Wyoming Forum, June 2014

The forum in Wyoming on the evening of 4 June 2014 was filmed by Pauline Schneider. Catch both parts here, with the action starting at the 32-minute mark.

Comments 146

  • Energy is the master resource. It is used in converting other resources into useable products. It is also used directly, as in heating, cooling, lighting, and transportation.

    The units used in the tertiary economy, the symbols, are purportedly exchangeable into items of the primary economy (resources) and the secondary economy (products). The exchangeability is dependent on the perception of the people and the guns of the state.

    Depletion of resources can to some extent be compensated by increasing use of energy to extract and process lower quality resources.

    Depletion of energy resources can be compensated to some extent by using more energy to extract energy. This “more energy” has to be diverted away from discretionary (non-essential) uses in society.

    The essential uses, food & water, body temperature maintenance (clothing, shelter) will also be constrained. Community, another important need for humans, cannot be provided by the hierarchy, so the substitute in modern society is entertainment (the “circuses” in “bread and circuses” of the Roman Empire).

    The production of more symbols is made simpler by magnetised particles on rust-coated aluminium platters as in the hard drives of computers: the seigniorage (profit from creating currency) is maximised. Seigniorage is the fece value of the currency minus the cost of creating the physical currency (minting, printing, electronic entry) and also minus the depreciation in value caused by putting it into circulation.

    The production of these symbols can for a time mask the depletion of resources and energy resources. They can be used to commandeer increasingly scarce resources for use as prioritised by the hierarchy.

    With progressive depletion of resources, ultimately the essential uses for the resources will be encroached upon after all the discretionary uses (and even the “circuses”) have been eliminated.

    A bit dated but still pretty good:

    An Introduction to Ecological Economics (e-book)

  • If anyone has any interest, and to continue Robin Datta’s previously made point concerning symbols, I have copied below yet another (short) comment submitted to the Fractal Planet blog under the “How Guy McPherson gets it wrong” discussion:

    Based on S.I. Hayakawa’s wonderful, must-read book, Language In Thought & Action (1978), and Alfred Korzybski’s Science and Sanity, An Introduction To Non-Aristotelian Systems and General Semantics (1933), I would like to make what seems to me a critically important point here concerning science:

    Nature works as nature works completely irrespective of any mere human’s thinking or feeling about it, scientific, philosophical, religious, economic, or otherwise. If someone insists that nature works according to their particular interpretation of “the science”, and that they “are right” and anyone who disagrees “is wrong”–as some people sometimes do on this and related blogs–this serves as a wonderful example of confusing symbols (one’s thinking and visualizing) with reality (the world that exists outside of one’s head).

    The symbol IS NOT the thing symbolized.

    The map IS NOT the territory.

    The word IS NOT the thing.

    The mathematical equation IS NOT the reality it only models.

    The natural science processes and content ARE NOT the nature that they only model.

    To summarize this point: reality exists independent of and separate from anyone’s thinking about it, no one has special, infallible knowledge concerning ultimate Truths about the universe, and–nature bats last.

  • Bud Nye Says:

    “To summarize this point: reality exists independent of and separate from anyone’s thinking about it, no one has special, infallible knowledge concerning ultimate Truths about the universe, and–nature bats last.”

    But I thought I knew everything.Look like I will have to quit thinking,which is not much of a task. rofl

    A couple of quotes that come to mind.

    “Water boils at 212F,it doesn’t matter what you think.”

    “Man has always been able to fly,he just didn’t know the Laws of Aerodynamics.”

  • In the after-debate footage, Guy and the zealot were ‘talking’ and I think it is the first time I have heard Guy put a solid date on NTE.

    The Zealot said that he watched some of Guy’s videos and why did not bring up NTE in the debate. I forget guy’s response, but the Zealot pressed on and asked if Guy really believed in NTE? Guy said Yup. So the Zealot asked when? And Guy said 2030. The Zealot was dumbfounded. He said: You mean that there will be NTE in 16 years? Guy said Yup.

    Predictions are tough. If you are right, no one remembers that it was you that predicted it, but if you are wrong everyone seems to remember…

    BTW, if one listens to Paul Beckwith carefully, he implies 2020 for NTE.

  • I’m sure you noticed, in my follow-up comment, that I was quoting somebody else’s science.

  • I should have ended that comment saying that I considered a 2030 NTE date much better than a 2020 date regardless of its source.

    Regardless of how error prone predictions are, they are fun to make. I guess it provides an illusion of control that we take comfort in.

  • “Water boils at 212F,it doesn’t matter what you think.”

    Has it always boiled there?
    Will it always boil there?
    Does it boil there everywhere, like on different planes, different universes?
    I’m just not so confident in my, or anyones, interpretation of reality.

    I am not disagreeing, just asking.

  • A few nit-picking points.

    The present system started with the extraction and burning of coal, which facilitated the manufacture of large numbers of machines that facilitated the faster extraction of coal to feed even more machines, plus the creation of money out of thin air and the charging of interest on money created out of thin air. You can look to the establishment of the Bank of England 1694 for that aspect, though the founders of the BoE were not the first to come up with those ideas; what they did manage to do was to incorporate the government into their money scams and foist it all on the general populace.

    In many parts of the world we still use adverbs which are distinguished from adjectives, i.e. cheaply, easily etc. It seem s that in Amerika adjectives and adverbs are interchangeable.

    As for the overall picture, yes, RE, it sums up the mess we are in pretty well. There is no way out other than via collapse or revolution triggered by mass starvation and blatant misallocation of resources. The psychotic sociopaths are working on that aspect. One could be forgiven for thinking that they actually want food riots so they have a pretext for gunning down civilians and reducing population overshoot.

    I’m still struggling with the concept of NTE by 2030. NTE still looks more like 2040 to 2050 to me. However, I am willing to change my stance as evidence for earlier meltdown and very abrupt climate change accumulates. Unlike most people who run as fast a possible when presented with evidence, I witnessed further cases yesterday which I won’t bore you all with.

    In the meantime, the NZ government (along with all other governments) will continue to do all it can to bring forward food riots and NTE.

  • reality exists independent of and separate from anyone’s thinking about it

    The thinking is about a construct formed from sensory inputs and memories. The construct is projected “out there”. Interactions with the projection produce further inputs that are consistent with the existing construct.

    Different creatures will have different constructs. Bats hear ultrasound, whales infrasound. Some insects see ultraviolet, some snakes perceive infrared. Dogs have a whole world of olfaction beyond ours. Fish perceive slight changes of electric currents in water through their lateral line.

    There is a very rare variant in one of the human retinal (visual) colour pigments that shifts the peak sensitivity of its receptor slightly on the colour spectrum (the range of colours seen in the rainbow). The retinal colour pigments are inherited on the X chromosome. Males have one X chromosome from the mother. Females have two X chromosomes inherited one each from the father and the mother: in their retinal receptors the active X chromosome is selected randomly, with half the receptors using the paternal chromosome and half using the maternal chromosome.

    An investigator tracked down family lines with the mutation to find a woman who had both the normal and the variant pigment, one on each X chromosome. She was able to distinguish two separate colours in the yellow range where others saw only one colour, in effect four primary colours.

    There are some large molluscs that have multiple eyes and fifteen different visual colour pigments.

    Water boils at 212F,it doesn’t matter what you think.

    I think that requires a pressure of one atmosphere.

  • The “Debate” was a horror show. The old fart was completely and absolutely stupid. I’ll bet the giant book he brought did not have one fact that was true. The man is a clown. I feel sorry for him AND his eye flittering debutant wife (I know many of this archetype) as she proudly stands by her moron man.

    Waste of time to debate someone so sycophantic and obviously bought.

    I thought he would have had something to say; but, he didn’t.

    And, the worst part, is, the audience clapped for the turd during his introduction.

    The only thing left for us to do is this:

    Thich Quang Duc 6-11-1963

  • It’s funny how we now have people saying truth isn’t absolute, when that idea could be used to discredit science.

    Where were these people when religion (of all kinds, Christianity, Nigerian witch doctors, etc.) was ascendant for 2,000 years, and mutilated women or burned unbelievers because they, absolutely, believed that they were correct?

    I dunno, I can’t help but suspect ulterior motives behind America’s new-found relativism.

  • The ‘Death of a giant’ post seems to have disappeared

  • “The ‘Death of a giant’ post seems to have disappeared”

    I noticed that too!

  • Science Friday podcast JUN. 06, 2014

    Making Summer Travel Plans With Climate Change in Mind

    “Would Glacier National Park be the same without the glaciers? Would visiting Boston’s Faneuil Hall be the same if there was water lapping at its doors? A recent report from the Union of Concerned Scientists lists many landmark sites around the U.S. that could be at risk in a changing climate with warmer temperatures, rising sea levels, and increased fire threats. Ira talks with Adam Markham, one of the authors of the report, and with ecotourism author Andrew Blackwell, about which potentially endangered tourist sites you might want to try to visit sooner rather than later.”

  • The author of the ‘death of a giant’ post begged Guy to remove it after getting quite testy with someone who no doubt provoked him and deserved it, saying he only wrote it for Guy.

  • “BTW, if one listens to Paul Beckwith carefully, he implies 2020 for NTE.”-MMM

    Wow! The timeline gets shorter with every thread! Now we are down to 6 years before everybody is dead!

    This is getting like Mayan Prophecy and 2012. I had GREAT graphics to use for 4 solid years, then unfortunately Los Angeles did NOT slide into the ocean on 12/21/2012. :(


    I may actually live long enough to see if this latest Doomsday Date comes true.


    Latest Rant now UP!

    European Union: Jokers & Clowns and Neo-Nazis

    Also don’t miss the Interview with Jason Heppenstall of 22 Billion Energy Slaves

    Don’t miss Part II of The Money Valve now UP, Part III coming Sunday or The Week in Doom.


  • As long as other people are listening, it’s never a waste of time to debate a denier/fundamentalist. You never know when you may plant a seed. Maybe someone there might take steps to lessen the inevitable suffering of a loved one that is coming.

    Things are moving faster. The latest from Robert Scribbler.

    Ten Cubic Kilometers of Ice Lost From Jakobshavn Glacier in Less than One Month

    How large is a cubic kilometer? Think of something the size of a mountain. Now multiply that by ten and you end up with a veritable mountain range. Think of it. An entire mountain range of ice. That’s a good rough comparison to the volume of ice lost from just a single Greenland glacier over the course of a mere 26 days from May 7 to June 1 of 2014.


  • @Robin Datta

    Water boils at 212F,it doesn’t matter what you think.

    I think that requires a pressure of one atmosphere.

    Isn’t the 212F/1A figure specifically for Sea Level ?

    Found this chart that makes me believe my distant memory is correct.

    Altitude, ft Boiling point of water, °F
    0′ (0m) 212°F (100°C)
    500′ (152.4m) 211.1°F (99.5°C)
    1,000′ (304.8m) 210.2°F (99°C)
    2,000′ (609.6m) 208.4°F (98°C)
    5,000′ (1524m) 203°F (95°C)
    6,000′ (1828.8m)201.1°F (94°C)
    8,000′ (2438.4m)197.4°F (91.9°C)
    10,000′ (3048m) 193.6°F (89.8°C)
    12,000′ (3657.6m)189.8°F (87.6°C)
    14,000′ (4267.2m)185.9°F (85.5°C)
    Source: NASA[1]

    Which bring to my mind the question of whether folks in Denver or other high altitudes will need to adjust their cake recipes as more planetary ice melts and changes what Sea Level means…not that by then getting food cooked perfectly will matter as much as just getting food.

    Thanks for posting that Naval War College talk by the Scripps professor.
    Do any of the S.A. lands that your group have conserved have underground cities in the area ?

  • Isn’t the 212F/1A figure specifically for Sea Level ?

    Atmospheric pressure does indeed vary with altitude.

    One atmosphere refers to a a standard, defined unit of pressure regardless of its location.

  • Isn’t the 212F/1A figure specifically for Sea Level ?

    Atmospheric pressure does indeed vary with altitude.

    One atmosphere refers to a a standard, defined unit of pressure regardless of its location.

  • RE
    Valuable effort.
    But is a topic of the past.
    As everything about our current economic system.
    We do not need more analysis, we need new (serious) proposals.
    You have promoted your SUN idea, but so far, that seems to me an empty box, with a nice envelope. Since nothing serious has been proposed regarding economy for example. Then is the internal human relations scheme.
    I invited you to explain how you do imagine your “society” will function.
    So unless you are using the analysis as part of a proposal for a new economy, or another way to live, you are wasting precious time, more if we think in 2020 as the date for NTE.
    It does not matter really if it will be in 2020, or 2030, or after that, but in any case, the economy will fail, and the whole system will fall down before.
    And by that time, we will need new solutions.
    It seems to me that, at the present moment in history, gathering data and analysis should be used with only one purpose, to devise new systems.
    I will insist in my point noted for you previous essay. Things are always more complex than they seem to be before putting a new system to operation.
    I invite you because the exercise will be useful to everybody, you included.
    And also because, I suspect that you are missing many issues.
    But if you do not want to, it´s ok.
    With rants, and noting and watching the whole system going down, seems to me is in the end, a useless effort. It was good for five years ago.
    If you do not do it, I will do it anyway, sometime in the near future, because is an important part of any proposal. But for the moment, I am working in other issues, that will become the skeleton of my proposal, otherwise, it will be just an empty box with a nice envelope. And that is not the idea.
    Please I am not attacking you, I am just saying that I believe we need another kind of attitudes, as we are running out of time.

    I firmly believe that we need a new ethos, and that means a lot of effort. Because clearly more of the same is not a solution.
    I have depicted just a few pixels of my view, with my posts, and essays, because there is still a lot to be “painted”. The picture still has too many blank areas.

  • “As everything about our current economic system.
    We do not need more analysis, we need new (serious) proposals.
    You have promoted your SUN idea, but so far, that seems to me an empty box, with a nice envelope.”- GA

    If you do not grasp the mistakes made in the past, you cannot build a Better Tomorrow.

    YOU may grasp the problems quite well by now, and in fact I am pretty sure most readers of NBL do as well, but in truth at least 99% of the global population is still CLUELESS as to why we are going through this Clusterfuck. So the first thing you gotta do is get them to see it, and you don’t do that by writing academic papers the vast majority of the population does not read, and if they read it they would not know WTF you were talking about.

    I am set at the bizness of waking people UP. I am one loud and obnoxious individual on the internet, as everyone here is well aware. This WORKS. I get more people listening in a month than Guy can reach in a year of jetting around from Ecuador to Canada and back again to New Mexico.

    SUN is a Work-in-Progress, and to make that one fly I have to first get enough people to actually LISTEN. You don’t get anything accomplished with a personal Blog stating your POV, even if you are a Ph.D. like Guy or Ugo Bardi. You need NUMBERS.

    Folks here think this is all a waste of time anyhow, because they see the problems as insoluble, but I do not. And so I publish here, because the more places I publish, the more Eyeballs I get on the material.

    I got no clue how it will end up long term, but I do know that right now if people do not wake the fuck up, they are going to be the first ones on the train to the Great Beyond.

    So excuse me for being loud and inconvenient here and messing with the meme that EVERYONE will DIE by 2020. this is complete horseshit unless a Planet Killer Asteroid collides with the earth in the next 6 years. Even Yellowstone going Ballistic would not knock down all 7B people walking the earth right now by 2020.


  • RE said:

    ‘I got no clue how it will end up long term, but I do know that right now if people do not wake the fuck up, they are going to be the first ones on the train to the Great Beyond.’

    I have been at this for over 15 years: they are not going to wake up until there is no food on the supermarket shelves (or the day after). I discussed that very aspect with someone I have been warning for the past 2 years. A couple of weeks ago, after we had discussed the fact that he had done nothing to become informed or prepare despite being repeatedly advised where to look and what to look at, I asked him when he would wake up and do something: ‘the day supermarket shelves are empty, or the day after?’

    He said: “The day after.”

  • I’m sure many folks have heard of “gamblers fallacy” – which says simple if you flip a coin and it turns up heads – subsequent flips must be weighted towards tails to maintain the 50-50 probability. Which sounds logical but is completely false. Every flip has a 50-50 chance regardless of past results. I learned this lesson well hitchhiking from Las Vegas to Pennsylvania with 5 bucks.

    Years later, I learned what Kevin Moore has just described – I call it the activists folly. It is the belief that if you present folks with the naked truth, they will “wake up” and begin acting differently – which sounds logical but like the gamblers fallacy, is completely false.

    Robin described the mechanism behind the fallacy – ie: behavior is directed by emotion, not intellect. Kevin describes it in action – people hearing without listening. And I believe ulvfugl has described the results many times — despite knowing and talking about our destruction of habitat and it’s likely consequences for many years, we continue in the same direction. Everything remains as before. Tomorrow the world will do what it did today. No amount of “naked truth” can change this.

    So, IMO, believing that people will “wake up” to the truth — or will respond to the “perfect solution” is a false notion. Rather than say “OMG. you’re right”, they may decide to nail your raggedy ass to a tree.

  • Bob: But all we have to do is stop human greed, get people to realize that we’re all related and have a single planet to care for and surely equality will erupt all over the globe. Simple really. Just change human nature and all our problems will go away.

    Well, I’ve done my bit by writing that. The rest is up to you!

  • RE – your inability to grasp what NT-EXTINCTION means is almost dumbfounding, considering your rational grasp a lot of the fundamentals.

    Bob, kevin, ulvfugl and others point to it directly (like good zen people) but you and the preponderance of others (on Earth) fail to FEEL it. It’s just a concept for the majority because the sun continues to come up every day, so like well-conditioned organisms we go about what we’ve been doing in a normal day (destroying what little we have left even faster).

    We’re quite literally changing reality every moment by doing this but continue (via our programming) with our “normal” behavior. Kevin’s quote during his lecture wasn’t a phrase pulled out of a hat for comic effect, it means that most (including the vaunted council) don’t even see how far down the wrong road we’ve gone.

    Hash tag? Geez, the last time I played that everyone would smoke a bowl of the Nepalese finger and wander around the woods looking for themselves all afternoon.

    Few get the implications of the ice melting all over the world, thinking “oh we have centuries before it all melts” which is NOT the POINT! In an interactive dynamic system, balance is critical! Too little ice, too many people, too few resources, too much going on (we’re all DOING something, requiring some kind of energy) – our reality is now spinning out of control in a slow-motion (for now) collapse.

    We have myriad interacting problems advancing on the delicate balance that maintains the habitability we enjoy. From human-contaminated ocean chemistry destroying marine life at an astounding rate to human- caused atmospheric chemistry causing climatic instability (and increasingly, unpredictability), and redistribution of the mantel of the planet (thus, earthquakes and volcanic activity rising). Beside that, all the biological effects being disrupted from radiation to genetic engineering, from pollution to mono-crop farming, from increased ozone (and lots of others) killing the vegetation to methane and hydrogen sulfide now providing the perfect mechanism for spontaneous combustion and instant neurologic death (or zombie-fication if the life-form lives). Methane ALONE will kill everything living if enough of it

    The released radiation we’ve caused ALL BY ITSELF is going to be enough to wipe out all life and the signs of its rapid and total world-wide spread (like the minute particles of plastic shown to be in the melting Arctic ice) are increasing everywhere monitoring is taking place.

    Our pollution is killing the environment we rely on for our existence. It’s not going to be around! Even after “the bottleneck” there won’t be any uncontaminated area, there won’t be the ability to grow food (you can’t control an environment for any length of time without steady energy, and predictable climatic conditions – including air quality/chemical composition- proper soil composition, and other factors), even if a relatively few “lucky bastids” make it “through” (as if it’s going to just end suddenly).

    We’re all going to come to this realization despite our acquired beliefs and built-in normalcy bias. Humanity’s worldview is FICTION that we created but cannot sustain.

  • It looks to me as if we are already in World War 3.

    Just that nobody has woken up to that fact yet.

    I wrote on the Dark Mountain Forum – whenever it was, about 4 years ago possibly ? – that there was a very pleasant peaceful happy time immediately preceding WW1, and that I felt, intuitively, that we were in such a time.

    Seems that now it is over. The madness is unleashed once again, this time by Washington.

    Poroshenko insists that Ukraine must join the EU and everyone must speak Ukrainian, not Russian. These are conditions that make any compromise or agreement or understanding with Putin and the Russian people completely impossible.

    It amounts to a declaration of war, which pulls the whole of Europe into conflict.

    Poroshenko is taking his instructions directly from Washington. It’s said that Washington believes that a First Strike nuclear option gives America the advantage. Any European leader who does not accept this will be removed.

    So we can all forget about the positive feedback loops and the financial collapse, ocean acidification, loss of species and all the other little problems that trouble us here.

    Nobody will be doing any monitoring or reporting on the methane or the weather, because the sick fuckers in power will be getting their ‘population reduction’ via the NWO.

    The whole of Europe will be like Yugoslavia was, and Syria is, with added radioactivity.

    They planned this.


  • If anyone has any interest, another comment I posted to Fractal Planet copied here:


    You wrote, “Given that you recognize Guy’s fallibility, I’m unsure why you’re so certain his claims about climate science are right. (And you can argue again that the science is flawed and unimportant if you wish, but Guy says he’s basing his claims on the science.) Surely you must accept at least some of the most obvious errors I’ve pointed out, no?”

    (1) I do not just recognize Guy’s fallibility, I also, and importantly I think, recognize mine, yours, and everyone else’s, including the world’s scientific experts regarding these things. It seems obvious to me that, as much as we may wish it in order help us manage our anxiety and fear (this does, after all, most fundamentally drive most religion and science: reducing anxiety and fear by instilling a sense of personal control), NO ONE possesses The Unarguable Truth about how the world works. Directly related to this, I work extremely hard not to confuse our symbols with reality; the map with the territory; “the science” with the reality that our science only models, only crudely and tentatively attempts to represent.

    (2) Cognitively, I do not have the certainty that you attribute to me: that “his claims about climate science are right”. I do not think in the neat, mechanical, linear, fundamentalist, right/wrong ways that you do. (But since you insist on it and like it so much, I will use that “right/wrong” language in the rest of this paragraph.) On the other hand, based on my background knowledge in ecology, biology, mathematics, chemistry and physics, along with a lifetime of broad reading concerning the ecology and global warming issues, the things he says make very good and consistent sense to me, it all “fits”, and I think that a very high probability exists that he is significantly more “right” than “wrong” about what we see happening and what will almost certainly come here–soon. Alongside the cognitive, reasoning stuff, yes: in some very “unscientific” ways, with what I experience happening in the world around me, my decidedly unscientific body, my “gut”, tells me not just “He’s right”, but “HE’s RIGHT!” But, assuredly, I might have it “wrong”, and Guy might have it “wrong”. I just do the best I can with what I know. I think all of us always do exactly that.

    (3) Another correction: I have never argued that “…the science is flawed and unimportant”. I HAVE argued that I love natural science, I do consider it extremely important, AND that natural science does not produce the neat, right-or-wrong, “factual” boxes that you insist it does. (Much more importantly, neither does the world work that way!) Significantly, I have ALSO argued that, especially with the complex, chaotic systems under discussion, much room for understanding and interpreting the evidence in different ways exists. Your frequent use of “the science” seems to reveal much here. It suggests that you “know” that your understanding of how natural science works, and your particular interpretation of the evidence you have considered, work as The One, Correct Understanding And Interpretation, thus your references to: “THE science”.

    (4) Has Guy made some errors? Of course! I don’t question whether he has; I feel certain that as a fallible human being, like all of us, he HAS and WILL in the future–just as we all do. I also feel confident that when and where it becomes clear to him that he has made an error, or errors, he will change his thinking and the things he says and writes accordingly. That happens every day in natural science–and, both publically and privately I have seen him make some strikingly forthright apologies, acknowledgements of errors, and ways he has changed his thinking–just as I have noticed that you have, as well. Needless to say, I strongly believe all of us would best continue that pattern, which tends to open and maintain useful dialog and build trust–and stop the personal attacks, which tend, strongly, to shut down useful dialog and destroy trust.

    It’s not all about you, Scott. If, for whatever reason(s), he does not wish to debate you (or Tobis, or whoever you think he ought to debate) concerning the “errors” that you allege he has made, that does not mean that you “are right” and he “is wrong” about “the facts”, nor does it mean that “he is a coward”. I notice the number of words I have written and amount of time I have taken in order to respond reasonably well to just the three, short sentences you wrote above. How many more words would Guy have to write, and how much more time would he have to take, in order to respond to your many, fundamentalist claims of superior evidence and your allegedly superior and infallible reasoning about it?!

  • If there were any doubts that Western “leaders” live in a fantasy make-believe world constructed out of their own lies, the G-7 meeting and 70th anniversary celebration of the Normandy landing dispelled the doubts.

    The howlers issuing from these occasions are enough to split your sides. Obama and his lap dog Cameron described the Normandy landing on June 6, 1944, as “the greatest liberation force that the world has ever known” and took all the credit for the US and Britain for the defeat of Hitler. No mention was made of the Soviet Union and the Red Army, which for three years prior to the Normandy landing had been fighting and defeating the Wehrmacht.

    The Germans lost World War II at the Battle of Stalingrad, which was fought from August 23, 1942 until February 2, 1943, when most of the remnants of the powerful German Sixth Army surrendered, including 22 generals.

    Nineteen months previously the largest invasion force ever assembled on planet earth invaded Russia across a one thousand mile front. Three million crack German troops; 7,500 artillery units, 19 panzer divisions with 3,000 tanks, and 2,500 aircraft rolled across Russia for 14 months.

    By June 1944, three years later, very little of this force was left. The Red Army had chewed it up. When the so-called “allies” (a term which apparently excludes Russia) landed in France, there was little to resist them. The best forces remaining to Hitler were on the Russian front, which collapsed day by day as the Red Army approached Berlin.

    The Red Army won the war with Germany. The Americans and the British showed up after the Wehrmacht was exhausted and in tatters and could offer little resistance. Joseph Stalin believed that Washington and London stayed out of the war until the last minute and left Russia with the burden of defeating Germany.

    Hollywood and popular writers have, of course, buried the facts. Americans have all sorts of movies, such as “A Bridge Too Far,” that portray insignificant events, however heroic, as turning points in the war. Nevertheless, the facts are clear. The war was won on the Eastern front by Russia. Hollywood’s movies are fun, but they are nonsense.


  • Does commenting on the forum in the blog posts section not show up here?

    Anyway, I said:

    I love how in that second video, when the other person jumps into the conversation, with Stewart (?) distracted, Guy gracefully and calmly backs out of the room into the hallway, rounds the corner, and is (almost) never to be seen again.

    Made my day.

  • Ulvfugl In the various D-Day hoopla being observed, I have done my best of avoid it because it just makes me angry. For all their evil deeds, brutality and just plain meanness, Nazis actually believed in thing like the Master Race and the Thousand Year Reich. We’ve got none of that. I would actually feel a tinge of support if one of our “leaders” claimed the US was taking over the world because we were on a mission from god, or because we were clearly superior, or because he got the idea from TV. Not a trace of it. That the American Empire has no goal beyond it makes money for some companies and people running those companies shows a complete void of vision. No one in power believes in anything. Money is their only concern. And it shows in how we treat one another and how the government behaves. We’re not on a Holy Crusade, or out of create a New World Order with a thousand points of light. We’re attacking to get your oil so we can drive cars and have profits John D Rockefeller never imagined possible. There’s no victory plan. There’s no exit strategy, there’s no real reason behind anything we do. But we’re doing it anyway because we can.

    And to top it all off, no one is in charge. There is no leader. There isn’t anyone responsible for anything. It’s all a huge blundering moronic meat grinder crawling across the planet, leaving toxic destruction in its wake. As a result, twenty or so men get an extra billion or so to do nothing. No great works are built. No museums no parks no wonderment to the glory of the US or anything. The money is dumped into a vault to collect interest at rates no one else can get without any reason or purpose behind it either other than accumulation of wealth.

    A dog, given the opportunity, will eat itself to death. And here we are, eating the planet without a single reason beyond “Because it’s here.” Small wonder patriotic displays make me sick to my stomach.

  • Into Destiny, comments at the Forum do not appear in this space

  • The Wehrmacht categorised its divisions as kampfwert (battleworthy) A, B and C. Wehrmacht divisions that had been in action on the Eastern Front and reduced to kampfwert B or C by the Red Army were sent to occupation duties in the West for rest, reconstitution and recuperation. Towards the end, inflated ratings were given to substandard units to meet der Führer’s incessant demands for better units.

    The united States Army never faced a real kampfwert A Wehrmacht division in the Second World War.

  • When all financial wheels broke loose in 2008-09, we were treated to Henry Paulson’s clear statements about what to do.

    Bankster Henry “knew the solution” to the escalating financial chaos – “WE WANT PEOPLE TO BE ABLE TO GET THE CREDIT THAT THEY NEED.”

    Henry was Secretary of the Treasury & he clearly knew how to keep people borrowing from bankers.

    Henry was doing his civic duty while on loan from Goldman Sachs.

    Financial genius Henry Paulson summed up the money scam & the heart of the compound interest religion in thirteen simple words.


  • “I have been at this for over 15 years: they are not going to wake up until there is no food on the supermarket shelves (or the day after).”- KM

    Really? And how many people does your website reach every day in how many countries? I can’t even count the number of emails I have received saying “Thanks for Connecting the Dots” or something similar. By no means do I expect to reach everybody, I just reach as many as I can, and the numbers get bigger every day. The Diner blew by Kunstler last night. Many people are waking up now. It is way different today than when I started blogging collapse on PeakOil.com in 2007-8. Back then, you couldn’t even convince people that we were bound for 1750s era technological regression. At the time I felt we could plateau out at pre-steam engine technology, now I don’t think metallurgy can be retained, so it is back to Stone Knives and Bearskins. Nowadays I have the opposite problem, at least here on NBL, which is convincing people that survival is possible at all in a bottleneck scenario.

    “RE – your inability to grasp what NT-EXTINCTION means is almost dumbfounding, considering your rational grasp a lot of the fundamentals.”-Tom

    I have Zero problem comprehending the meaning of NTHE. It means every last Homo Sapiens currently walking the earth or due to be born will be DEAD by 2050, or 2020 if you buy the latest in hyperbole here.

    I understand it, I look at the evidence and I don’t buy it. We are set up for a major population knockdown and bottleneck by 2050; however such a rapid extinction of a species that inhabits so many ecosystems and is so adaptible as HS is close to impossible without an event like an Asteroid Collision on the grand scale. Even under the most rapid warming scenario generating near PETM level temps you would still have survivors. Even with complete death of the phytoplankton you still last longer than mid century, because the oxygen depletion by surviving animals will take quite some time, and land plants will survive in some ecosystems. Even a freaking thermonuclear war won’t knock down everyone that fast.

    I KNOW 10,000 people, 1000 Breeding Pairs made it through the Toba Cataclysm. I see no reason in principle this cannot be done again.

    Might as well make the effort anyhow. Nothing to lose here, and it is certainly better than sitting on your keister waiting to die.


  • WW2:

    Germany started ‘liberating’ nations using some of the most advanced weapons of the times. Japan did something similar. Extraordinarily fast, heavily armed war machines of various types lunged into poorly armed military of the nations invaded or attacked. Messerschmitt 109s against biplanes, Stuka dive-bombers against civilians, Zeros capable of 350mph against Douglas Devastators capable of 260mph, pocket battleships against merchant ships, battleships with 16 inch guns against battleships with 12 inch guns, Panzer units using fast, heavily armoured tanks with devastating fire power against poorly armed units. With Spain a covert ally, Germany’s conquest of western Europe was essentially complete by mid-1941, leaving only Britain to be brought to heel.

    The main reasons Britain was not invaded in 1941 were:

    1. It had a very large navy.

    2. It had a lot of piano factories which were contracted to produce Hurricane fighters a phenomenal rate. In September 1941 the German military calculated Britain was nearly out of planes and were shocked to discover it wasn’t.

    3. German fighters could spend less time protecting bombers or attacking British fighters because they had to cross the Channel, whereas British fighters could be scramble into action after a radar warning (the Germans failed to knock out the radar systems).

    4. Hitler was so furious when the RAF bombed Berlin he order London to be bombed, relieving pressure on Britain’s fighter airfields.

    On the matter of: ‘The united States Army never faced a real kampfwert A Wehrmacht division in the Second World War.’

    It was agreed that the first land engagement for US ground forces would be in the western region of the North-African battlefield where rookie Americans faced battle-hardened German forces which were equipped with some of the best equipment available at the time. The result was an absolute rout, with the Americans retreating as far and as fast as they could. The Germans decided not to pursue them because fuel supplies were limited (the objective of the North-African campaign being to take control of Middle East oil fields to the east). When the foolhardy and hubristic Americans regrouped and advanced the result was much the same as before. It was the mass build-up of forces led by the superb strategist Montgomery that turned the tide in North Africa.

    In the fighting that immediately followed D-Day, British and Canadian forces were held up for weeks by German units armed with superbly engineered tanks and 88mm assault guns. Sherman tanks were no match for the German tanks, and it was primarily Allied control of the air that facilitated victory in France.

    American units faced somewhat run-down German units which were well armed during the Ardennes (Battle of the Bulge) engagements. As before, the American units were quickly overrun. As before, fuel (lack of) became the deciding factor. Meanwhile Vi and V11 were falling on Britain.

    On the Eastern front German tanks performed superbly against Russian T34s. The problem for the Germans was that they could not produce them fast enough and they were running out of fit young men. By 1943 Russia was able to churn out T34s by the thousand. Also, the Russians were issued with clothing suited to the weather conditions, in particular hats which reduced heat loss. Germans continued to wear steel helmets.

    The war in the Pacific was initially won by Australian units fighting in New Guinea when the halted the Japanese advance. Overreach was a factor: the appalling jungle conditions and long supply lines meant they were fighting half-starved Japanese soldiers.

    The war at sea in the Pacific was initially won by the superb fire-control systems the Americans had on their aircraft carriers, allowing badly damaged carriers to remain afloat and under power. Also, the US had an extraordinary capacity to repair, and subsequently to manufacture additional ships and planes. fast, well-armed planes (P51s etc.)turned it all around.

    There was very little innovation in Japanese factories and they continued to produce fast but poorly armoured planes that caught fire the moment a shell penetrated a fuel tank, though they did experiment with a submersible aircraft carrier (capable of carrying 3 planes. Again, US airpower won in the long run.

    Most of the Allies successes were made possible by copious amounts of cheap oil coming out of American wells, of course.

  • Toba was easy. Cold is no problem for humans, and Toba is a terrible analog for today.

    Habitat is requisite. Without it, we’re all done. We’ll be there soon.

    And then there are those nukes, with no means to be rid of them and nobody willing to do so. Yeah, I know: You think we’ll rise to the occasion. That’s a ridiculous idea, with no supporting evidence. It makes as much sense as comparing today to Toba.

  • From Common Dreams:
    Published on Thursday, June 5, 2014 by Vox.com
    America Will Fail on Climate Change
    by Ezra Klein

  • Hi infanttyrone,

    No underground communities are located at any of our reserve sites; however, I am aware that business and political elites have and are continuing to construct gargantuan below ground facilities that are stocked with supplies to last for years. Many of the building projects are complete and now await the final order to seal the blast doors.

    Our efforts are dedicated toward preserving the Earth’s non-human biodiversity. Mankind is a failed species. Greed and selfishness predestined our species to extinction. Perhaps time remains for a wise, intelligent species to evolve.

  • Had to check to see if I posted twice yet today. Fortunately, no, so I can respond. :)

    “Toba was easy. Cold is no problem for humans, and Toba is a terrible analog for today.

    Habitat is requisite. Without it, we’re all done. We’ll be there soon.”-GM

    Given these folks were pre-Ag and barely out of the trees, I doubt the survival during that time was very easy for them. Their local climate had to change enormously and suddenly, taking out most of the normal foods they gathered up.

    They most certainly had to be lucky in their location, probably they got spared the worst of the ashfall. The Oceans however did not, and acidity changed rapidly as sulfates came down from the atmosphere in copious quantities. Their fisherie was probably negatively affected, by how much one can only speculate.

    Now, fast forward to this Bottleneck. Heat is a bit tougher to deal with, but not impossible because of Day/Night temperature variations which generally are around. Diurnal temperature variation is around 16C in tropical climates.

    “Temperature lag is an important factor in diurnal temperature variation. As solar energy strikes the earth’s surface each morning, a shallow 1–3-centimetre (0.39–1.18 in) layer of air directly above the ground is heated by conduction. Heat exchange between this shallow layer of warm air and the cooler air above is very inefficient. On a warm summer’s day, for example, air temperatures may vary by 16.5 °C (30 °F) from just above the ground to waist height. Incoming solar radiation exceeds outgoing heat energy for many hours after noon and equilibrium is usually reached from 3–5 p.m. but this may be affected by a variety of different things such as large bodies of water, soil type and cover, wind, cloud cover/water vapor, and moisture on the ground.[1]”

    So, long as you have thermal mass and insulation (rocks and hay bales in a natural example), you can conserve night time temps during the daytime, to keep your plants at an ideal temperature for growing. This is not complex technology, it is just using principles we understand now, but the folks at the time of Toba had no clue on.

    The population will contract significantly, however I suspect that as this begins to take hold MANY people will begin the process of maintaining environments for growing food, and of course mostly in high latitudes. Poor soil will be supplemented by harvesting seaweed as was done in Ireland to help that soil as a growing medium. And of course, there is much to scavenge here from the Age of Oil in terms of Plumbing from McMansions to use for setting up Hydroponics systems.

    You do not need a lot of peple to make it through the Zero Point to avoid extinction, just a few. You just need one spot that doesn’t get rained down too hard on by Nuclear Fallout, just as one spot in Africa did not get rained down on too hard by the massive ejecta from Toba. In any event, radiation takes a good deal of time to knock down everyone, hell the folks in Tokyo are still alive here and they are right next door to Fukushima.

    2050 is out of the question for complete wipeout. There are too many means for survival possible past this time frame. You make it a Century, then it is more plausible.

    Meanwhile, why not TRY to make it through? The worst that happens is you end up failing, but you would die either way. Might as well go out Swinging (in the Nature Bats Last metaphor). :)


  • The lunacy never ends: “2050 is out of the question for complete wipeout.”

    Based on carbon alone, we’ll be at 5 C above baseline by then, bathing in ionizing radiation. I can’t imagine how anybody survives either phenomenon. Not even in a bunker.

  • RE.

    During the 2005 NZ election campaign, as spokesperson for energy and the environment I reached about 300,000 people via the website, and maybe 100,000 via newspaper reports (out of a population of 3 million adults. Nothing changed. People continued to vote for lies and robbery (National Party, Labour Party etc.).

    I brought Guy McPherson to NZ, and he spoke on National Radio, the most-listened-to station in the country. I’m not sure of the number: somewhere between 100,000 and 300,000, I guess. Nothing changed.

    Guy also did a 2-day presentation-workshop in Wellington (the capital): nothing changed.

    I arranged for Guy McPherson to speak in New Plymouth at the district’s premier venue Puke Ariki). The photo frequently used of Guy sitting next to a pot plant was taken in New Plymouth at the local ‘newspaper’ offices. That and other publicity associated with the NZ tour may reached tens of thousands of people.

    Andrew Judd, the present mayor of New Plymouth District (100,000 people), was in the audience at Guy’s Puke Ariki presentation. Subsequent to the presentation by Guy and the follow-up workshop in NP, I spent about 20 hours in detailed discussion with Andrew Judd (prior to his election) about what was happening, why it was happening and what needed to be done.

    Shortly after Andrew Judd took up office I smelled a rat. I tackled him personally (in his mayoral office) and asked him if he had ‘gone over to the dark side’, and whether was prepared to lie to the community and sacrifice his own children’s future in order to promote the short=term agendas of money-lenders and corporations. Andrew did not give me a straight answer, but I got my answer when, in January 2014, I presented him with a detailed report on exactly what was happening and exactly where things were headed; that report also went to the head of the regional environmental monitoring department, Gary Bedford; it elicited no response from either Andrew Judd or Gary Bedford.

    Andrew Judd did a U-turn on everything he ever said before the elections. We now call him ‘The Smiling Assassin for New Plymouth’ (John Key being ‘The Smiling Assassin for New Zealand’.

    In April, a ‘community conversation’ was held in the Opera House -now renamed the TSB Show Place, in keeping with the money-lender corporate control of society we endure. About 70 people turned up, practically all of them vociferously opposed to what NPDC had been doing and was planning to do.

    A couple of weeks ago another ‘community conversation’ occurred, that time at the Buller Street Parent’s Centre. I was the only member of the public to turn up. I said: “Okay, I’m here. lets start talking about all issues we need to discuss.” Andrew Judd looked and behaved like a nervous 14-year-old: he than announced the meeting was cancelled. He and other councillors could not get out the door fast enough.

    Later that day I spoke to the council’s Monitoring Committee about the downgrade by the EIA of the California shale reserve by 96% and the complete lack of gas from test drillings in the Weald Basin In England (which was supposedly going to lead to Britain becoming an energy exporter. I also pointed out the failure of the
    hydrogen economy’ and the failure of the ‘clean coal’ economy promoted when I was a prime speaker at an energy forum at Deloitte House in 2004. There was strict imposition of the 10-minute rule, allowing no time for questions by councillors or further discussion.

    My letter to the Daily News concerning the events of the day was not published, of course.

    On 4th June I spoke to the full council (as per the link previously provided) about ignorance, stupidity, official lies, the unreachable goal of industrialism, the total failure of NPDC to prepare for the now clearly visible future of environmental collapse and energy depletion, its continuous breaching of NZ statutes, and the culture of death associated with the dismalisation of the city through the use of black.

    I am not sure how many people I have reached, but can say that I saw Anthony Rhodes of Venture Taranaki (a council-sponsored organisation) and he told me he has watched my ofresentation live via Internet. I subsequently discussed the latests VT Trends report with him and suggested that VT stop using the word ‘production’ in connection with the oil and gas sector because the correct word is ‘extraction’; nature produced the oil and gas; people extract it. Changing the terminology sends a completely [correct] message] “Good though,” said Anthony.

    Yesterday I had a long discussion with Brian Cheyne, Taranaki Regional Council air quality monitoring officer, about the lack of monitoring of the air people actually breath, in particular street level )3, NO2 and carcinogen pollution from generated by vehicles. I pointed out that monitoring points on the tops of the NPDC building, the balcony of the TSB building, the Bell Block flyover, the Port etc. were irrelevant. indeed, at the only slightly relevant monitoring point the methodology had been wrong. You can imagine his response to being told that years of so-called monitoring had no validity (except perhaps in connection with the air quality for pigeons).

    I then took up the matter with Lucy Graydon, newly appointed Policy and Strategy Team Leader for NPDC, and told her what she needed to do and how to do it.

    I know none of it will make any difference because the recently- created position of Advisor to the Mayor (a position I applied for and for which I did not even get a proper acknowledgement, let alone an interview) has been filled by one of John Key’s trained assassin’s, straight from the John Key’s fuck-the-planet and fuck-the-next-generation via propaganda and lies department. Greg Stephen’s job will be to tell Andrew Judd what to think and what to say. It has all be a jack-up from the start.

    I have not bothered with website as such since Robert Atack gave up about 4 years ago. I did rather a lot on Collapse of Industrial Civilisation until Mike Lee went into intransigent denial of the facts relating to insider, false flag operation known as 9/11 amnd his intransigence in connection with respect to NTE. On one occasion he wrote and essay in which he wrote a futuristic essay talked about the people who had survived the [coming] thermal maximum.

    You can convince yourself that people visiting websites is more effective that talking to people face-to-face and using ‘the systems’ systems against ‘the system’ if you wish. That aspect does not concern me. AI am only concerned that you might be expecting some change for the better.

    ‘No win situation there, damned if you do, damned if you don’t.’

    It’s a no-win situation here. At this late stage in the game my progeny are damned whatever I do.

    When I was asked, “In that case why do it?” I replied: “it’s a bit like the Nazis at the end of W2@: they could either be allowed to walk the streets of be held accountable for their crimes against humanity.

    Sometimes I say to people: “How much longer are you going to be content to be lied to and robbed?”

    Most still have no idea what I am talking about. as was the case with the woman I talked with about the newly-created ‘artwork’ surrounding the lift entrance at Puke Ariki, which has been done in black and features depictions of violence and death. The degree of denial is beyond belief: I spoke with the artist as he was completing the work and his knee-jerk response to my comments about the associations of black with negatives and death etc. was :”No it isn’t; no it doesn’t.”

    I then pointed out the goat’s head, culturally associated with Satanism, the kiwi bird being shot with a bullet from a pistol, the two fists meeting as the doors close, the ‘Def by misadventure’ he had written in connection with a record album (def not referring to loss of hearing).

    After a heated discussion with someone who believes in astrology and that matters on Earth are being affected by the position of Pluto, in which I was once again accused of being ‘too confrontational’, I came home to carry on doing what I do.

    On Monday I expect to collect the addendum to ‘The Culture of Black and New Plymouth as a Sacrifice Zone’ which I presented to NPDC too late to be included in the main hearing process. I intend to share the information with the friendly staff at the Puke Ariki reference department and allow them to copy it. I also expect to pick up a printied copy of the ‘information and comment to NPDC April 2014’ (I do not submit. They already have to artwork depicting the NPDC tank driving over the babies and children they have thrown into the trench to keep their tank ‘moving forward’ a little longer.

    By the way, there is almost no snow on the mountain. When Guy and Sheila visited this region two years ago (end of June) the mountain was blanketed in snow to the lower slopes. I am well aware that one season does not make a climate, but this could be indicative of something very ominous.

    These are ‘interesting times’ and the adventure continues, with the bulk of the populous completely oblivious but those who come into contact with me kept informed as everything progresses to the crash stage.

  • Nowadays I have the opposite problem, at least here on NBL, which is convincing people that survival is possible at all in a bottleneck scenario.

    Might as well make the effort anyhow. Nothing to lose here, and it is certainly better than sitting on your keister waiting to die.

    Yes, the bottle might not be capped. The question “Who will get through?” can only be answered retrospectively.

    There may be many other questions but two broad ones that will influence one’s actions are:

    • Who could get through?
    • Who should get through?

    Also there is the matter of whether or not such questions should be permitted.

    Operating on the basis of “could”, efforts are to be directed to identify those most likely to survive, and then to direct resources and efforts to enhance their prospects.

    Operating on the basis of “should”, efforts are to be directed to define the group most deserving of survival, and to direct resources and efforts to enhance their prospects.

    Both the “should” and the “could” are variants of The Last Man Standing.

    The monolithic domes and SUN folks may have ideas about both the “should” and the “could”. And they are quite sincere in their efforts. They are also very knowledgeable in their preachings. However, one should be aware of the undercurrent of their brand of “should” and “would”, even if accepts it.

  • Robin, there’s a third question you didn’t ask:
    “Who would want to ‘get through’?”

    Nothing, not even the spectre of death, would make me voluntarily travel to Texas.

  • RE

    Your are certainly free to do whatever you want.
    But, in the end, we are in the same side. The few (in minority) here that believe that not all is lost. And that is why, I question your way of doing things for the time being.
    We are so distant, that our futures will be different, we are some 16 000 kmts apart. So we will have to deal with our own local realities. When the time comes.
    But we share a view.

    To your point.
    It seems to me that waking up people is not the right thing to do today.
    I am convinced of that.
    It is too late for that.
    People like the one that posts here are the convinced that we are mostly done. And understand the problem. Some bet for everything lost, and nothing to do (just sitting in train, with a cat, staring out the window), but some others like you an me, that not everything is lost, although, for most it is. But that tiny possibility is enough, to continue thinking in those who may survive.
    I cannot change the minds of a few people here, to change the minds of thousands is far more impossible. When they are already set up for some view of reality. That is why I believe that children are the only way, as they do not question their parents. Adults, regardless of the most reasonable position, will always question the other, just because accepting that the other is right, means a damage to their egos. As simple as that. This blog has given me the capacity to clearly understand that you will hardly convince others with reason. The only way, is to find others that already think and see things very much like you.
    I came here with that purpose, to discover that even here, I was in the wrong place. But doing things, even wrongly, is part of the experience required.

    Most people think in six dimensions, as I once said here, when you understand that, it is easy to understand that people like that, will not change, until one of the six dimensions begins to fall apart. By then, it will be too late. Anytime before everything will be OK, because their small world is ok.

    What you did not understand before, will not understand later. Because for that change it is required curiosity. And that is what many people lack of. If you do not question, you will not look for answers. You are providing answers that nobody is looking for. Those, like me, that had the curiosity, already have gone through the process of understanding the problem.

    And finally, the hard truth, there is no way to save more than a fistful of them. So, that is why I believe you efforts are going in the wrong direction. The 1000 people you need for your SUN project are already somewhere, and maybe looking for you. They do not need to be convinced.
    I guess you are not being practical. With the practicality this moment in time requires.
    You are a smart guy, use you capacity in a better way.
    Concentrate in your SUN idea, because it is a good idea, in the basis, but needs more attention to details.
    Why to patch, at a probably high cost, when you can, with attention, and mainly in an intellectual process, understand and discover possible flaws. There are always flaws in our preliminary concepts. The basic designs always are plagued of errors, and only the experienced designer may discover this issues on time, but as this matter is something totally new, there are no experts. And this idea of a community to stand the test of time, and human nature, it is not a simple issue.
    As we say here “another thing is with guitar” (“otra cosa es con guitarra”). I have seen this crude reality so many times, failures, totally unexpected, just because of a lack of thinking previously.
    I have been forced to think towards solving the problems on time, because when designing ships, to discover the flaws with the ship on the water, it is too late.


  • @kevin moore. indeed, people do not want to think logically even when given the space and opportunity for theoretical exploration, to say nothing of being able to synthesize and process existing facts.

    I had a horrible visit with my sis and BIL: he’s a lawyer (and thus supposedly “smart”). Working in an east-coast epicenter of the insurance business, he doesn’t even understand the mechanism of debt bubbles. I tried to explain to him slowly that any form of debt money, requiring the payment of interest, imposes a framework of exponentially-increasing debt that cannot be serviced, no matter which party is in office or where the inflationary bubble shifts (RE, student loans, health care, derivatives). He said “ok, I’ll be back in one minute” and then walked off, never choosing to continue the conversation. It’s his way or nothing.. not open to alternative interpretations.

    This amazes me, because I guess I have never been around people like this before, or at least I never noticed it. Maybe it never mattered in the past? MIT folk were autistic and tendentious, but there was usually a way to argue logically before them. I am so naive that it took me until I was 50 to figure out that almost all people (and probably really all people, to some extent, including so-called “smart” people) do not actually respond to logic or rational argument. I don’t know why I (or Robin Datta, or ulvfugl, or Gail or Sabine or pat or Kevin… ) should see things differently than these other folks like my sister and BIL, for example.

  • “children are the only way, as they do not question their parents”

    Aaaaah hah ha ha ha ha Godofredo, you crack me up! Sorry, but I have to break the 2-post “rule” here. My sister’s kids do nothing but question their parents. Their 10-y.o. son violently and viciously berated me, raging that he was “ashamed to call me his aunt” because I did not pick him up in my car from his school 4 blocks away. My sister asked me to do so if it was raining. It was not raining. He got his sneakers wet, though, cutting across a field, and that was unacceptable.

    He is a special case, but there are many, many middle-class US households where the children rule the roost, running the parents ragged like little tyrants. This is the case in Italy as well, with elderly parents falling all over themselves to cater to parasitic “children” of even 30 or 40 years of age who still need their meals prepared and laundry done and windows washed by “mamma” (even in the separate apartment “mamma” pays for).

    I wonder whether people are actually evolving to reject nature or to be indifferent or habituated to its absence in their lives. The above child’s father said that he refuses to touch dirt. The child says that the outside “stinks. It smells like dirt.” They strongly prefer the sealed house running an asphyxiating (to me) central A/C to opening a window (horror of any single insect infiltration). Evolution?

    I recall seeing reference to a study about human brains actually shrinking, a possible explanation being that we no longer are challenged with a wide range of external stimuli in need of processing: we create and control most stimuli (in a modern Western culture) and so that requires less varied and ongoing brain activity. That was the gist of it, I think. If I find it, I will post a link.

  • George Monbiot has written an excellent essay’The impossibility of growth’.(monbiot.com)Probably just a new twist to an old tale for those familiar with Albert Bartlett.To echo what Lidia states above,rationality and reason are foreign territory for most in this world.We’re just going to ride the train until it crashes.
    Godofredo,so you don’t accept the overwhelming supporting evidence for evolution.I won’t be wasting time anymore trying to make sense of your ramblings.

  • “Based on carbon alone, we’ll be at 5 C above baseline by then, bathing in ionizing radiation. Nobody survives either phenomenon. Not even in a bunker.”-GM

    You are reciting a Mantra Guy, an Article of Faith. It’s not supported by the evidence to date, and if you asked 100 of the top Climate Scientists and/or Environmental Biologists in the world if they expect Human Extinction by 2050, I doubt even 3 would rate it high in probability. If you pitched out a century long timeline, you might get 20-30 to say that was high probability.

    Besides that, obviously you could survive in a Bunker past 2050. All you would need is 37 years worth of food stored, water and air filtration and you are good to go. Add some energy production and a few basic systems, you easily could extend that out to a century. And that is if everything craps out TOMORROW.

    “During the 2005 NZ election campaign, as spokesperson for energy and the environment I reached about 300,000 people via the website, and maybe 100,000 via newspaper reports (out of a population of 3 million adults. Nothing changed. People continued to vote for lies and robbery (National Party, Labour Party etc.).”-KM

    That is doing pretty good! Imagine how well you would do if you were the least bit funny! LOL.

    I am damn serious about this. ;) There is a reason Beppe Grillo has a movement going in Italy. A lot of jawboning amongst academics does not reach people. You have to engage them, and humor can do this. Music too. In the 60’s, Folk Music was a powerful force for change. Sadly not enough to overcome the power of the State at the time, but they had a lot more Oil at their disposal then. Playing field is leveling here now.

    “Both the “should” and the “could” are variants of The Last Man Standing.

    The monolithic domes and SUN folks may have ideas about both the “should” and the “could”. And they are quite sincere in their efforts. They are also very knowledgeable in their preachings. However, one should be aware of the undercurrent of their brand of “should” and “would”, even if accepts it.”-RD

    What RD is alluding to here is the possibility that Eugenics will rear its head again, as it did in the early 1900s. This is more than possible, it is likely to occur.

    I am in the self-selection camp, which is you choose to the best of your ability to do the things necessary to make it through the Zero Point. Some people have limited means, others have greater means. In fact, the people with the greatest means are probably those who never left the H-G paradigm entirely, Kalahari Bushmen, Amazonians, Inuit still living by the Old Ways in Nunavut.

    Those of us not living in those situations with those skills have to use what skills we do have in the Survival Game. A BIG ONE is figuring out how to avoid the Fascist State and it’s tentacles.

    I know that most people will not succeed, I most surely will not. I will be dead well before 2050 whether extinction occurs or not in this time frame. I merely posit that SOME peple can make it through, and there is no reason not to try to do so. You die no matter what eventually, everybody and everything does.

    Ugo Bardi wrote a real nice piece this week,“Deep Future: the ultimate destiny of humankind”


    He lays out the possibilities very clearly, and they are all possibilities with one degree of probability or another. Guy makes the case of CERTAINTY, he posits his scenario is infallible and the only one which can occur. He belittles the idea of Bunker survival, without ever establishing why such survival methods could not work. He preaches a Faith of Extinction on an incredibly short timeline.

    I do not think he is correct, nor do most other climate scientists, not on this timeline. A century, more plausible, even I would say that is within reason. Not 36 years. Too many people, too many different habitats, too many strategies left to try. You can only be certain of Extinction when the knockdown goes past what occurred in the Toba Cataclysm. Until then, there remains a chance, and HOPE remains alive. Until then, you can choose to try to live or roll over and die. Seems to me that despite all the jawboning and endless Death Talk here, all of you choose the former, even Mr Euthanasia, “Kill Yourself to Save the Planet” Pat.


  • RE

    I don’t comment much on here but where I am inclined to consider Guy’s position more favourably is the context, namely a globalising capitalist social economy (culture) and the resulting degrading effects vis-a-vis the environment. No amount of shuffling of the deck chairs will alter this relentless momentum and any attempt at redeeming capitalism is bound to fail. Only the complete elimination of the particular social economy offers a slim chance of allaying this risk.

  • “Political ideas that have dominated the public mind for decades cannot be refuted through rational arguments, they must run their course in life and cannot collapse otherwise than in great catastrophe.”

    – Ludwig Von Mises

    The above and other great quotes are at the link below. (You just have to ignore the rhetoric in the commentary).

    Present western societies are insane, irrational, destructive and self-destructive; the markets are all rigged, governments are composed of bought-and-paid-for liars and self-servers, it all should have blown up before now etc.


    @Lidia. Why can I see what others cannot? Maybe growing up in post-war Britain, seeing bomb sites, being told by my parents that the government had lied, witnessing my father falsely accused of murder by lazy, corrupt policemen, personally witnessing police lie in court, pinning down politicians and finding they have no answers to anything, and other similar experiences, and having a brain help. It must be partly a consequence of genetics and partly a consequence of experiences. The fact that others I know are not highly qualified but can still see it suggests some kind of connection to what used to be called -earthiness. One woman I know left school with no qualifications because she hated school; another spent much of her life as a hairstylist. Both can see that mainstream culture is all shit, and have no problem accepting what I say about it all being terminal. Indeed, one of them made the decision long ago not to have children because she recognised at would all turn to custard. After all, Limits to Growth was well publicised in the early 1970s.

    I have recently resorted to saying to people that I see things that others do not see. It may sound conceited but it is true. I am sure the problem for most New Zealanders (and Americans) is that they had it too easy for far too long. And most get their ‘information’ via the mainstream propaganda outlets.

    My qualifications in chemistry, physics and technology etc. and studying everything of significance from anthropology to ZIRP allow me to put better explanations and better numbers on certain matters than most other people can. A reasonably good memory helps too.

    I have no idea who is in the All Blacks team, where they played last or where they will be playing next. If rugby is being screened at a venue I attend I usually say that I hope the guy dressed in pink wins.

  • “A major disaster such as the one we are contemplating in this scenario could kick the Earth out of the vertebrate habitable zone.”

    “But let’s assume that the ecosystem can recover without major losses of phyla.

    vertebrates could become again abundant and the Earth would look very much like it looked millions of years ago, when the ancestors of human beings didn’t seem to be destined to the great explosion of numbers that was to take place with the Anthropocene.”

    If some species of primates could survive the great carbon pulse, they might re-develop tool making abilities and, in time, human-like intelligence. That would take time, considering that it took some 50 million years to arrive to homo sapiens from the earliest primates, but it would still be possible within the remaining lifetime of the biosphere for vertebrates. If all primates go extinct, then the task becomes more difficult considering that it took more than 400 million years for primates to appear after the evolution of vertebrates. But, again, it would not be impossible and, anyway, perhaps sentient beings don’t need to be primates. So, there might be a second (and probably last) chance for intelligent creatures to do better than we did.”

    – From Prof. Ugo Bardi’s most recent post on his blog

    Actually the time for primates from mammals was about 100 million years. Mammals were around 150 million years ago, but it was about 65 million years ago that the dinosaurs exited, and about 50 million years ago that the first primates appeared.

    A brain of sufficient size, and a high encephalisation quotient (large brain compared to body size) is needed for intelligence. Other features for the development of intelligence are forelimbs freed from the demands of locomotion, prehensile hands (able to grasp objects), and opposable thumbs (for fine motor activity). Sufficient overlap of the fields of vision to allow stereoscopic vision works with the hands in fashioning tools.

    Sociality and toolmaking technology are important in the evolution of language.

    The maintenance of the brain requires a system capable of oxygen delivery at a distance (circulating haemoglobin) adequate oxygen carriage (high concentrations of free haemoglobin make blood viscous: the workaround is to contain the haemoglobin in red blood cells), and an efficient gas exchange mechanism (the lungs: much better than gills). Also important is homeothermy and endothermy (maintenance of constant body temperature and generation of one’s own heat).

  • RE said:

    ‘That is doing pretty good! Imagine how well you would do if you were the least bit funny! LOL’

    You have no idea how funny I can be. Or how entertaining. Snap judgements based on little information won’t further your cause. I’ve had councillors laughing out loud in the council chamber. And not at me now that I have been proven right so many times (they used to laugh at me, Chicken Little and all that, as required by the system.

    However, the real point not how funny I can be but that the money-lenders and corporations who set up the system (the ancestors of those living today, to be precise), those who control practically everything today, will not allow any significant change, which is why all political movements have failed. Direct Democracy failed because the mainstream media did the sabotage job required of the mainstream media, to ensure that NZ society continued to be driven off the cliff for the benefit of the few at the top of the pyramid.

    By the way, the Second World War was not fought to defeat fascism but to determine which group of fascists would control the world.

    Time for George again:

  • “Besides that, obviously you could survive in a Bunker past 2050. All you would need is 37 years worth of food stored, water and air filtration and you are good to go. Add some energy production and a few basic systems, you easily could extend that out to a century.”

    What a ghastly existence. Trapped underground, snickering about all the dead and trying to figure out how 37 years worth of canned Spam is going to last for 100 years.

    And then RE wonders why no one takes him seriously.

  • What a ghastly existence. Trapped underground, snickering about all the dead and trying to figure out how 37 years worth of canned Spam is going to last for 100 years.

    As the saying goes, beauty lies in the eye of the beerholder… One does not need to be a Führer to be comfortable a Führerbunker. (Just so long as the Red Army does not show up!)

    Cicada larvae spend 17 years underground. A whole host of species including insects and vertebrates have spent so much evolutionary time in the darkness of caves that they have lost their sight. Half the humans on some parts of the planet (including where I grew up) live their adult lives in burkhas, behind closed doors.

    The main issues with bunkered existence would be how long to stay inside, and how long supplies will/should last. If a large part of one’s life expectancy is to be spent inside, then the next generation may have to be started and raised in the bunker prior to emergence.

    But then there is the bright side. That next generation will have no experience of the planet as it used to be: a vast wasteland is all they might ever know, and so that will be “normal” to them – and for generations to follow. Shifting baselines, as pointed out by Kevin Moore.

  • @ Grant Schreiber

    And then RE wonders why no one takes him seriously.

    But you read what he said, Grant, he’s trying to be a comedian, he’s modelling his career on Beppo Grillo, the famous Italian clown, everything he says is intended to make you laugh, none of it is meant to be taken seriously….

    The only problem is the lack of talent. Someone needs to tell him, you know, quietly, in private, a good friend that he trusts.. nobody actually laughs at his ‘jokes’, he’s no fucking good at it…

    We’re all supposed to be jumping up and down whooping and yelling because he’s shown us the Promised Land, HOPE, the RE Way, and rolling around giggling with mirth for days after hearing him talk, recalling the one-liners that cracked us up, you know, building concrete domes in swamps in Siberia, what a HOOT that is gonna BE !

    And then 80,000 years before we can come out and walk about and see how things are doing in our post-bottleneck Wonderland… that sure is something to look forward too, even PAT has to understand THAT and crack a big grin !

    I know I’m just bubbling over with joy and newly found enthusiasm every time I read RE and hear his sermons.. I think bunkers should be eco friendly and bio degradable and use the materials that are easily found locally on site, and probably there will be an abundance of bones, so I suggest that RE study this construction technique, it’ll prove invaluable. He’ll have to get used to the stench of course, but his sense of humour will help him.


  • Robin: is your beerholder empty or always full? Not sure if you’re being glib or not. If this is joking, I missed it.
    If not, do I really need to point out the difference between cicada larva, cave creatures and human beings? Does wearing a burkha in public really equal living underground for decades?

    RE was stating that one could store food for 37 years. What food stores for that long? Fruit roll ups? Freeze dried ice cream?
    What next generation? How much food do you need for a family of four to last 37 years? How many females must one go out and find to have more kids? Just how big is this bunker anyway? The size of Chicago?

    It is a ludicrous concept. It is based upon the assumption that the total collapse of civilization is not only survivable, but something easy to accomplish if one has had the foresight to buy enough canned goods and have a really good generator with an inexhaustible power supply. And once the radiation levels have dropped off so it is “safe” for the “survivors” to come on out of their hole, do they instantly take up raising corn and milking cows from the newly replenished earth, or do they sit in dumbfound silence and starve? Or did they starve to death years ago because in all their planning they forgot to bring a can opener?

  • Humans have used knowledge through the process of the scientific method to applied technology leading us through social progression.

    If we were a biological organism it would be the equivalent of going from bacteria to dinosaurs………..

    But when you become the dominant species of the planet you are a victim of your own success if the dynamic equilibrium of that ecosystem that supports your progress is altered in any manner which compromises your adaptability to it……….

    Such is our society today………

  • RE, my “timeline” relies on science. Yours, on faith. You clearly do not understand the difference between the two.

    We’ve had no humans on this planet at 3.5 C above baseline. Carbon dioxide alone takes us to 5 C within a few decades. Arctic methane alone takes us to 16 C before 2033. Both estimates assume collapse of industrial civilization now. Yet you believe your bunker will allow humans to persist indefinitely.

    Fukushima alone threatens all humans in the northern hemisphere. Multiply by a few hundred for the final impact.

    Where’s your water coming from? And how does it look when the survivors come up for air? The science indicates it looks like Venus.

    Placing your bunker in Texas makes even less sense than a straw-bale house in New Mexico. At least I admit the stupidity of my mistakes.

  • kevin: I saw this today and wanted to know if things are beginning to “crack” there politically.


    Sunday, 8 June 2014
    NZ politics

    One corrupt politician bites the dust

    John Banks to resign

    Act MP John Banks has confirmed he will resign from Parliament after being found guilty of filing a false electoral return.


    Here’s a fun read to start off your day:


    [a few quotes]

    Categorizing the Unemployed by the Impact of the Recession

    This resulting measure combines an assessment of the respondent/family’s current economic status with the magnitude of change in the quality of daily life, with an assessment of whether this change represents a new normal or is a temporary stay in
    limbo. Combining answers to these three questions result in a typology with five groups, defined as follows:

  • -The forum in Wyoming on the evening of 4 June 2014 was filmed by Pauline Schneider.- ……..Crappy audio …yeah No joke it is terrifyingly bad !

  • Instead of complaining about crappy work by the filmmaker, why don’t you offer some assistance? She could use fiat currency for better equipment, and manual labor to help when she’s filming.

    She’s offering a gift. All her video clips are free.

  • Godofredo Aravena Says:- I believe that children are the only way, as they do not question their parents.
    Adults, regardless of the most reasonable position, will always question the other.

    I always read your comments and find them interesting. I was hoping you might explain your idea about children not questioning their parents.
    If this were true where you are,because it sure isn’t true here,wouldn’t most children come out like most parents.That is to say,people who want to consume,get more,ignore the natural world and the converging catastrophies all around them.
    Isn’t that what the world already has? Children that grow up immersed in the status quo.

    You also say that adults always question each other.So the children will turn into adults that question each other.Or are you imagining that hope for humanity lies in pre-teens?

    Lidia said – I recall seeing reference to a study about human brains actually shrinking

    There is a very interesting book title “The Shallows:What The Internet Is Doing To Our Brains” that talks alot about parts of the brain shrinking from lack of use.
    Also there is discussion of what parts of the brain grow bigger with use.Kind of makes me wonder what a scan of a Doomers brain would look like!

  • Lidia

    It is a shame to say that your children are the result of your efforts, and how serious you have taken the responsibility..
    There are no such thing as “problematic children”, when children are problematic kids, you have to look at their parents. When I say, responsible parenthood, that is what I mean, and you have one shot per kid. No second chances.
    Parenthood is a really serious task, that most people do not practice, in pursue of their careers, success, and the material things like the house, the car(s), and so. In that rush, children are always forgotten.
    The first ten years are critical. You have to give them a lot of attention, so at the first sign of something going out of the rail, straightaway take action.
    Our IC has lost of sight the children issue. And how important they are.
    Even though parenthood is unique situation, different with every kid, there are some basic rules to follow, that must be put to practice. If you follow them, you will be probably happy, after the years that you did a good job. Rules, that most people do not follow. And because they do not practice them, they are not given to the next generation, and the situation happens again. Over and over. Unfortunately.
    Do not blame children, blame their parents. And the parents of their parents.
    The marvelous thing about children is that they are not robots, they learn and follow your rules, but they think, and later, as they become adults, and gather their personal experience, emerges a mix, that can only be better, your teachings, rules, and experience are mixed with what your children can add.
    I have been always curious about parenthood, and children. And along 40 years of my life, since I was a kid, I have followed the lives of friends, and relatives, taking notes about everything, parents (origin, job, attitude towards children), family life, place where they were raised, school and education, personal capacities, special events like the early death of one of the parents, etc (everything counts). to sometime in the future, connect dots. I have also followed my life, and the lives of my girls. My view of childhood is sustained in that long term experience. The task is not finished yet, as, to my perception, you only know that you were a good (or bad) parent, once you see your grandchildren become adults. Because in them, it will be the most filtered basic rules you gave to your children, that survived the test of time, combined with the life experiences of your children.
    Parenthood is a really serious matter, because from that process, emerges the future of our society.

  • Another comment I posted at Fractal Planet:


    I HAVE confirmed with McPherson that this accurately summarizes his argument:

    “Some critics appear to believe that Guy McPherson argues that probable human extinction will come exclusively from global climate change, but he does not. Instead, he argues that a mass die-off, with probable human extinction, will come from one or some combination of three, global-scale, mutually interacting processes: global climate change, environmental collapse, and/or nuclear meltdown. (For more specifics on this, see this article written in November, 2011: http://transitionvoice.com/2011/11/three-paths-to-near-term-human-extinction/ .) Directly related to this, he also argues that, due to peak oil, peak potable water, peak soil, other peaks, and general ecological collapse, industrial civilization will soon collapse. Because of greatly reduced atmospheric reflectance, this will quickly result in an increase in average atmospheric temperature to 2 C° (3.6 F°) over the pre-industrial baseline. Meanwhile, the interiors of large continents heat much faster than the global average, so those areas will become uninhabitable for humans shortly after the collapse of industrial civilization. Does he argue that these things will happen with absolute 1.0 level certainty? No. With an extremely high probability on the order of 0.98, or so? Yes. Does he base this high probability on a particular, peer reviewed, published paper that takes all of these reciprocally interacting processes into account? No, because such a study would involve computer modeling and he prefers to report actual data and trends, not predictions based on computer models. The probability amounts to a professional judgment, an opinion, based on the pattern and trend of the presently available evidence. Does this qualify as “unscientific” because he has not mathematically calculated his probability estimate? Certainly not. To argue that amounts to arguing that doctors and surgeons who quickly make extremely complex, life-or-death decisions many times every day do so “unscientifically”, with no “real” basis in science, because they do not mathematically calculate each probability for each step along their reasoning chain, nor even the probability related to their final decision.”

    Regarding your point that, allegedly, “It’s bizarre that you would compare Guy’s message with life-and death decisions of medical professionals in an emergency.” I do not compare HIS MESSAGE with the decision making of medical (and many other professionals). I DO compare THE GENERIC REASONING–A CLAIM–that failing to make detailed probability calculations presumably equates with “unscientific” reasoning and problem solving. I could have added many other examples related to other professions and the day-to-day risk assessment decisions we all make every day. Related directly and importantly to this, much psychological research demonstrates that we can and do solve far more complex problems “intuitively” and non-consciously than we can with conscious, structured problem-solving of the kind that Scott demands “real science” involves exclusively–a naïve, simplistic, misleading idea indeed. The history of natural science demonstrates many, many examples of just such intuitive, non-conscious reasoning, decision making, problem solving, and creativity.

  • And yet another Fractal Planet comment:


    I understand your frustration with me and some others, but probably especially with me. It seems to me that, among other conceivable possibilities, you have two main paths that you might follow: (1) You can follow the decidedly UNscientific path that CloudwalkingOwl suggests: harden your position still further in simple, linear, fundamentalist, right/wrong ways, CLOSING yourself off further from ideas, information, evidence, and reasoning that contradict your present models of how natural science and the world presumably work. You can follow his advice that “If we don’t kill the messenger, the least we can do is to keep him away so as to avoid the message!” (Human supremacist, corporate-controlled media do this extremely well with much of the public, much of the time. “We’ve got the POWER to control the message–or to do anything else we want with anyone or anything else–so, by God, let’s USE it!”) Or, (2) you can take a more scientific path and OPEN yourself to ideas, information, evidence, and reasoning that contradict your present models of how natural science and the world work. You can, subsequently, work at constructing new models. Meanwhile, I realize, very well(!), that language can help others construct new knowledge only if, (a) they WANT to construct new knowledge, and (b) they proactively and persistently WORK AT constructing new knowledge, new models. Which path will you choose over the short term? Which path over the longer term? I do not presume to know and will not guess. (But I do know that past behavior serves as the best predictor, by far, of future behavior.)

  • Thanks for all your work Guy, and to Pauline too for all her work behind the scenes(I heard the presentation just fine with headphones).I appreciate the information you’re bringing. Despite the outcome, I believe it better to know so one can be prepared mentally. Just a quick question, am I correct in assuming warming will accelerate exponentially after 2015 due to a month of ice-free waters in the Artic? Thanks for your time. -Jim

  • Thanks for your affirmative comment, Jim. Warming will accelerate exponentially after Arctic ice is gone (an event humans have never experienced). It’s not completely certain when the Arctic will be ice-free during September, but 2015 is a pretty good estimate. It could happen this year, and I doubt it’ll wait beyond September 2016.

  • To Thestormcrow

    I wil try to explain.
    Is complex process.
    There are four stages in our childhood.
    From 0 to 5 years old, from 5 to 10, from 10 to 15 and after 15.
    You have to understand that children, when they are born are like an empty hard drive. There is nothing there but the basic instincts.
    So everyday adds data to the hard drive. Everything counts.

    Of the four stages, the first stage and the second are the most crucial.

    Along the first five years, kids learn about the world mainly through their parents. As they spent most of the time at home. In this stage, the mother is relevant. Well, during this stage, children built their world. The basis for the rest of their lives begins here. The way to speak (accent), the dirty words, the good things, the bad things. If you do not have TV at home, your children will never feel that it is missing. If you do not have a car, the same. If you like a team of baseball, your children will like it too, as it is the model they see.
    Children build their world as what they see around. That is THE WORLD for them. Obviously, you have to take seriously your task, almost planning ahead everything, because everything matters. You are the model.
    This is a 24/7 task.
    Another responsibility of the parents along this stage is to try to devise how is your children, as early as possible, to take the right actions to manage the character, in a blank way (that is without punishing, as much as possible).
    And we cannot forget that children want everything for them. I mean, they want it, they want it, they want it. You have to deal with that also in a blank way.

    Along the second stage, your children leave home, and begin to know that there is another world. A world that will be very much faced and handled with what they already bring from home. But in this case, the most important activity is to guide your children. As they will have many new experiences, never seen before. Also, during this stage, you must answer many questions. And the answers must be based in serious supports, because, later (maybe years) they will revise what you said. If they find that what you said was not correct, they will begin to lose confidence in you. That is something to be avoided. Also important at this stage is to “be” always available. Because you never know when your kid will face a sometimes shocking (and never seen and lived) event, that if you are not available to make things clear, they will provide their own answers, that probably will be wrong (because of their lack of experience). Most of the time, if there are no parents available, for whatever reason, many questions will remain unasked. But there will be answers, many times taken from others, sometimes, not good examples.
    At this stage, your kids will make friends, but the relation will be many times cruel. Then you have to be there to clarify things, and provide support.
    The idea, is that the kids slowly build a way to handle the world.
    Again, this stage is a 24/7 task.
    You have to keep on looking carefully to your children to know what they like, what are they good for. What they do not like, and what they are bad for, to show them (and teach) how to handle and deal with those issues.
    In these two stages, home is the place where the most relevant issues for the future take place. And parents are the idols. Your children will not question what you teach them, and what you say. Of course, they have to be solid positions, and have solid supports. No light answers and attitudes.
    If you have a view about what is right, and want that to continue, you cannot rely in these stages on somebody else to provide those concepts. School, nannies, grandparents, they are by far not adequate. They are in a second place, and may help, but after you. Always parents first.
    This two stages are crucial, what you did wrong will hardly be corrected. If none at all.
    If you did things in a roughly right way, the next stages will be quite easy.

    The third stage, shouldn´t be a problem, if you have done things right before.
    Now it is not a 24/7 task, but anyway you have to pay attention to what your children do. Know their friends as much as possible, and their parents, if possible, know where they go, and what they do. Support what they like, they will try many things, is part of the way of knowing themselves, and the world. You have to provide some freedom. They need it. But you have to carefully watch, from some certain distance what happens with your kids. Certainly, never cut the connection. They have to feel that they cannot do what they want, as they will probably take wrong decisions about that.
    To resume this stage, provide limited freedom, but at the same time knowing where they are, what they are doing, and with who.
    And always providing basic rules, as necessary.

    The fourth stage is different, as your kids will began to question things.
    At the same time, there will be new experiences to live (without parents near or close).
    They will have for the first time, total freedom.
    They now rely on their judgment to decide. Judgment mainly sustained in what you have told them is the right thing, in the previous years.
    This is the moment when everything you have done before, will be the put under stress.
    But even if everything goes right, parents anyway must be watching, from an even more distant position, but always paying attention to the kids, providing some distant, and not asked guidance and support. By watching with attention, you will know when is the moment.
    You should be a counselor, more than a ruler.
    Very little can be done, if things do not work or go wrong at this stage.

    After this four stages, you have to keep on watching, your children will always have conflicts, even being adults. Nobody better than their parents, to provide support and guidance. It is the moment to amend minor things too.

    You have a whole chance to make good persons, that will do what you believe is the right things, with each one of your children. You have 20 years to seed in them the basis, supported with example. That will stay there until they die.
    And part of it will be transmitted to your grandchildren.
    It is all in your hands.
    But, serious parenthood is a need.
    And this is a conflict with our IC. You have to choose, your children, or you. As everything invites you to think mainly on you, there is a collision.
    But, without doubt I would say, children first.
    There will always be in the future time for us as parents. As by your mid 40´s, your children will begin to have a life on their own.
    And time, and many ways to do useful things, although, taking care of you children, is the most useful task you can leave for posterity.

  • Another piece of fine writing, RE.

    Why do you jump on the dates so much? I would have predicted the financial system not recovering from 2008, but the persistence of gullibility of workers (savers, investors, retirees, consumers) in their dependence on it could not be predicted. Despite a foundation more rotten than ever, the lemmings will not leave the parade, but are determined to go over the cliff together, such social creatures they are.

    It will collapse when they are no longer ABLE, not just not WILLING, to prop it up.

    You know as well as I that the build-up of pressure has only been aggravated afterward, as anyone who studies the Fed and its cartel functioning knows.

    Likewise with Methane. No one knows precisely the amounts under the Arctic seas and the tundra, or their rate of release, or the magnitude of their effects to come. Estimates like Shakhova’s, however, are not in great dispute, and are enough to do the job.

    That is why a range of dates can be put on an accumulation of those effects, because you are not only trying to “lead” with your “aim” at a linear moving target, but you have an ACCELERATING (at an UNKNOWN rate) UPWARD curve of methane accumulation in the atmosphere. Is this deniable?

    If this premise holds, then the math of extinction becomes the accumulating loss of “islands” of habitat, after the mass die-off from loss of industrial agriculture.

    As I’ve written before, people have trouble seeing over the “mountain” of mass die-off into the next range of “hills” of those final, smaller “lights going out,” which is what extinction represents. Why? Because their own demise is compassed in that first massive loss. The rest is merely hypothetical to themselves.

    “The last humans will not know that they are the last humans.”

    (And yes, being one of the few who intends to survive longer on such an “island” makes you viscerally — to them — an outsider to most such conversations. So it goes. Rocks go with the farm.)

    But it doesn’t make much sense to argue an outcome from a bunch of so-far-unmeasurable variables and inputs to the whole model. You can only describe what those inputs are likely to be, and then await some data. Meanwhile, anyone’s best guess is just that.

    For example, Is Arctic summer ice gone in 2016? 2020?

    Does it trigger a Methane burp? How big? Does some other factor in parallel trigger one?

    How fast does the overall warming in Siberia and Alaska accelerate?

    Does the present 480 ppm equivalent (400 ppm carbon, 80 ppm equivalent methane) accelerate (and what are the feedback effects at each higher total)?

    If you project a non-linear, i.e., UPWARD-ARCING curve, on ANY of these, your “expiration” date moves up closer to today. If you don’t, well then, you could be at 2050, 2100, or never.

    Guy doesn’t put a date on it, only cites others. But his best guess would likely be a range, and defer to the unknowns in these factors.

    Did anyone predict Ted Williams’ .406 season before the season started? (He went over .400 on May 25, 1941, so any such “accurate” predictions would have had to come well before that date. Think they would have taken some flak, back in March, say?)

    “…especially about the future.” — Niels Bohr


    I wonder if my distractibilty is explained in this book (excerpts at link), “The Shallows: What the Internet is Doing to Our Brains”:

    Lots of McLuhan references, and pros and cons of how we’re changing our relationship to information. My summary would be “If you had ADHD before, you ain’t seen nothin’ yet.” And yet, for seeking information that we actually WANT, rather than are fed, our most goal-directed selves can feast online.

    If you haven’t gotten to the most vital information (as I believe we have here at NBL) you just weren’t curious enough so far.


    And on to psychology of the Deniers. Here are excerpts of what I sent to Guy halfway through listening to his debate opponent (I really needed a break at that point from his bass-ackwards “logic”):

    “I’ve never been able to remember the differences between deductive reasoning, inductive reasoning, or reasoning by analogy, or whatever other ones exist. I still can’t categorize what I was hearing from your opponent. But I can smell a logical inconsistency that drives the train right off the tracks.

    “What I hear him (and other deniers) saying so far is that: Since climate is variable over time, and other periods of temperature rise have occurred before, obviously for other causes (“Mother Nature”) prior to human CO2 intervention, therefore, it must not be the human causes this time, either, but one of those earlier, mysterious unnamed non-carbon causes! Because, hey, it happened before! Shit happens, man!


    “This is your (typical?) human brain, your human brain operating in two dimensions, “Earth is flat”-ville. The synapses just do not connect all the way through. But the mouth still runs. ‘Hey! I’ve got a story to tell here; don’t interrupt me!’

    “That’s about as scientific as it gets, something you could pass off about as easily as watered-down Coors at a NASCAR rally, but only to the same unthinking crowd, and only when they are very, very, very thirsty…

    “When the flat-lander 1- or 2-dimensional brain discovers there’s something like an actual THIRD dimension to be explored in thinking, it feels very threatened.”


    OK, that’s enough for now; sunny day outside…

  • Essentially, we, global humanity, are marooned in a set of social relations (capitalism) that have taken on a life of their own. Thus, despite the best of intentions, we are repeatedly driven by them to add to the deficit by basically tinkering here and there, the sort of notions individuals such as RE have in mind. We are probably at a point though where the accumulated toxicity of the system has crossed a threshold and of course, with the galloping globalisation of commodification out of investor darling, China, I would suspect that Guy’s timeline is pretty much close to the mark, sadly. Dismantling communism (throwing the baby out with the bathwater) was not a very smart move, the niceties of freedom notwithstanding.

  • Wow, my comment got chopped! Ok. Skip it. It wasn’t important anyway, dealing with the unemployed and all – I mean, who cares about them?

    By the way, Shadow Stats, which still calculates the number of unemployed the way it was always done (you know, honestly) until it became a game of hide the facts (a few elections ago) through refiguring and redefining, finds a current unemployment figure of about 26% rather than the 6.3% you see touted in the headlines. So almost 30% of our population is actually unemployed and experiencing financial stress which leads to substance abuse, skipping medical treatments, going without food, feelings of shame or embarrassment – and all this impacts their kids.

    “The number of individual recipients whose benefits expire runs to about 70,000 a week.

    The mental health crisis among the long term unemployed rarely gets much attention, although Van Horn has described the combination of long-term unemployment and diminished government support as “a silent mental health epidemic.”

    [quotes from Suburban Guerrilla blog story where the article I linked to is found.]

    Nothing to see here, move along now.

  • @Godofredo

    The socialisation of children (and parenting in general) as we know and understand it, is also a function of capitalist social relations, the family being the fulcrum around which these relations are developed in early life. Thus the issue is not as clear cut as we might think.

  • @Godofredo, “when they are born are like an empty hard drive”

    This is SO NOT TRUE….


  • Tom,

    NZ politics is in damage-control mode at the moment, and the masses are being duped, as usual. John Banks is, and always was, a self-serving mendacious turd. And Len Brown (mayor of Orcland) is a quisling, noted for his pseudo-socialist values which evaporated the moment he got into power. The Labour Party has never been trusted by anyone with a brain since it promoted privatisation of public assets and promoted rampant consumerism in the mid-1980s. Unfortunately most ‘sheep’ are still totally uninformed and will head into whichever enclosure they are instructed to by the corporate media.

    The latest ‘new’ party to be rolled out features Kim.com. the German-born Internet guru who made a fortune out of some kind of piracy.

    Everything that comes from mainstream media is bollocks. But the masses are not suffering enough yet, so they won’t leave their comfort zones. Some other mendacious turd will be slotted in, to replace Banks, to keep the rorts functioning and the masses dumbed-down.

    That said, many people I speak with now have zero faith in politicians, and the general participation rate continues to fall. It’s a slow implosion:


    ‘ACT is promising to clean up its image after John Banks’ fall from grace.

    Banks, who was ACT’s only MP, resigned on Sunday after he was found guilty of falsely declaring donations to his 2010 Auckland mayoral bid as anonymous.

    It’s not the first time ACT’s reputation has taken a battering. Former ACT MP David Garrett stole the identity of a dead infant and former leader Rodney Hide was found to be abusing parliamentary perks.

    But leader Jamie Whyte says he’s determined to play it straight from now on.

    “We have had more than our fair share of these kinds of events,” Dr Whyte told TV3’s Firstline.

    “And it’s really terrible for us, because in fact no party in New Zealand is more interested in ideas than the ACT party.

    “It’s very odd and very disappointing that we keep getting sidelined by what you might call personality-related issues rather than policy issues.”

    Dr Whyte said Banks staying on in parliament would have been a problem for ACT as it was all anyone was talking about.

    And Len Brown, who was Banks’ opponent in the 2010 Auckland mayoral election, says he’s sympathetic towards his old rival.

    “He’s given a lot of service – over 30 years of public service – and so, in that sense it is very sad to see him, given that level of service, go out in the way that he has,” he told Firstline.

    Banks will resign from the seat of Epsom effective from Friday. He’s due to be sentenced in August.

    A parliamentary vote to avoid a by-election after his resignation needs to gain 75 per cent support.

    Labour leader David Cunliffe would consult his caucus and other parties but had previously said he did not personally favour a by-election so close to the September 20 general election, a spokeswoman said.’

  • “We’ve had no humans on this planet at 3.5 C above baseline”-GM

    That’s because HS hadn’t evolved yet.  However, we did have mammals that lived through the PETM, at 12C above baseline, and we are more adaptible and survive in more environments then they ever did.  It isn’t science to say it is impossible for HS to survive at temps 3.5C above baseline, it is a Faith Based argument.

    “Fukushima alone threatens all humans in the northern hemisphere.”-GM

    It threatens the folks living right next door in Tokyo most of all, but they aren’t dying THAT fast.  If Tokyo is vacant of people in 5 years, maybe you have a case that you could have a global wipeout in 36 years.  We can check the Tokyo population in 2019 to get an update on this.

    “Where’s your water coming from? “-GM

    Water is everywhere.  The higher the temperature, the more water vapor held in the atmosphere.  You just need temperature gradients in order to condense it out of the atmosphere.  WarkaWater towers do this nicely.



    Water can be recycled and conserved in many ways, you need less than 10% of the water conventional Ag uses to run a hydroponics setup.  Pipes won’t be available in 36 years?  They are buried under every street, some of them over 100 year old now and still going.  The tubing in your McMansion will last 50 years easy.

    “Placing your bunker in Texas makes even less sense than a straw-bale house in New Mexico. At least I admit the stupidity of my mistakes.”-GM

    I agree with that one!  Which is why I don’t live in Texas!  I live in ALASKA.  Eddie has his Doomstead in TX, not me.  I have encouraged him on numerous occassions to relocate, however his dental biz is in TX, so this is tough for him to do.

    Remember, it doesn’t take many people to survive, just a few.  Unless this event surpasses the PETM, some species will survive.  HS can be one of those species.


  • Your confidence is based on faith in our species. That’s utter foolishless: Can you not see what we’ve done?

    You deny the ample evidence regarding Fukushima. You proclaim our cleverness, not recognizing what we’ve done to habitat on this planet. You claim we’ll generate water on demand in our bunkers. I suppose your food will grow belowground, too.

    Your claims are totally ridiculous, but you won’t budge. No amount of evidence will convince you that humans need clean air, potable water, and healthy food to survive and that we’re headed for a planet without any of those ingredients.

  • Grant –

    “It is a ludicrous concept.”

    yes it is, on so many levels. I had a little back and forth with RE about this a couple of months ago. (Toba came up earlier then, too). it is ludicrous in so many ways it just boggles my mind.

    BUT – it hold tremendous appeal for a certain type of person. I imagine it holds some appeal for others who would just want to “survive” if someone else did all the work. but for a certain type of mind, it holds more of the “new frontier” type of appeal. obviously, we all know where that came from, and what kind of energy was behind it. that is exactly why, when this came up between me and RE earlier, I said “so much of this type of thinking is embedded in the punchline of our current cosmic joke.”

    RE’s thinking is the *heart* of the insanity that drove us all here in the first place. let me elaborate:

    – it is incredibly short term. the idea that building the concrete bunkers and stockpiling food is going to somehow overcome the level of long term change, and the degree of that change, is just perfectly delusional in its short term focus.

    – it is totally human-centric. the idea is that if we can somehow build a spaceship/dome on Earth (or a bunch of these), then we kind of ride out the catastrophe even if all the rest of Earth becomes as sterile as space.

    – it has no conception at all about the necessary dynamics of the biosphere that would be required for long-term survival. none at all.

    – even if we got as much incredible willpower, brainpower and brawn to build some kind of survival system that could get some humans through this for the next thousand years before extinction – SO FUCKING WHAT? what was the point? why on Earth wasn’t that same kind of energy applied to actually *rescuing* some kind of long term livable biosphere in the first place?

    why was it important to try to “save us” with a system of giant fruit jars? “the point was to live a bit longer – to have more time on Earth for humanity…” or what the hell ever the point may be.

    this is exactly the same kind of thinking that we see reflected in the micro scale of our health system – just stretch out life for a few more days or weeks or months… just because we can. why? no reason, we just feel compelled to act like this, you know, more life, more time on Earth…

    no, the reason is FEAR. fear of something that is called: DEATH and the the fact that some people simply can’t deal with not being in control using whatever damn thing they want to extend their pointless existences with. the fear that when one is actually faced with real death, one may suddenly wonder “what the fuck was I thinking? wait a minute – no, no! – I completely missed what was important!”

    that is the collective hell that so much of humanity is trapped in – so many have completely forgotten what is important about why they are here in the first place and just think “well, being alive is good, so let’s have more of that at all costs.”

    it is not that “alive” is just better than “dead” – simply for the reason that both of these are illusions in this context. it is about tasting existence from a place that escapes the primal fear of death, and at the same time knows what it means to be alive in primal joy, today, and has no need to be driven insane by a compulsion to control something that cannot be controlled, and every possibility to live in harmony with the forces that are one’s only REAL nature.

  • I suspect RE’s s problems is that he/she has not quite understood the relentless nature of the capitalist commodification process which essentially strip mines the planet and its atmospheric envelope to the limits of those systems and beyond, thus opening up the entire system to trigger thresholds that only go one way…and that is beyond life supporting ranges. That dynamic is in fact picking up pace despite all the fine words and sentiment, paradoxically. Thus any thought of bunkering out a crisis is pretty much a waste of time, I would imagine. We applied modernity to all the wrongs sorts of uses, unfortunately.

  • @ Lidia

    @Godofredo, “when they are born are like an empty hard drive”

    This is SO NOT TRUE….


    Thank you for pointing to Godofredo’s staggering, breathtaking ignorance.

    I was fired up to deliver an angry lecture on basic biology… but what’s the point… a sigh of sad resignation will have to do do…

    I mean, guinea fowl chicks, fresh out of the egg, look up at the sky and see a dark speck and run and hide, even they are not ’empty hard drives’…and they only spend three weeks developing, not nine months.
    Surely, any mother knows her baby is something more than ‘an empty hard drive’, ffs !

  • @Kevin

    I know where you are coming from. Live in NZ myself and have to say, we are plumbing new depths with the Banks and Mana/dot.com fiasco.

  • “It threatens the folks living right next door in Tokyo most of all, but they aren’t dying THAT fast. If Tokyo is vacant of people in 5 years, maybe you have a case that you could have a global wipeout in 36 years. We can check the Tokyo population in 2019 to get an update on this.”

    right now, Japan has a fully functional modern economy with every tool of modern technology and many billions of $$ to keep Fuke under some kind of lid. that kind of thing will be *totally* gone when the rest of them around the world go Fuke. it will be pure, burning, radioactive hell. same thing with Chernobyl. there is no comparison whatsoever between what happened with those and with what is coming. this point has been made before, RE, but you keep conveniently forgetting it. I wonder why?

  • @Henry.

    Please catch up!

    The UNIPCC methane forcing factor was assigned the value of 23 times carbon dioxide (over a century). Then it was raised to 34 times CO2. The value over a 20-year period is supposedly 72 x CO2. But none of those values has any relevance.

    In any time frame that matters and in the real world, I contend that we need to use the instantaneous factor. That is particularly true if every molecule of methane in the atmosphere that gets oxidised is instantaneously replace by another (and more), so the concentration does not fall, as described in many models, but is in fact rising, as actually measured in the real world. (Preindustrial methane was in the range 0.5 to 0.75ppm, rose to around 0.175, levelled out and is now rising again, as I understand it.)

    I took up this matter with Paul Beckwith a few months ago and postulated the correct multiplier for methane is of the order of 300. Paul conformed seeing a value of 250 times CO2, but has not got back to me with any clear-cut figure.

    I have been an advocate of the Precautionary Principle for a long, long times….. you know the one about not doing something unless you know it is safe.

    In the absence of anyone demonstrating I am wrong in my analysis, I have been suggesting we use a forcing factor of 300 times CO2 for CH4.

    Bearing in mind that for the past 800,000 years atmospheric CO2 has ranged from 180ppm to 260ppm (averaging about 220ppm), and that the preindustrial figure of 280ppm actually corresponds to an unusually high peak, I think we have a problem. That is especially true when we have a political-economic system dedicated to raising atmospheric CO2 and CH4 concentrations as quickly as possible.

    Using 300 as the multiplier, the approximately 2ppm methane in the atmosphere equates to around 600ppm CO2e. Add the 400ppm actual CO2. Now add suitable forcing factors for the multitude of other greenhouse gases present in the atmosphere and you get a figure in excess of 1100ppm CO2e. Compare that with the [relatively stable] prehistoric warming factors of 220ppm CO2 plus 0.6 x 300 = 400ppm CO2e and we see that we have more than twice as much greenhouse gas warming as was occurring over most of the past 80,000 years.

    Of course I could be wrong, and welcome being proven wrong.

    Three days ago I did battle with the Taranaki Regional Council air quality monitor with respect to the quality of air people actually breathe. I discovered that the sampling points are all totally irrelevant -on the top of a building, on a second floor balcony, in windy out-of-town locations, and that no sampling has been done where the actual problem of air pollution is, i.e. 1 metre above ground level in busy streets.

    Brian Cheyne did not take well to the fact that the results he had accumulated over several years were of no value in evaluating the extent of the O3 and NO2 problem with respect to cyclists and pedestrians, and that his results were geared to monitoring the air quality for pigeons.

    Whilst speaking with TRC officers last Friday, I had an interesting conversation with James Kitto, supposedly investigative scientific officer for TRC; he claimed that ‘people are living longer as a consequence of industrialism, and therefore industrialism is good’. I pointed out that the people who are living into their 80s and 90s now grew up in a world which was not heavily polluted and in which food was natural and nutritious etc. I put it to him that we are about to witness and shocking drop in life-expectancy as a consequence of high levels of pollution, poor quality food, obesity, diabetes, cancers, societal stress etc. That elicited the knee-jerk response we have come to expect from people trapped in the Matrix and well-rewarded for walking round with their eyes closed.

  • mo flow says, “RE’s thinking is the *heart* of the insanity that drove us all here in the first place.” Bingo.

  • Need some suggestions. As an engineer, my climate science study draws a conclusion similar to Guy’s. For the last 20 years of my healthy life, I want to do something meaningful – chasing money and pleasure is not a priority. Have decided Embracing Life is my view of the Meaning of Life.

    I want to work on 1) saving as much life as possible 2) setting the best example as a way to influence others. Not concerned about my physical comfort or convenience so much now – hard work, knowledge and teaching is my direction. But what would be some good project(s)out there?

    Kevin Moore’s SUN project sounds interesting. Also, looking at WWOOF. Any other ideas?

  • @RE

    Here are a few points you may have overlooked in your getting- through-the-bottleneck-in-a-bunker planning.

    1. The mammals that got through the asteroid impact and the PETM were about the size of shrews (smaller than my thumb) and ate invertebrates.

    2. Humans cannot live without sunlight. Vitamin D is essential. You will need a regular supply of artificial sunlight. The compact fluorescent lamp I have on my desk stopped working after about four year’s use.

    3. Humans are unusual in that, unlike most mammals, they need a constant supply of vitamin C obtained from fresh fruit. Vitamin C does not store well

    4. Human excrement is not particularly pleasant, and in the absence of natural systems will quickly give of large quantities of ammonia, a rather poisonous gas. Also, in the absence of natural systems it will give off copious amounts of methane, and if the conditions in your sealed cave deteriorate, hydrogen sulphide, a very poisonous gas.

    5. Any photovoltaic systems you might consider as energy capture systems would have to last well beyond the current life-expectancy of any known technology, and would have to be protected from being covered in whatever dust or other crap might fall on them and prevent them form working.

    Good luck solving all those and other ‘challenges’.

  • Kevin Moore — Sunday morning at the Church of Carlin. That the “American Dream” speech should actually come to be more relevant in our lifetimes than the “I Have A Dream” speech is a sad realization.

    ulvfugl’s link to the RT “First Strike” segment is the other reminder of the madness of nations and factions. Yes, Russia’s resources are in the global corporate crosshairs — just surround them and make them surrender — how could it not be a business model for world capital? The first one to move on it has advantage over the next.

    How the Neo-cons stayed on top of the American psyche and now control another administration, from within and without. Why, it’s almost as if the socialization function, maximized beyond tribes into nations, was destined to destroy the species it took hold of. Human cattle, ’twas ever thus.

    Reminds me why I once went down to Kevin’s neighborhood, and realized on a summer afternoon at Piha Beach that it was the first time in my life I’d been off of the nuclear bulleye. Lizzie & I would get back to her flat in Auckland and hear on the telly about the Northern Hemisphere incinerating itself, and I could choose whether to play Gregory Peck, or Fred Astaire. Once a Nevil Shute fan, always…

    RE — Toba is not a great analogy, but I understand it’s about all you have to go on, as a limited example. After 6-10 years of “volcanic winter”, climate began to return to its normal parameters; all the pressure from the existing underlying systems was to return it to its trajectory of survivability, with most resources still available.

    The human animals of the time, not vulnerable to agricultural upset, went on hunting/gathering — adapting their HIGHLY DEVELOPED and passed down expertise — in new locales available to their migration. Such “virgin” lands must be less available now, although a decade now of studying “edible microbes” might help our future heirs out. “Discovery in place,” rather than migratory discoveries. We already are able to “discover” what is around u now, and monitor, for awhile at least, the changes in those resources.

    The disruption ahead of us, of carbon lasting at least 1000 years in the atmosphere (and oceans) before starting to ameliorate, crosses out many of your hoped-for generational hand-offs. The permanency of that is unlike that post-Toba. You have not addressed it, except with “hope”.

    Yes, it is still worth trying, but Realism demands a broader attitude toward likely events ahead, even while trying.

    Yes, I agree, I would encourage Guy to state his “humans have not existed at 3.5 degrees” differently, and lessen focus on Fuku & nuclear meltdown, as they dilute the facts and implications about runaway Methane. I’ve gone at length before and won’t repeat as none seem to respond, pro or con. If I can get Harvey W on the horn, I’ll settle my doubts about that on his say-so.

    Nonetheless, we can always contemplate anew the ultimate madness of nuclear power, 25 years of electricity vs. 25,000 years of toxic storage. The quintessential microcosm of the larger enviro-massacre.

    I sense that you don’t enjoy Guy’s arrival as a moral philosopher, but that is where we all ought to move, IMO, whether or not we contemplate personal or species survival. I think there’s room for both. Perhaps you could expand on the areas where you acknowledge and agree? Just trying to help sharpen a valuable presentation…

  • @ Rod

    Read Karl Marx’ Capital. Best critique of the folly of exponential growth.

  • @ Henry

    ulvfugl’s link to the RT “First Strike” segment is the other reminder of the madness of nations and factions. Yes, Russia’s resources are in the global corporate crosshairs — just surround them and make them surrender — how could it not be a business model for world capital? The first one to move on it has advantage over the next.

    I read a comment somewhere today, I forget where, something like ‘When there are billions of us, why are we we allowing a few psychotic murderous lunatics to keep doing this ?’ You know, the insane warmongering McCains and Bidens and all the rest who make money from wrecking countries and slaughtering innocent people.
    It is unbelievable that this is happening. They are willing to sacrifice Europe, and European leaders do nothing to stop them.

    With call-signs “Death 11” and “Death 12”, we suspect the deployment by the US Air Force of 2 B-2 Stealth Bombers to the UK’s RAF base in Fairford is for anything but simple sight-seeing. As The Aviationist notes, B-2s don’t move from Whiteman AFB, in Missouri, too often as they are trained to conduct very long round-trip missions from their homebase; which is why the deployment of two Spirit bombers with the 509th Bomb Wing to the UK is, at least, noteworthy. The question is… what will Putin’s retaliatory sabre-rattle be?


    and this

    US secretly selling nukes worldwide via Israel


  • G.Aravena,
    A quote from your reply number 72 at the Death of a giant post.(still up at the forum).
    ‘I do not believe in evolution. I do not believe in god,but I do believe that we were created The same I believe about the living beings we find in naturenature. They were also created.’
    Apart from the fact that this is the first time I have heard of a creationist that didn’t believe in a
    god (I wonder who did the creating)this quote could serve as a definition of a scientific illiterate.
    I have noticed many others,but I can’t be bothered trawling back through all your comments.You must live in a very insular society , or have a hide as thick as a rhinocerous to continually parade your ignorance at this website. I think you would be more at home at a creationist website ,maybe discussing the rapture.

  • RE now claims that his value add is being funny. I can see his point, though it seems possible that he may be unaware of the difference between funny peculiar and funny haha.

    Accusing Guy of faith-based analysis while relying primarily on a Toba instigated population bottleneck to support his “science” inspired confidence that humans can survive almost anything is a bit of a hoot. In no small part because there are science based studies that seem to show it never happened. A paper published in Molecular Biology and Evolution suggests that the bottleneck occurred 2MYA and that the effective breeding population of our ancestors never much exceeded 10,000 until about 10,000 years ago. About the time that we humans figured out the domestication of einkorn wheat, and imperialism. Coincidentally I just finished consuming a ginger cookie baked with einkorn flour. Sorry about the irrelevant side-note there.

    Population Bottlenecks and Pleistocene Human Evolution is available free, just like Berners-Lee intended.

    A study of core samples and fossil remains from Lake Malawi show no indication that Toba had much effect on East African climate. There was a thin layer of volcanic glass in the sediment, but other than that they found nothing much unusual. You would think that throwing 2000+ cubic km of material into the air would have a more noticeable effect.

    Here’s an out there theory that just sprang to mind. I read somewhere that there is an effective upper limit on nuke bomb power. If one is powerful enough it will blow a hole all the way to the top of the atmosphere and most of the material and energy goes out into space. I wonder if perhaps something like that happened at Toba?

    I agree with kevin moore that the greenhousiness of methane is not somehow varying over time. It’s one number until it decays into CO2 when of course it equals the number for CO2. As long as the methane concentration is climbing, it’s that one number, whatever it is, because the decay rate is completely offset. The lower numbers, much beloved of the politicized IPCC, etc., will be useful when our despised mother stops farting in our general direction.

    It was confirmed yet again yesterday in New York that too much heat kills human beings. Even small ones.

  • Ulvgful and Lidia

    About the hard drive issue.
    I am trying to be practical, and for the purpose the analogy is close enough. Specially regarding culture, moral and ethics.

    You are pointing to the less relevant point of all what I said.
    That was added in the last minute.

    I would like to read comments about the rest.

  • Oops, screwed up the link to the bottleneck paper.

    Population Bottlenecks and Pleistocene Human Evolution

  • ‘Fer those who missed the link on NBL almost too many moons ago:
    The Bomb in the Brain: The True Roots of Human Violence
    “Stefan Molyneux – 5 videos
    The physical, emotional and medical effects of child abuse. You cannot understand or oppose the violence of the world without understanding its true source…

    From Freedomain Radio, the largest and most popular philosophy show on the web…

    Many who do not accept dieoff can and do buy into dieback. If we go by a 90% reduction in human population (from 7,000,000,000 to 700,000,000) then 9 out of 10 of today’s children (and substantial numbers of yesterday’s children) will be part of the dieback. They will have truncated life expectancies, the later they are born into the débâcle the more severely truncated will be those life expectancies. Even the best of parenting will do nothing to prevent the early deaths of nine (or more) out of ten of the progeny.

    To advocate more progeny in the face of impending dieback is to be a party to their early demise.

  • Kevin — I’ll yield back to myself some of your overages (must be that dateline thingie?), or invoke the Sunday sermonizing exception to the rules, to say, yes, I’ll go refresh on some of those numbers, but are you saying that we are NOW at 1100 ppm equivalent?

    And that it must be that the only thing keeping us from having an immediate +3 to +5 warming is the time lag effect, 40 years or whatever else in case of methane? In other words, if we’re not getting that effect now, then just WHEN does that level of methane release have its fatal impact and why not now?

    And, believe me, it WAS the methane that shocked me into wakefulness two years ago on our fate, so I don’t need a very much bigger number to get me going. I’m just still using numbers that I already thought sufficiently dire to use in our conversations.

    ulvfugl — yes, ZH has comments today from the E. Ukraine insurgent commander, Strelkov. Heard anything in the “news” about any of this war going on? Thought not. Ho-hum, it’s only a war (that we don’t want to report on, even though we usually LOVE wars as “bleeds” to lead with.)

    The uniform complicity of the propaganda media has, as much as any events, convinced me that, this time, “it’s going down.” Tony Soprano is going to bust out the sporting goods store for the insurance money, or burn down Artie’s restaurant for another pay-off.

    Nukes, schmukes! They’ll bluff the Russians, and count on them being the rational actors, as they usually have been. Playing “chicken”. Rogue state.

    As if we needed another high-consequence disaster upon us! Not to accuse them of rationality, but, hey, if the Methane’s already going to blow us out of the water, then why not go for Russia’s oil and gas? Double down on black.

    And Obama, with his “I believe in American exceptionalism with every fiber of my being…” speech, whatever its intended irony (is he blinking in code, “Help me! I’m being held captive by zombie Hitlers!”?) is riding that tiger with no visible efforts to stop its rampage. Are they wearing out the Zapruder tape they plug into his sleep program every night?

    I think it’s time to watch “Manchurian Candidate” again; made it halfway through it a few years back. I keep looking for Angela Lansbury to appear in real life, though…

  • To RAM

    About children.
    Parents are totally responsible.
    It is up to them, to decide what they want their children to become, considering the natural abilities of each one. Each kid requires special attention.
    It is not a matter of external forces, like governments, family or society in general.
    You decide where, when and what is good and what is wrong.
    You have five years to decide, the first five years, of your first child.
    Enough time I guess.
    When I mean that parenthood is a serious matter, I say that because you have total power, to decide the way you want things to end up. There is always a margin, like in everything.
    It is an enjoyable task by the way.

    To David Higham

    I live in an insular society (kind of), but with internet, there is no such thing.
    I live in Chile. But please do not judge the rest of the Chileans based in my image, as it looks here.
    Most people here think that I am illiterate, clueless, and ignorant.
    I understand that, because the space here is limited, and many concepts I talk about, imply a complex support, that cannot be provided altogether.
    I am a creationist, but I do not follow any current, as I see in them too many blanks.
    So I decide to develop my own theory, around the concept of intelligent design, taking part of the basic idea from Michael Behe.
    What I see today, is that we are going too much trying to explain tiny things, like Behe, instead of looking for the big picture.
    As a ship designer, my tendency is to look first for the big picture, and then pay attention to the relevant details. But the big picture is a must. As a designer in general terms, I have practiced intelligent design for decades, mainly applied to ships, but certainly not only to that.
    Starting from my experience as designer, and noting a pattern that repeats every time, I decide to develop a law, that explains the characteristics of an intelligent design process.
    So I have departed from the tendency, and developed a law to explain how intelligent design works. It pretend to be a universal law. A basis for the concept.
    With that law at hand, many things can be explained and understood , it provided a basis to explain many things about us, nature, and even other things.
    I am working on a unified text, that will cover the relations between each thing, a work that will take some time, because many things have to be put in place. As you will understand, to put so many pieces together, is not a simple task.
    All the proposals (theories) about how we became part of the biosphere, have holes, big or medium size. Nothing has been proved. Clearly, there is room for other theories.

    How and why we are the way we are, is one of the first questions that captured my attention some time ago, that lead me to the creationism, looking for answers.
    And then came.
    Why we exist in this planet? Evolution is not enough answer to me. Besides that I cannot accept that a random process will produce something as complex as a human body, with its capacity to think, learn, and create.
    Why do we feel rage? Not what it is, why we CAN react that way sometimes?
    Why do we feel envy? Not what it is, why we CAN act that way sometimes?
    What is the origin of the ego? What stands for?
    Why we act the way we do?. In general?
    Why things are the way they are in nature (biosphere)?.
    What is our purpose?.

    Then other questions that need an answer too.
    Who was Jesus, did he exist, if so, what for, and why?
    Why after every extinction process in the story of the earth, appeared new animals?.
    Then the aliens, do they exist, what relation have them with us?

    How everything can be put together in one piece is the question I try to answer.
    Using logic, that is a clue issue.
    So, I have developed a gross proposal, that links all this issues.
    I know that this may sound you nuts. I would understand you anyway.
    But, as you will may imagine, to explain the relation that connects all this issues, will take many pages. And as the proposal, is still being written, I guess is not the moment to go deeper in the concept.

    I may seem an illiterate, clueless, and ignorant.
    It does not bother me.
    But I have a support for everything I say, support that has taken me many years to build, gathering information and concepts to support my views from many places.
    And many years of asking questions to myself, and then looking for answers.
    But as most of this is philosophy, cannot be proven.
    So in the end, it will be only views, my views.
    Hopefully, I will be able to finish the text I am working on within two years. I hope.
    I may be wrong, but that is a right we all have.

  • Because there aren’t enough children with two parents, they’re finding ways to make them with three parents: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/10872361/Three-parent-babies-are-not-unsafe-as-human-trials-planned.html

    Take heart, Godofredo!

  • Quality of Dying

    Once you’ve resolved any doubt
    That extinction is here, just about,
    And there’s no point in feigning,
    The question remaining
    Is “What’s the best way to go out?”