Stupid, Crazy, Greedy, Evil, and Innocent?!

by the virgin terry

i think doomers generally have a compulsion to try to understand certain things which simply can’t be understood. a good example asks why are sheeple in general so irrational and badly misinformed/misopinionated re. crucial scientific matters like agw (i prefer the old nomenclature, global warming, to newer terms like climate chaos), peak resources, pop. overshoot, the unsustainability of exponential growth, etc. etc.. are they stupid? are they crazy? can they simply not face unpleasant surrealities (denial being a form of insanity, i would argue)? these 3 positions, which i’d cut to just 2, the stupid-crazy options, pretty much sum up the conjecture here, essentially. i think there’s no way of surreally distinguishing between the 2. i mean, stupid sheeple do crazy things, and crazy sheeple do stupid things. in the end, i don’t think it matters which derogatory label is applied, the result ends up the same: a hopelessly, tragically fucked up world.

a lot of doomers seem to like to lay blame on some minority who they call greedy, sociopathic, etc. they think if it wasn’t for these greedy assholes, we might have a chance. i disagree, offering this thought experiment:

imagine being part of a group whose numbers exceed the necessary resources to maintain those numbers. obviously some are going to have to die so that others may live. imagine that this imbalance is severe enough so that a large majority, say 90%, must die just so that the remaining 10% can eke out a bare bones survival with absolutely no ‘luxuries’, no physical comforts or sense of security. do any of u think that at least 90% of a group, which by necessity would have to include many that are quite young and healthy, are going to voluntarily sacrifice themselves? no, a large majority are going to compete, do whatever it takes, to survive. in fact, it’s a very safe bet that they’ll want to have more than bare bones, insecure, comfortless survival. they’re going to want comforts, securities. in other words, they’re going to want more than what others might consider a ‘fair share’.

i’m a ‘privileged’ (materially/ecomically) amerikan. by global standards, i’m very wealthy. i think it’s a safe bet a large majority of nbl readers are in the same boat. we may be relatively poor by our social/cultural standards, but fabulously wealthy compared to the billions of sheeple trying to survive on less than $2/day. one could easily argue that all of us are greedy, part of the problem of immense inequality. we could all give away all of our possessions and income until we meet the standard of the average wealth/income of a global sherson, which i think was fairly recently calculated to be about $8/day (income, i don’t know about ‘net worth’, but i’m pretty sure that would be very ‘modest’, also). we could, but few if any of us do, or plan on ever doing so. this is because we all love our pet comforts and the security that possessing a little ‘nest egg’ provides, don’t we? any exceptions to this i expect are rare, indeed.

do all these flaws make us, individually and/or collectively ‘evil’. evil, like good, ugly, and beautiful, is in the eye of the beholder. i see it in me, u, the mailman, the milkmaid, the saint and the sinner. i see a little or a lot of evil in everyone.

lastly, i like to argue that all sheeple, even the greediest, sickest, and most diabolically ‘evil’ ones are innocent. i say this because i don’t believe in free will or laying blame on anyone. i think we’re all flawed, some arguably more so than others, but the crucial point being that none of us can help being flawed, no one chose to be flawed. sheeple don’t choose to be stupid, they’re either born that way or trained to be so. ditto for insanity, and of course, ditto for greed. everyone struggles to be ‘good’ in their own eyes, which generally entails surviving and thriving while helping some usually small minority of others they know and love to do likewise. it’s the nature of our world, of biological life, that not everyone can survive, or thrive, or be ‘good’. so if any ‘one’ or thing is to be blamed, it is mother nature, or perhaps some hypothetical ‘god’ that created mother nature and it’s wayward child, human nature.

Comments 93

  • On closing the last thread , Guy commented, ” It won’t take 15 years for the last human to exit the planetary stage.” Dredd, on Saturday, gave us the article on the cold blob in the Northern Atlantic. The currents in the oceans are stopping. Our extinction is assured. We have artificially created the conditions that have lead to extinction many times in the past.

    And seeing that the industrialists were presented with sound evidence, as long ago as the 1840s, that adding carbon to the atmosphere would destroy everything. It stands to reason that heavy industry and the people that drove it forward are guilty of willful negligence. They had access to scientifically produced, peer reviewed data all along and did nothing to prevent disaster, even though they could have. The general population had no idea of the future effects of carbon and are less guilty, by far.

  • In the end, aren’t we all sheeple? Our subconscious lives on “hopium.” Why else would we plant Moringa?

  • Hosanna, all THE big questions answered …

    It’s nature what dunnit, yup nature, flawed nature dunnit, ayyuup.

    Mother nature and maybe a “hypothetical” Flawed Gawd too.

    Yeah, that Goddamn Flawed Gawd fingered – AGAIN.

    Everybody & everything flawed but innocent

    Nature or nurture controversy solved – Shazam!

    Nobody done nuthin to nobody.

    The stupid bastids (sheeple) is all flawed.

    The whole flawed shebang;

    ” … the crucial point being that none of us can help being flawed, no one chose to be flawed. sheeple don’t choose to be stupid, they’re either born that way or trained to be so. ditto for insanity, and of course, ditto for greed. everyone struggles to be ‘good’ in their own eyes, which generally entails surviving and thriving while helping some usually small minority of others they know and love to do likewise.

    The kicker of the whole flawed shebang;

    “it’s the nature of our world, of biological life, that not everyone can survive, or thrive, or be ‘good’. so if any ‘one’ or thing is to be blamed, it is mother nature, or perhaps some hypothetical ‘god’ that created mother nature and it’s wayward child, human nature.”

    Mama Nature wants to know;
    “Do you have the credit that you need – let us help you?”

  • Tvterry, by extension of your hypothesis, Hitler, Ulysses Grant, Pol Pot, and pedophiles are all guilt free.

    In my experience, those who are the most responsible for our collective “problem”, are the ones who insist either that
    1-no one is to blame, or that
    2-we are all equally to blame.

  • Humans don’t visualize non-linear processes well.

    Especially when they have been taught they are semi-divine with boundless potential.

    At once ORIGINS take the stage. Was there any point to it? Or just random noise?

    The presumption humans are at the top of the food chain may not be accurate.

  • 80% of the world’s problems are caused by 20% of its people.

    If you make 100k / annum, you are the problem.

    When the Jew-Saudi-Whitey cabal crashed jets into the twin towers for power and money, then the 0.01% caused 99% of the world’s problems.

    Depopulation is a fancy word for killing billions of people. This will happen, right after the Economic Collapse. Which is a fancy phrase for stealing public assets.

    Millions die in the Congo so we can shit talk each other on our dumbphones. Millions are enslaved in China so we can get fucked online.
    We are the disaster.

  • I’m really pissed at Alex Smith when he flubbed an interview with Dr. Brown who evasively non-answered a question about atmospheric depletion and the earth-space battery. I’m not smart enough to figure this shit out. Help!

  • Not that it matters anymore, but no one examined the probable malformation of the Y chromosome. I’d bet on that as the original problem. But again, it don’t matter no more.

  • The presumption that humans ARE at the top of the food chain & have been chewing away on “lesser” creatures for several centuries is an empirical fact.

    “Yabut, THE Flawed Gawd made compound interest, the Chicago School of free market imperialism, & land stealing murdering Zionism, Mama.”

    “Yabut, if you keep doin it, you’ll go blind & ruin the whole world.”

    “Yabut, can’t I keep doin it until I have to get glasses?”


    The Goddamn Flawed Gawd killed the Iraqis, Afganis, Libyans, & Syrians.

    Bubba Netanyahu says that the Iranians are so fatally flawed that they must be flayed for further Zionist/Israeli State expansion.

    The Gawddamn Flawed Gawd made Bush, Cheney, Wolfowitz, Wurmser, Kagan, Libby, Feith, Abrahms, Perle, & Rumsfeld lie, distort, cheat in order to successfully murder innocent Muslims by the millions.

    It’s a clash of civilizations – light & darkness – the chosen people of Israel versus the bumbling flawed Goyim.

    Steven Spielberg makes “historical” movies telling us how the really flawed German National Socialists gassed & burned 6 million suffering Jews w/o leaving a shred of material or physical evidence – not even a flawed piece of material evidence.

    Yup, we are all fatally flawed.

    Some more than others, maybe?

  • I hate to poke someone and get another unwanted comment but, MLK is not linked to Exxon. This is not to say he wud not have ended up on their payroll, but I love his point that a man who hasn’t figured out by 30 y.o., what is worth dying for, he is dead anyway, from then on.

  • If we didn’t have an interest based economic system, climate change would have never happened.

  • RE, your Calvin & Hobbes cartoon is very deep, but I can’t see how it applies to debunking NTE?

    The cartoon is perfectly suited, however, to Florida Public Education where innocent childrens’ brains are filled with the Holy Holocaust Religion with its gas chambers & ovens hoax believed by almost everybody.

    Florida has a statutory law mandating Holocaust Religion studies for all public school students.

    Spielberg’s fraudulent movies are routinely required viewing for all Goyim children.

    Holocaust “speakers,” like lying crackpot, Irene Zisblatt, are regularly foisted on front facing Goyim children.

    Zisblatt has been a featured speaker at several Florida public schools.


    Of course, it is expressly forbidden to study any other “BRAND” of religion, including Christianity.

    Just mention the Christian Bible in public school & off to the courthouse for serious litigation about separation of Church & State.

    You have valuable “legal rights” to guarantee that “ONLY ONE TRUE RELIGION” is forcibly stuffed into childrens’ brains.

    Irene Zisblatt;

  • The very characteristics that allowed homo sapiens sapiens to survive and thrive turn out to be the species’ undoing. It’s likely a “fatal flaw” common to all sentient species and perfectly explains Fermi’s paradox.

  • Gerald, you are a troll.
    Your modus operandi – find a site that tolerates free speech….
    Post a bit in agreement with whatever the premise of the blog is, meanwhile mostly spew your toxic antisemitic rhetoric whenever possible.
    I know of at least 2 good posters here who have abandoned this site because of you. I’m sure there are more.
    Reading your posts is like going for a walk and stepping in a pile of fresh dog shit.

  • Saying a little more on the solutions issue:

    – Everybody has to get onto the same page.

    – Average folks can only take in a little at a time–very much like small infants.

    – Instead of big breakthroughs, what about the tiniest of steps, but steps that are globally applicable?

    – For whatever tiny, teeny CO2 removal it might do, why is the planet not covered in trees?

  • Gerald,

    I promised myself that I wouldn’t get involved in this but enough is enough. I’m getting angry now.

    Maybe you should learn German so you can have a look at this evidence you so glibly refute. You know nothing about Germany, National Socialism, what happened then and the historical background. If you did, you wouldn’t make statements like these:

    “…..w/o leaving a shred of material or physical evidence – not even a flawed piece of material evidence…..”

    is plainly a ridiculous, stupid thing to say. Why do you need to peddle this? You’re American, of Italian descent I imagine…Yes! Free speech, I know, but why do you need to write this kind of crap?

    All this is very recent history for my people, and there are plenty of documents.

    What Israel is doing with the help of your country (and my native one) to the Palestinians, unsettling the entire Middle East etc. etc., is a completely different matter. Oh yes, also including that the Holocaust is always used to make people feel guilty.
    I’m well aware of that, and so is every interested and informed person.

    You’re obviously an intelligent man and also comment well on some things. But in this case, you just come across as a hater of almost everything, the one who knows the truth! Where does this hate come from (rhetorical question).
    You really have a problem with this Holocaust thing and need to calm down. Stop regurgitating that bile. You are completely wrong, and that’s not just a matter of opinion. Your diatribe on this particular subject is tedious and very offensive to many….although not to me. I’m prepared for anything humans can utter, write and do. I’ve long given up being offended.

    Just be a good man and stop it!

  • @tvt,

    Well said. Your last paragraph neatly encapsulates my own view of human behaviour and culpability, at both the individual and collective levels. Bravo.

  • Kirk Hamilton Says:
    September 28th, 2015 at 5:04 am

    What Kirk said !

    Technically it is called “depraved heart murder” (Oil-Qaeda & MOMCOM Conspire To Commit Depraved-Heart Murder}.

  • Maybe….

    It’s a systemic thing. To bring about it’s own end, a biosphere needs a few ‘clever’ human beings to more-or-less contentedly busy themselves with making scientific ‘discoveries’ and engineering all the aspects of an energy-intensive and toxic civilisation, and many ‘dull’ human beings to more or less contentedly do the necessary donkey-work.

    Obviously all these people, both the ‘clever’ and the ‘dull’, have to be kept oblivious as to their true purpose. We might conjecture that the over-developed human brain is a necessary anatomic feature which enables all, both the ‘clever’ and the ‘dull’, to work, without conscious awareness of the biosphere’s agenda, or the human cross-purposes it entails?

    For example, it is a very complex combination of intelligence and amnesia-aka-stupidity that enables human beings to simultaneously: a) understand their dependence on the vast forests as regulators of a global breathable atmosphere, b) concieve, design, manufacture, and deploy technology and infrastructure for the all-too-transparent purpose of destroying those same forests, c) inculcate insatiable consumer-demand as a pretext for doing so, and d) remain sufficiently oblivious of the painful absurdity of such combinations of indispensable needs coupled with weirdly inappropriate actions to continue functioning as unwitting biosphere-destroyers.

    Orchestrating some billions of such complexly-motivated creatures into a viable suicide weapon is no small feat. The ‘logistics’ of the enterprise lie as far beyond human imagination as any other activity on the biosphere scale. Almost of necessity the system will inadvertently produce a few specimens who become sufficiently alienated from the systemically sanctioned consciousness to either see through the whole thing, or delude themselves that they have done so. Fortunately, the system is adept at marginalising such specimens socially and economically, and thus proceeding on it’s appointed path without obstacle. Who knows? Perhaps even these misfits are not so inadvertent as they might appear to be, possibly having their role to play in the unfolding of events?

  • Just on reading the first paragraph, and a skim of the rest to possibly return to later.

    We are an animal species, and nearly all of our activities and concerns are animal ones. Eating and reproduction — and if you think “education” and “house-hunting” and “scintillating conversation” are anything other than all about the mating instincts, guess again — occupy as much or more of our daily time than that of many other species.

    To stray from the herd or tribe means likely death or tribal shunning. (“Fiddler on the Roof”) The instinct to conform is deep in the mammalian, or perhaps reptilian, brain.

    The few who occupy themselves with intellectual or artistic concerns do not stray far from this animal model, and their goals include the above benefits of being “rich”, or “cool”, by means other than shoveling ditches, always available — somewhere — to those enamored of poverty. Social status within the herd — chimps, gorillas, orangutans — you get it. It’s wired in our brains, not just the 400,000 years of h.saps. but way, way before that.

    (I see young men in mostly-poor countries going into insupportable debt to be the first in their families to, not go to university, but to own a car! Rehashing the 1950s USA. Social standing, baby! Not to mention backseat action. Give up YOUR car, you eco-activist, and five of them will replace you!)

    And so, we have been crossed by a few of those intellectual “achievements”, in the form of technologies that have outrun our capacity to integrate into a healthy animal existence. And we have not achieved the rationality, nor will we ever, to abjure the immediate individual benefits of those technologies with a longer term view to repeal them and avoid their effects.

    And now, I must go outside and see how those squirrels I hear on my roof are getting into my attic. Their feet are thudding on the roof more heavily than ever… must be fat and happy, all stocked up with winter coming on.

    Just me and the wild things here.

  • Human behaviour usually comes back to Selfish Gene theory.

    Many behaviours that were biologically successful in the distant past are now omnicidal and suicidal.

    I know the names of those who are largely to blame for the mess the world is in, and also know the names of the people who are largely to blame for the mess the district I live in is in.

    Such people write rules, laws and regulations, and go on to decide that such rules, laws and regulations do not apply to them, whilst lying to the masses on a continuous basis about practically everything. That kind of mental corruption is way beyond my capacity to empathise with.

    Understanding how brains work will not result in removal of mendacious, psychotic sociopaths from power; nor will it awaken the masses. Manipulation and deceit are normally the keys to acquiring and holding on to power in industrial societies. And the masses will not awaken until they have lost everything.

    ‘The brains of high-achieving individuals are wired up differently to those of people with fewer intellectual or social abilities according to one of the first studies to find a physical link between what goes in the brain and a person’s overall lifestyle.’

  • Shake, rattle and roll is still possible this year, and should it occur, the illusion of omnipotence and control is gone:

    ‘…….Which brings us to today.

    Stocks have cratered, slicing through the 50-week moving average with little difficulty. The Fed, unable to announce a new QE program due to political pressure (the media has picked up the narrative that QE increases wealth inequality) decided to deal with this by maintaining interest rates at zero at a time when over 80% of economists thought it was time to raise them.

    Despite this, stocks barely bounced and began to break down again.

    This has NEVER happened before. Previously even a hint of monetary loosening was enough to make stocks rally hard. This time around the Fed clearly acted to support the markets and the markets didn’t respond.

    A TECTONIC shift has begun in the markets, if they no longer respond to the Fed’s efforts to boost them, then it is GAME. SET. MATCH. for the Fed and its policies.

    At that point, the END GAME will begin, ushering in a crisis that will make 2008 look like a joke…….’

  • The end is coming soon and it will be spawned in, how’d you guess, LA!

  • There is a book that everybody that post’s to this web site should
    read the title of the book is ” The Culture of Narcissism ” by
    Christopher Lasch, and visit Prof. Garrett James Hardin’s web
    site and go look up Prof. Al Bartlett’s web site these two gentleman
    knew back in the day humanity was screwed.

  • paul c, i’m tickled purple by your praise. of course, my compositions pale in comparison to yours. why don’t u try your hand again at writing something original in essay form for publication here and on your own website? just for fun.

    kevin, thanks for posting the link to the excellent documentary on oil corporation collusion and political malfeasance on the previous thread. re-linking here:

  • The Ocean currents are stopping right? The Fed-reserve is ready to print again, but the word is a reset is the only the real reality, and the flat lady Yellen was about to sing but stammered! And I really need to know is there anything, a next step after fuck-it ? Or is this it? The games all over, so love out

  • “RE, your Calvin & Hobbes cartoon is very deep, but I can’t see how it applies to debunking NTE?”-GS

    Basically because believing in NTHE is a Religion. It has very little in the way of good scientific underpinning. An extinction of the species Homo Sap inside 15 years is highly unlikely, and even in under a century pretty unlikely. Suitable Habitats for HS are not going to collapse EVERYWHERE that fast. They didn’t in the PETM when the average temps went to 25C, so on what basis can you say they ALL will at a 20C level? Where is the scientific justification for that claim?

    Can you get an extreme Knockdown Event in this period of time? Yes, you probably could. A Knockdown is not an extinction though.


  • I’m pretty sure Calvin was just trying to get out of his math homework.

  • RE

    ‘Basically because believing in NTHE is a Religion. It has very little in the way of good scientific underpinning. An extinction of the species Homo Sap inside 15 years is highly unlikely, and even in under a century pretty unlikely. Suitable Habitats for HS are not going to collapse EVERYWHERE that fast. They didn’t in the PETM when the average temps went to 25C, so on what basis can you say they ALL will at a 20C level? Where is the scientific justification for that claim?’

    You obviously do not read responses to your claims (or choose to ignore them).

    You previously offered the non-extinction of shrew-like mammals (smaller than mice) during the PETM as evidence that humans could survive extreme temperature rises. Evidence that shrew-like mammals evaded a previous extinction is not evidence that humans can evade extinction in the on-going 6th Great Extinction Event. Oddly enough, body sixe matters, along with diet.

    And you completely ignore the fact that carbon dioxide is being added to the atmosphere are a rate much, much higher (arguably between 100 times and 1000 times faster) than in any previous mass extinction event.

    I happen to agree with you that extinction within 15 years seems unlikely simply because I cannot conceive any mechanism for raising deep ocean temperatures by 3oC in 15 years; on the other hand, self-extinction of the human species within a century appears to inevitable because the chemical balance and the heat balance of the oceans are being disrupted at a truly phenomenal rate, and once the oceans ‘go’, so does practically everything else.

    I put it to you that rejecting the probability of NTHE within a century is an act of faith and is not supported by any evidence. Therefore, we can say that your beliefs have more in common with religion than science.

    You will note, if you make the effort to view the presentation, that
    Jeremy Jackson predicted extremely fucked-up oceans around the middle of this century. And not a thing has been done since January 2013 to prevent extremely fucked-up oceans: indeed, everything possible has been done to bring forward extremely fucked-up oceans.

    And while I am responding to you, I will remind you that carbon that was sequestered during the Devonian, Carboniferous, Jurassic, and Cretaceous periods was still largely sequestered during the PETM but carbon that was sequestered during those periods has been released very rapidly into the atmosphere and oceans over the past 200 years or so, and is having dire effects.

  • Oddly enough, body size matters, along with diet.

  • Dr. Mc Pherson made this prediction on NBL back on Nov 4 2007

    …the Department of Defense (DoD) workshop, at which I was asked to provide an overview of changing fire regimes in the American Southwest and implications for DoD installations. Fire regimes are changing, and are expected to change quite rapidly in the near future as a result of global and regional changes in climate.”

    Now we see Guy’s 2007 article here on NBL become fact as the West burns worse every summer.

  • Having read various interactions on this site involving Gerald S.’s contention that the holocaust was a Jewish lie followed by people calling him a hateful anti-semite, I finally decided to check out the so-called holocaust deniers arguments.

    At a site called there is a lengthy article called The Great Holocaust Mystery: Reconsidering the Evidence, which summarizes in great detail the material presented by the deniers. Previously, I had the holocaust on my “It’s true” shelf. After reading this article, I’ve moved it off that shelf on to the my “maybe it’s true but maybe it’s false” shelf.

    Check out the article unless your mind is made up. It asks some interesting questions. After finding out the truth about 9/11, I believe it’s wise to question everything we are told about the
    present, and everything we have been told about the past.

  • Andrew Taylor (et al.):

    Is the earth even round? Because it looks pretty flat to me. Yet when I present the evidence that it is flat, nobody responds with any credible counter evidence that it is round! They just roll their eyes and call me a quack! Everyone goes along with the “conventional view” that it is round simply because that’s what they learned in their so-called “science classes.” But what “evidence” exists to support that claim? Wait, MOUNTAINS of evidence, you say? I don’t believe you!

    I feel sorry for Dr. McPherson that you folks are so heavily represented on his blog. Sure doesn’t help his credibility when this is the quality of discernment that he attracts. Ugh.

  • An interesting essay,Terry.

    Clive Hamilton has an interesting essay below,as well. I wrote a comment
    to his essay if anyone is interested. Yes, I know at this stage it is all a waste of time. Can’t help howling at the moon.

  • .

    I went and read your blog post, and also the comments associated with it. One of the comments to your blog post mentioned how it isn’t reasonable to put a caveat on the argument excluding things such as nuclear war breaking out as a result of the chaos induced by the radically changing climate.

    You replied to this person:

    “This is strictly an argument about climate change, not other factors that can cause an extinction.”

    Well, that’s sort of the whole point isn’t it, that all of these contributing factors will occur as a result of climate disruption, and that they will play a cumulative role in driving humanity into a state of total collapse. You can’t eliminate things and just look at one factor in a vacuum like that. That’s what’s so pertinent about Guy’s perspective; he takes the broad view and looks at all the cascading effects that radical climate disruption will unleash, and then extrapolates from that what it will likely mean for humankind. Namely … our functional extinction.

    These aren’t, as you implied to the commenter on your blog post, “other causes of extinction.” These would be cumulative causes of extinction. Ones that will have been brought about as a result of radical changes to the global climate. To me, you seem to be arguing semantics and just appear to be off on a tangent here.

    Your argument is like saying that if we remove from consideration all the little cumulative things that happen to our bodies as we age, then we wouldn’t die a death at all. Sure, that’s one way to look at it. However, things aren’t operating in a vacuum like that. In reality, all those little cumulative things will happen to our body, and we will die of old age. It’s called aging. It’s the big, cumulate picture that counts here, not one isolated factor happening in a vacuum with all the other factors removed like you are presenting. When you look at the big picture as Guy does, things look pretty bleak indeed. The warming will have a terrible effect all on its own, but it will also trigger a great many other cascading things to happen, environmentally and socially. You seem to want to discount all those other things.

    That’s the perspective that Guy takes; it’s the broad view of all the little events that climate disruption will trigger that makes extinction seem so likely. It’s the triggered wars, and the nuke plants melting down, and all those other factors that are exactly the point. Your argument, which seems to be saying “ya, but it won’t be extinction by heat exhaustion”, seems rather irrelevant and semantic. It’s the same for your semantics of dithering over whether or not some group of 1,000 (or whatever) or so ‘bottleneckers’ might survive. How can you claim that this happening changes the gravity of Guy’s overall message so much that it makes Guy’s message irrelevant, and makes him, as you called him on your blog, ‘an idiot?’ To me it seems you can’t, and it doesn’t.

    Personally, I think you’re all up in your head about this, and need to look at the bigger picture. To me, Guy’s message seems less about the anthropological long term future, and seems (to me) more geared toward what the implications are for the average, individual person. It’s about what’s going to happen to them … the extinction of themselves and everyone they know. I don’t even think most people are really concerned about whether or not some warped remnant of the human dna emerges 10,000 years from now, meaning that we didn’t ‘technically’ go extinct … hooray and hallelujah! So what? (And I’m not so sure that will actually even be the case.)

    I think it’s about people being worried about what’s going to happen to them, and to everything and everyone they know, and about it all being wiped out on a functional level regardless of whether the extinction is technically complete and absolute or not. For all intents and purposes, and for most people, it means our functional extinction. It’s also about people becoming aware of what’s really coming up for us here in our collective futures, which at this point, people seem to be completely asleep and in denial about. And your musings about your technical definitions of extinction (to the extent that you disrespect Guy the way you do) don’t really help with that either, in my opinion.

    To me, you are just arguing over words, missing the point, and creating arguments in artificial vacuums. Relating it to the stages of grief, I think you’re sort of just mentally bargaining here. At any rate, your position is hardly one that warrants the disrespect you show towards Guy, that’s for sure. Guy’s completely wrong just because 1,000 people might survive? That’s just dumb. And on that note, according to the timestamps, it was you who called Guy an idiot on your blog about an hour before he told you to step off on his last night. So, why were you complaining at him about it in the other thread? (Rhetorical question, please don’t answer that.)

    Anyhoo, have a pleasant extinction. I’m sure you’ll continue thinking whatever thoughts float your boat. :)

  • ” Evidence that shrew-like mammals evaded a previous extinction is not evidence that humans can evade extinction in the on-going 6th Great Extinction Event.”

    Obviously Randy Newman was wrong, and Short People DO have a reason to live. lol.

    Of course size matters, but so does sentience. Unlike the shrews, we do have ability to run hydroponics, build greenhouses, set up passive cooling systems etc.

    You explicitly agree that a 15 year timeline is unlikely, and this is the foundation of the argument. I am certainly not arguing that Homo Sap will not go extinct, that is guaranteed. It’s the TIMELINE that is in question herem and whether there is any HOPE for you to live more than another 15 years.


  • @twimc

    Evidence accepted by Canadian Court in trial of Ernst Zundel, 1988:

    “In 1955, another neutral Swiss source, Die Tat of Zurich (January 19th, 1955), in a survey of all Second World War casualties based on figures of the International Red Cross, put the “Loss of victims of persecution because of politics, race or religion who died in prisons and concentration camps between 1939 and 1945″ at 300,000, not all of whom were Jews, and this figure seems the most accurate assessment.”

  • Mark Austin Says:

    Now we see Guy’s 2007 article here on NBL become fact as the West burns worse every summer.


    Lake County,California (2 hours North of San Francisco) has already seen 3 fires this season. The last one (and the worst of the three), called the Valley Fire, almost fully contained now, ranks as the 3rd most destructive fire in state history. About 2,000 homes burned to the ground and 76,000+ acres (120 sq miles) were charred. Over 4,000 firefighters were involved at its peak.

    4 fatalities, and some barely made it out:

  • Satish Musunuru! Mark Austin clued me into your blog and I really enjoyed it. Keep up the good work. Very interesting.

    Phil Morrison: As is typical with flat-earth deniers, you ignore the issue and still provide me with no evidence that our planet is a sphere. (Yes, this really is what it feels like to “argue” with you)

    Apologies to all for the 3rd post. I promise this is the last one, as I have once again been suckered into addressing the trolls and getting off topic.

  • RE gets his ass paddled by LWA.

    Spezzy loves his hatred. Great writer.

    Babajingo strays to the edge of earth, may threaten to jump.

    Bud Nye dislikes mushrooms. Too much we, not enough me.

    Guy says as little as 15 years for extinction.

    Extinction is 1 second away by asteroid or gamma rays, yet less likely.

    This is one fucking whacked out place, I LOVE IT.

    So much madness makes me feel normal.

  • Prof Valtaoja is a Finnish astronomer and a popular writer and speaker. According to his 2004 book, an environmental collapse has been avoided. Therefore humanity should strive to “the anarchy of abundance”, i.e. a society where products are produced in unlimited quantities, a society where everyone has so much property that no one has a reason to want even more. Valtaoja believes that we visit Mars for the first time in the 2030s. That will be achieved without fusion energy.

    However, says Valtaoja in a new interview, the first fusion reactor is already being built in Southern France. If it works, global energy problems and climate change are solved. Fusion energy will provide us with faster spaceships, which allow travel between stars and a such trip will take only 20 years. Valtaoja has predicted in his books that in 2778 the first astronaut will stand on another planet watching our own sun. Another giant leap for mankind!

  • love your new style Robert. god damn gerald…even the germans here think you’re off.

  • Another great article, this time, highlighting the disparity between Patriotism (I hate it) and the blatant, shitty, care of Veterans. (I wonder if ‘GENERALS DOWN TO 2ND LT” are treated any better than the millions of enlisted men. DOH!)

  • Andrew,

    9/11 is not in the same league as the events that took place under the Nazis who did what they did to “Other” the eternal scapegoat.

    For the Germans, the Other were the Jews, the socialists, the Gypsies and mentally and physically handicapped, homosexuals and what in German used to be called “Asoziale” the asocial, in other words, the ones that are not considered “of us”. It’s a very ancient story played out over and over again in most cultures.
    If there had been other “Others” living in Germany at the time (as in the US) they would have been picked, I can assure you. It’s as simple as that. Stories from my own family can bear that out. There are so many anecdotes and photos, films, events that were witnessed by people I knew personally (most of them are dead now) that it would be impossible to insist that all this had been faked.
    In the early 50s, when I was a little girl, there were many suicides by ex SS and also ordinary Wehrmacht men. Young men who could not live with what they’d done and seen. The women in the neighbourhood would whisper “so and so threw himself under a train”, and I and other little girls would try to listen in (little boys never listen in). Later on, when I was older, I asked my mother and my grandparents (my grandfather was 55 when Hitler came to power) and all this was born out. There is so much I could tell you but it would take hours. All I’m trying to say is that, in order to fake all of this, you would have had to convince the Germans who lived through those 12 years of Nazi rule as adults that they had all been dreaming.
    The speeches by the top Nazis did not hide anything. They were always quite open. That’s why I say that people who are doubters should learn German well enough to be able to judge for themselves and not just look at the “evidence” on websites.

    9/11 was easy to fake but 12 years of Nazi terror rule and concentration camps is quite another story.

    It was very nasty for “ordinary” Germans too if they didn’t tow the party line. The rule of terror affected everybody but the faithful. If you wanted to survive, you kept your head down and not speak up to protect your family. And that’s what people generally do but they still notice what’s going on. Terror shakes you out of your comfort zone, your senses become more acute to enable you to survive, thus you notice and are only fooled if you make the greatest effort.

    This kind of scenario is always the same, whenever and wherever a totalitarian regime wants to force its gospel on a population – and the “Other” will always be targeted.

    The more totalitarian our governments will become, the more people will be targeted as Others, made into scapegoats and disappear. Just look around. Same old, same old, that alone should tell doubters how truly nightmarish things can get.

    Why can’t you accept that this evil took place like so many other mass murders of populations: the indigenous people all over the world, other cultures, religions etc etc? What is called the holocaust was an event of this kind, a mass murder event undertaken most efficiently. There’s no denying it.
    You people have no idea what it is like to live under a totalitarian terror regime. I’m only one generation away and learned about some very nasty happenings witnessed by relatives of mine. So maybe, just maybe I know a little bit more than you. At least I know from first-hand witnesses (who were not part of any plot or hoax, what a ridiculous idea!). But you’d have to take my word for that or believe all the websites. We still live in a nominally free society – the choice is yours.

    Not everything is a hoax, and what the Nazis managed to do in just 12 years certainly wasn’t.

  • Sabine,the idea that Germany was a totalitarian terror regime during those years is a statement I totally agree with. And I certainly don’t think of Hitler as the good guy, and the great majority of the Europeans Jews back then as any different than you or me, ordinary people trying to live their lives in peace. Even if the ideas presented at that site I mentioned are true, rounding up the Jews, forcing them to live into ghettos, separating family members, incarcerating them in concentration camps with the intention of eventually shipping them out of the country, all that should be considered a heinous program.

    Let me be clear. I am only saying that the denial of the holocaust summary at that website raises some interesting questions involving the accepted historical account of the holocaust. I would find a concise argument that counters the points made in the article well worth listening to.

    I won’t post again on this topic. Near term human extinction is the topic I come here to read about. The near term part I have yet to be convinced about, but I will admit that methane as a wildcard makes it possible.

    Back to lurking for me.

  • Lena Horne and Eddie Anderson

  • gnomes will be fine.

  • Free speech gets the death penalty.

    Get it OUR WAY or be wasted – we know the truth!

    ” … most of the people the US military has imprisoned in Guantánamo, along with some held in Afghanistan, have been labeled “unprivileged belligerents.” He added, “It must be noted that the United States deems as an ‘unprivileged belligerent’ anyone they target for capture or choose to kill.”

    According to Pierce, there has been an ongoing “war” against journalists of all nationalities since the September 11, 2001, attacks in the United States, and he believes the new Pentagon manual takes this a step further.

    “The new DOD Law of War manual makes that official and potentially takes it to the highest level of conflict,” he wrote. “Inherent to those classifications [‘unprivileged belligerent’] is that they represent the “enemy” and can be killed by US officials.”

  • Question: What’s the difference between a climate change denier and a holocaust denier:

    Answer: The climate change denier is a moron…while the holocaust denier is cretin.

  • Hello RE, I’ve read you on NBL. I have a moment since I am waiting for a Death Certificate delivery involving a family funeral matter. For 15 years a portion of my Federal Contract work has been with DARPA research projects.

    One aspect of H+ in co-development between CERN, Fermi Labs, S. Korean Gen-test & Epi-gen / Dr. Benner Applied Molecular Evolution = virtual guarentee that an aspect of humanity will transcend carbon based lifeform extinction.

    HOWEVER, it is no secret that all of our radiation reduction / absorption studies (Genetically modified Tardigrades) are linked to an urgent need to resolve issues with 446 Nuclear reactors. (62 more in stages of construction – vs – 5 in decommissioning process.)

    Please check our Pentagon web site or any military site in over 37 other countries. The reason that +3c temps are an extinction factor is because we are already understaffed with qualified nuclear physicists and other consequence management experts at 82% of our nuclear plant sites.

    We welcome innovations, education and applications to manage future plants. However, currently a number of climate induced Pandemic or EMP threats could cause a chain reaction involving several reactors going critical in unison. Under-staffing and overheating are a serious threat to the world wide nuclear grid.

    RE your climate article did not include the actual existence of 445 active core reactors. try where on page 2 you can see the MIT computer models of massive death following even a limited scale event.

    Fallout patterns and loss of human management during multi meltdown events, involve the further loss of control to most plants in a cascade effect. Subsequent radiation from reactors, not warfare, has more intense and longer term half-life than conventional nuclear weapons.

  • I would have thought that after years of collectively contemplating the causation of NTE, it would become rather self-evident that there is no point in either arguing or debating the phenomena with anyone who refuses to accept it.

    Why attempt to convince anyone that NTE is or isn’t a high probability? What could one possibly hope to achieve in doing so? It’s little more than truth seekers projecting their dire perspective unto an incurious culture and foolishly expecting something other than daft obfuscation in return. We can call it a moral imperative, but that’s most likely projection as well.

    RE has continued to serve as a posterchild for why it’s utterly pointless to even try. The man is clearly being driven by survivalist vested interests that are completely contrary to the premise of NTE. Of course he—not unlike most everyone—is going to take issue with it, simply because their entire existence demands they do so. NTE strikes at our very core, where most people’s response is emotionally reflexive rather than intellectually deliberate.

    Unbeknown to his obvious emotional immaturity, RE has no other choice but to consider “us” quitters—aside from the fact that there is a great amount of truth there. If he accepted the near term timing of NTE, then he would subsequently have to accept that all of his current and past efforts have been for naught, and that is something very few people have the internal fortitude to accept, not unlike deciding to call it quits.

    But what I continue to find very odd, is why anyone who is attempting to advocate NTE, still thinks it’s a question of compiling and presenting ever more supportive evidence, for it has almost nothing to do with the evidence at this point because the evidence has been overwhelming for years.

    Whether it’s 15 years or 30, what difference does it make other than whether or not we’ll be alive to suffer through it? The profound take home message is the same regardless of the exact timeline: The war has been lost, but it’s far from over.

    The entire concept of NTE is a question of hopium, as it has been from the very beginning. NTE is almost solely the domain of those who have long come to the conclusion that humanity simply hasn’t the agency to change the self-destructive course we’ve been on since the inception of civilization. In this, it’s more of a personal demeanor than it is a certain perspective.

    Accepting NTE has less to do with objectively grasping the implication of numerous positive feedback loops, the rate of change or any of the contributing factors, but more to do with our individual emotional ability to live with such overwhelming evidence. That is why in the matter of ‘accepting NTE’, coloration IS causation; the observance of endless destructive patterns reveals the ultimate futility.

    “There are none so blind, as those who refuse to see” and virtually no one wants to see NTE, and honestly who can blame them. Attempting to make people see such a thing is the very definition of a fool’s errand, as Guy is in the process of discovering for himself.

    RE—not unlike most everyone I know—is but one of billions of souls trapped by their blinding vested interests and is completely absorbed in sustaining those interests no matter what, whether it’s some survivalist compound or their children’s college fund, for at the end of the day it’s all the same ephemeral hopium.

    But we become equally foolish in thinking anything we say or don’t say is going to change a damn thing for those who refuse to see for themselves. But then again, arguing for its own sake does allow one to pass the time imagining they’re accomplishing something….as this comment more than proves.

  • @Mark Austin

    In 2012, a couple of thousand CERN physicists/types signed
    a report confirming the existence of the Higgs particle.

    I’m not sure how many of these physicists/types signed the report in 2014 saying “hold the phone” they’d lost the Higgs.

    In the meanwhile, all was not lost. Peter Higgs got the Nobel, and CERN got refunded.

    Now, CERN has a woman in charge. This spells the bitter end, a la Janet Yellen.

    Anyway, CERN has these 2,000 crack physicists/types searching for the mass-less Higgs that they might add mass to other mass-less particles. IOWs these guys could be playing with themselves elsewhere, like, say, atomic reactors.

    Just saying,

  • Scene: SNL set of old with Gilda Radner as Emily Litella

    Emily Litella:
    What’s all this I hear about the Nobel Prize in Physics being awarded to a couple of Europeans who studied hogs and bison ?

    Shouldn’t something like that be covered by a Nobel Prize in Zoology ?

    I mean…pigs are pretty much everywhere, but bison ?

    Couldn’t they at least find an Indian scientist to honor for studying bison ?

    Oh, well…what do you expect from a prize committee based in a country
    that dips perfectly good whitefish in lye ?

    Anyway, I’m Emily Litella and that’s…

    Offscreen voice of Don Pardo:
    Miss Litella, the prize in Physics was for work on the Higgs boson, not hogs and bison.
    The Higgs boson allows some fundamental particles to have mass and form atoms.
    Without it, everything would move at the speed of light and have no mass.

    Emily Litella:
    Oh, that’s very different….nevermind !

    @Bud…waiting patiently here…whatcha got?

  • I think bringing NTE and holocaust denial to these pages is a way for some people who come here to act out antisocial behaviors. I mean, how absurd would it be for me to go to a holocaust denial sight and start writing on NTE? I would be labled a kook! Imagine that, being labled a kook by a bunch of kooks!

    Turd In The Punchbowl-n. A person who spoils a pleasant social situation.

    This metaphor is powered by a particularly vivid contrast: the inviting sensory appeal of a festive beverage juxtaposed with the revolting suggestion of feculent contagion. Therefore, labeling someone a turd in the punch bowl is most appropriate when the individual’s deleterious influence goes beyond mere faux pas or nuisance behaviors, and rises to the level of deliberate offense for its own sake. Consider that the literal act of depositing or excreting fecal matter into a communal food-service container would be sabotage.

    The punch bowl and the feces connote certain additional nuances. The former is a symbol of public community, as such dispensers are frequently encountered at parties where they become a focal point for interaction. Freud famously identified feces with aggression and the possessive instinct. Thus a turd in the punch bowl suggests rage toward, and / or the urge to conquer, a community or society as a whole. Defecating into a punch bowl is a very public act, in contrast with poisoning the well or laying an upper decker, which are generally surreptitious. In particular then, to be a turd in the punch bowl is to be a willful and attention-seeking obstructor to the success of a social community.

    Sabine, this song relates in a strong way to what you were saying abour the need for a scapegoat.

  • RE R.I.P After reading LWA & Daniel’s poet posts, then Mark Austin’s comment puts the final nail in the coffin, the only question left is, What’s the difference between a moron & cretin in re’s case nothing . With all love we go how to the last great extinction because of more than several exponentials equation

  • ‘such an idea proves the world has gone completely insane.’

    (No mention of energy depletion, squandering of energy, CO2 emissions or exacerbating abrupt climate change in the item, of course.)

  • Kirk…hilarious!
    I’m beat from a day of digging in espalier posts and I still LOLd my way through your comment.
    Thanks man.

  • .
    @Robert Callaghan.
    Thanks for letting me know my post went viral. Well, ok, not viral, maybe more like just an infected paper cut, LOL. Still, I would have never known. So, thanks for the link. Hats off to whoever grabbed it and posted it there (I think?) :)


    I agree with what you said in your post about the unlikelihood of changing already made up minds. However, regarding Guy’s efforts … remember that while he may not have woken up the whole world, he has provided wonderful validation for those of us who’ve come to the same conclusion as him, but felt alone in their observations. In that regard, I’m thankful that he didn’t just choose to keep silent about what he saw. It’s nice to know that you’re not alone.

    Also, regarding RE … maybe I didn’t write my post to RE with so much an aim at changing his mind. I saw him taking some underhanded shots at Guy (like his remarks about this being a religion, and about Guy being a quitter), and maybe I just decided to wrestle that stick away from him and give him a good whack back with it. :)

    And on that topic (Guys strong message that RE takes such umbrage with), I’ve actually found that what’s worse is to give people any room to wiggle out so that they can slip back into denial. Based on my observations of typical psychology, RE’s message is the kind that can allow people to think all is well, and that it’s alright to go back to sleep; that there’s no serious threat, or that maybe it’s just the next generation’s problem. Give people even an inch to wiggle out, and they’ll usually take it. Guy’s message keeps it real. So, I suppose it depends on your perspective as to what constitutes a bad message. I thought RE’s message deserved to be countered for the benefit of all the lurkers out there who might be sitting on the fence. It wasn’t just directed at RE alone.

    Anyway Daniel … thanks for your comments. You’ve given really good advice.


    @Bud Nye
    Where are you Bud? Sorry for my harsh words the other day. Now I feel bad. You’ve been here longer than me, so don’t let an old meat sack like me chase you off. Despite what I’ve shown here lately, I’m actually a sweet guy with a really big heart. So, please don’t leave on account of me. I’d feel bad if that were the case. Hugs? :(

    Same goes for you too RE. I guess it’s just a habit I have that when people seem to be using a stick on someone else, that I’ll sometimes wrestle it away from them and give them a whack back with it. So, no hard feelings, K? Although, I still stand by the views I expressed in my post. However, I do send them with love, or at least I’m trying to. ;)


    On that note, it’s probably me who could stand to mellow on the jello a bit here anyway. I don’t mean to disrupt the co-mutiny here with my meat sack ways. My apologies to everyone if I have in any way since joining in here recently. I do like to express myself, and I know that can be annoying to some. It’s certainly not my intent to be dropping any turds in the punch bowl.

    I’m trying ugotstahwonder. Maybe I need to visit the silly cybin again. It has been awhile.

    Less sticks and more jokes maybe. There’s no reason going extinct can’t be fun, right? That is, until it stops being fun I suppose.

    Group hug!!!! No? Ok, that’s alright … I understand. Hrrrmph. :(

  • Great news! Mark Carney, Governor of the Bank of England -and yes, a central banker charged with creating money out of thin air and charging interest (albeit extremely low these days) on it- has now publicly sided with those who observe that climate change is a serious problem.

    Okay, there is utter nonsense in the narrative such as:

    ‘One proposal, he added, was the creation of an industry-led group, a climate disclosure taskforce, to design and deliver a voluntary standard for disclosure by those companies that produce or emit carbon.

    “Companies would disclose not only what they are emitting today, but how they plan their transition to the net-zero world of the future. The G20 – whose member states account for around 85% of global emissions – has a unique ability to make this possible.”

    Met zero emission in the future and still a globalised industrial economy???

    However, it must be getting serious for Carney to utter ‘unutterable’ sentences such as:

    “Take, for example, the International Panel on Climate Change’s estimate of a carbon budget that would likely limit global temperature rises to 2 degrees [centigrade] above pre-industrial levels.

    “That budget amounts to between a fifth and a third of the world’s proven reserves of oil, gas and coal. If that estimate is even approximately correct it would render the vast majority of reserves “stranded” – oil, gas and coal that will be literally unusable without expensive carbon-capture technology, which itself alters fossil fuel economics.’

    What! Can’t extract all that coal and oil and burn it?!!!

    It’s such a shame this is all about 40 years too late.

  • babajingo, glad to hear you enjoyed my blog!

    LWA, please don’t worry about Bud! You can’t chase him off, I promise! You do seem to have a big heart though. Thank you for hanging out here. And please join in the co-mutiny :) You really can’t be too offensive here, trust me.


    I hadn’t come across the terms “functional extinction” until a few months ago when I saw the Jeremy Jackson lecture posted above by kevin but it helped clarify things for me.

    “Functional extinction is the extinction of a species or other taxon such that: it disappears from the fossil record, or historic reports of its existence cease; the reduced population no longer plays a significant role in ecosystem function; or. the population is no longer viable.”

    So there might be a few stragglers here and there, a few preppers in their bunkers or a few tribal people in the heart of the Amazon, and if Elon Musk makes it to Mars, perhaps we can consider him a straggler too, but the species on Earth would be functionally extinct.

    Talking of Musk, he’s representative of the sociopathic “leader” that is at the helm of society and civilization today:

    We might even take Mars with us as we go.

  • Doom Porn

    Hardcore: Nature Bats Last

    Softcore: Greenpeace, Klein, McKibben, Scribbler, Commie Dreams etc. etc.

  • 44 South, without laughter in my life, being here would be about as fulfilling as waiting to be flushed down a toilet. I especially like Carlin. He’s one of my heroes, a foul mouthed hero, but a hero nonetheless.

    BTW, on my last entry, the definition of a turd in a punch bowl was a quote from the Urban Dictionary. I forgot to add the quotation marks.

  • Quote of the Day
    John Berger: “Nothing in the nature around us is evil. This needs to be repeated since one of the human ways of talking oneself into inhuman acts is to cite the supposed cruelty of nature.”

  • The situation is actually brighter than what we think.

    The world economy is growing fast, probably faster than ever in history. The real story is the exponential growth, which will continue just as it has always continued. The challenge of mankind is to keep this positive [economic] development going on and at the same time to reduce our environmental impact. This can only be achieved by science and technology. About all meters that measure human well-being and happiness show a positive direction.

    Our second challenge is that we must at the same time to save the Earth. Our environmental impact is now much too high.

  • Ray Batman

    It would be good for you to read to see how glowing are the prospects of economic upturn. Or maybe you’ll see things differently…

  • .
    The daughters of Howlin’ Wolf:


  • Shep, I agree & I said so above.

    I know that we are doomed, but accepting tvt’s outright farcical nonsense is “quitting” & then some.

    Shep’s quote is the precise antithesis to tvt’s childish “nature dunnit.”

    John Berger: “Nothing in the nature around us is evil. This needs to be repeated since one of the human ways of talking oneself into inhuman acts is to cite the supposed cruelty of nature.”

    Any atrocity can be justified with – “it’s our nature”

    Paul Chefurka, I cannot understand how you could openly endorse tvt’s twisted Social Darwinism. It is pure perversion & anti-intellectualism.

    Here it is again; ” … it’s the nature of our world, of biological life, that not everyone can survive, or thrive, or be ‘good’. so if any ‘one’ or thing is to be blamed, it is mother nature, or perhaps some hypothetical ‘god’ that created mother nature and it’s wayward child, human nature.”

    If such farcical flapdoodle adds any information to our understanding of our world & the human condition; I most assuredly can’t see it.

  • I do not like the word sheeple at all.
    It implies to me a kind of vulgar elitism.
    The Buddhists have this idea of the returner. The one who attains enlightenment and though they could continue to Nirvana, choose to return to the fold of the damned in order to assist them in their troubles.

    That’s not to say that I don’t think a lot of people are frooked out of their minds. Completely gaga and lost. However, empathy, or any semblance of healthy psychology demands of me that I acknowledge and address the environmental, institutional and structural factors that plague them, just as much as any one.

    And trust me, people are suffering. I live with the damned, much to the consternation and fury of the privileged Euro people squatting on Turtle Island. And believe me, it is not pretty and not fun at all, In fact most of the time it is an unbearable and impossible hardship.

  • Kirk,

    I’m just getting started with White Buffalo. U know his profile looks almost exactly like the old whitey Christ portrait that you used to see in a lot of homes.

    I stumbled on this video of Jacob (Jake) White (jewish and white!!)and the fellow seems genuine and interested in nothing but the truth. Does not take a scientist to rock with song lyrics etc.etc. It is an hour long treat in a stand up club in perfect town, San Diego, where a lot of pretty cash heavy people live and work. He kills it. (The White Buffalo – Live at the Belly Up – 2015 – Show Complete)

  • The Worst Nuclear Disaster in US History That You’ve Never Heard About


    The United States government deliberately hid “the worst nuclear disaster in U.S. history,” according to experts and an in-depth investigation by NBC4 Southern California. Whistleblowers have also come forward to expose the little-known catastrophe, which occurred north of Los Angeles in 1959 and leaked over 300 times the allowable amount of radiation into surrounding neighborhoods. That contamination is now linked to up to a 60% increase in cancer in the area, but the government still refuses to acknowledge its colossal mistake.

    The ongoing tragedy was driven by America’s darkest demons, from dogmatic militarism to aggressive corporatism, and ongoing government and corporate efforts to cover-up the disaster are nothing short of staggering. [much more]

    [still believe our government wasn’t behind 9-11?]

  • Love the John Berger quote—thanks shep.
    Better than the original:

  • Infanttyrone,

    Regarding your long September 26th, 2015 at 9:02 pm comment:
    In your first paragraph you asked why people think in those terms. I wondered the same thing. Because instead of making a lot of assumptions I strongly prefer to ask people directly about what they think, what they feel, and their motivations, I asked my questions and made my request. To date, no one has seriously responded. That leaves us only with guessing and all of its hazards and errors. What attracts people to this kind of reasoning? What appeal does it have? And how do they resolve the problem of the ghost in the machine without invoking magical processes? For the most part I agree with your assessment. Though huge variation certainly exists with each person having their own, unique motivations, I expect that probably captured the generalities pretty well. To summarize the situation in few words: A huge amount of psychological research demonstrates that people very strongly dislike unknowns. At both an automatic, unconscious, perceptual level, and at a conscious, cognitive level, we readily fill in any gaps in our knowledge usually with little concern about the reliability of the gap-filling.

    In the second half of your comment you asked, “Where might these weird effects come from?” Notice that the way you asked the question and commented on it, you appear to have started with the premise that the alleged effects actually do occur—versus people only BELIEVING, usually quite sincerely, that they occur. Meanwhile, much compelling evidence demonstrates that these effects do not occur when we have controlled for fraud, error, and wishful and magical thinking. One can refer to The Skeptics Society, scientific journals, and other places, for that evidence.

    Prof. Lisa Randall’s book Warped Passages has nothing at all to do with these alleged effects. She does not discuss them in any way. Many people may wish to fill in the gaps in their knowledge by jumping to all kinds of unwarranted conclusions based on this and related books, but that amounts to nothing more that pure speculation.
    Regarding your question (3), if I recall correctly I feel about 99% sure that James Randi accepts human caused global warming, but don’t hold me to that. I don’t have any idea at all whether he thinks we could reverse it. I feel nearly certain that he does not deny it. He may well agree with Guy (probably does), but I don’t know.


    Regarding your September 27th, 2015 at 12:40 pm comment, I would say GREAT that your drug experiences altered your perception and made you realize how limited your consciousness really is! I certainly do not judge you or hold that against you or anyone else in any way. Meanwhile, some of us do not need a drug-induced altered state in order deeply to understand and appreciate how limited we find our consciousness or any of our many other biological functions. I confess that I feel a little bit surprised to realize that some people have the idea that a person supposedly must take at least one drug trip in order to come to this understanding in a deep emotional and cognitive way. For some of us the changing nature of and many limitations of our consciousness seem entirely obvious just by watching ourselves and others on a day-by-day basis. A little knowledge about psychological and neuroscience research makes this dramatically more obvious, again, with no drug trips involved or required. Meanwhile, as someone who started a drug treatment program at a private psychiatric clinic many years ago, and spent some time as a psychiatric nurse on the drug treatment unit of psychiatric hospital, I would like to tell you with great conviction and near certainty that the immediate gratification effects of some drugs largely account for their highly addictive nature. Indeed, we strongly tend to find pretty much any experience that alters our consciousness in positive ways within about 20 minutes or less addictive. Generally, the more rapid the effects, the more addictive the experience. This accounts for the addictive nature of things like running, sex, television, certain games, pornography, eating, and so on. If you don’t know this, and/or you do not wish to acknowledge and accept it, fine. Like all of us, you can, and will, believe whatever you want to believe driven mainly by your emotions.


    Regarding your September 27th, 2015 at 2:53 pm comment, to disagree with someone explaining how and why does not qualify as an “ad hominem smear” as you suggest. Based on much compelling evidence, all of the alleged phenomena I referred to fall under the heading “nonsense”. The evidence in support of them remains highly controversial and weak at best. The evidence against them strong in comparison. Writing these things does not qualify as “dishonest”, “ridiculing”, a “smear”, or “mocking”. You and others certainly have the right to disagree with all of this, if you wish, but it would help greatly if you would stick to the evidence and reasoning while avoiding the personal attacks on me and others.

    Do you notice how you not only wish to pursue an ad hominem attack on me for presenting my views, reasoning, and evidence, but also launch into an ad homimen attack on James Randi? You prefer NOT to focus on the evidence and reasoning about it concerning these alleged phenomena, but instead to change the subject to making personal attacks on the messenger(s).

  • @Bud Nye
    Good to see you’re still kicking Bud.

    A simple google search would show you Randi’s assessment of AGW.

    No, he doesn’t seem to agree with Guy at all, nor is he convinced that humans are even the cause. His long discourse (linked below) regurgitates (in his usual feigned, pondering way) most of the rhetoric of the denier crowd … ie: he questions majority consensus, talks of a climate that has always changed, reminds us we are coming out of an ice age, blah, blah, blah. All in all, it’s his usual format of skirting around the real issue, while alluding to ideas that gently nudge toward a certain perspective and /or agenda. In this case, he seems to only repeat the rhetoric put forth by the denier crowd.

    Here, however, is his final quote from the link I will provide:

    “In my amateur opinion, more attention to disease control, better hygienic conditions for food production and clean water supplies, as well as controlling the filth that we breathe from fossil fuel use, are problems that should distract us from fretting about baking in Global Warming.”

    As you can see, he refers to AGW with his typical sarcastic tone, one that betrays his usual and tiresome professed ‘objectiveness’ about the topic. That’s typical Randi. Anyway, here’s one of many links that can easily be found on google if one really wanted to know where he stands on the issue.


    Anyway, good to see you back Bud! And, regarding your comment addressed specifically to me …


    We gave you links. Read them or don’t. I tire of discussing Randi’s rather pedestrian charade.

    Enjoy your day! :)

  • I’ve posted my latest essay. It’s here.

  • @BudNye, one of your better comments. What it comes down to is that, generally speaking, people like to think what makes them feel good. Rationality is cold comfort, and will grow colder as the world warms and makes life more difficult for everyone.

    Rationalists are the puppy-killers. We pee on unicorns and harsh everyone’s mellow, which is why people are overjoyed when we shut up and let the jukebox play.

    Nothing against the jukebox, btw.. it’s just an observation.

    BUT @ogf.. that Whitney clip? I just didn’t see what you see. I saw a highly-artificial and overwrought piece of machinery, designed to push people’s emotional buttons and separate them from their money, with a woman who happened to be trapped inside. I saw a minority group desperate for “heroes”, who end up being so much meat being put through the grinder.

    [Was it on this blog where someone also linked to a video where Ice-T divides the world into “pimps” and “hos”??? Lovely! He’s right, but it’s neither beautiful nor inspiring that blacks can bring their own flavor of exploitation to a formerly white arena.]

    Apparently, Ms. Houston was a difficult individual whose talent clearly brought her to ruin. She’s singing a song written by a woman who has to wear toxic piles of fake hair and makeup and has felt the need to undergo dozens of ever-more-disfiguring surgeries on her face and primary gender features in order to be “successful”. I just don’t see anything beautiful in any of that. I think the whole clip reeks of ugliness.

  • Bud: To clarify, I wasn’t saying that I needed drugs to tell me that I have limited consciousness in relation to others (or that this fact was the primary “lesson” of the drugs). Of course I was aware that my perception is subjective and based on my individual experiences long before I ever took any drugs. I’m not a total idiot. The idea that “some of us do not need a drug-induced altered state” to understand this is not the point. Nobody NEEDS it, for any reason. Some of us wish to explore consciousness in this way. You say you don’t judge me for it, but honestly I wouldn’t care if you did : )

    I wish I could describe the experience, I truly do. I will only say there is a reason why shamans use them in their practices and have great reverence for them. There is a reason why professors Timothy Leary and Richard Alpert (aka Ram Dass) left their posts at Harvard to explore LSD to its fullest extent. There is a reason why they found it more instructive than anything they had ever learned in their psychology careers. There is a reason that LSD trips have been compared to the experience of enlightenment, and to The Tibetan Book of the Dead. I would never recommend these drugs to anyone who wasn’t remotely curious (such as yourself) nor to anyone who has a predisposition to mental illness (and I’m not equating the two!). They are powerful chemicals that alter brain function, I get that. And I’m not totally sure why I even engaged in this discussion in the first place, other than to “stick up” for one of the most transformative experiences of my life (okay, maybe 5 or 6 transformative experiences…).

    p.s. I have never seen any evidence that LSD and/or psilocybin are addictive. In fact, nobody considers them addictive. If anything, it is pointless to take LSD on a regular basis as one’s tolerance level rises exponentially over short term usage. If you take LSD 4 days in a row, by the 4th day you won’t get much of a hit. Nobody goes to rehab over LSD addiction (unless they’re in there for something else, too).

  • Well, okay, Lidia. I accept that is your opinion. What can I possibly say beyond, thanks for sharing?

  • .

    @Bud Nye
    Ok, I have some extra time on my hands, so let’s see if I can educate you a little about Randi, since I’m going to choose to assume you’re not being willfully dishonest, and instead are just unable to see through the diversionary debating tactics that Randi seems to have taught you as being an acceptable form of reasoning.

    To begin with, let’s examine Randi’s methodology of using diversion, which is what one would expect from an illusionist. His whole claim to fame in supposedly debunking psychic phenomenon, as one example, is really just a matter of debunking B by debunking A, and then insinuating that A and B are equivalent, when they’re in fact not equivalent at all. Most people can’t see through this, because he’s pretty good at his game.

    The only psychic ‘charlatanism’ he ever debunks in his lectures is the cold reading type (which everybody already knows is a sham.) You know the type, the person who goes on Montel Williams and says, “I am seeing a name … a name beginning with the letter G.” Then when he sees someone squirming away and grinning from ear to ear he hones in on that person and starts listing off names. “The name I’m seeing is Gord, no Glen, no it’s Gerald, no, nope, sorry, its Greg.” Upon finally hearing the name ‘Greg’, the person now literally jumps out of their chair with glee because somewhere in their family tree there is, to no surprise, a person named Greg. We already suspected this though, because the ‘reader’ has already honed in on the persons previous reaction to the letter ‘G’ being thrown out. And on and on the game goes.

    Get the picture? Now, everyone knows this is just a silly parlor trick, and has nothing to do with psychic phenomenon whatsoever. Now, getting back to Randi, this is the only sort of psychic charlatan that Randi ever truly exposes, the one that’s the obvious sham. Let’s call it example A. Now, Randi’s diversion comes when he falsely claims that this exposure now debunks all cases of psychic phenomenon. The problem lies in the fact that there are cases of example B that are not even similar to Randi’s example A (his cold reader.) But, through his diversion, or if you will, his ‘logical illusion’, he has conflated example A now with all other psychic phenomenon (examples B. C, D and so on) and claims that “they are all performed through the same or similar fakery.” Although, he really hasn’t shown that at all, he’s just led us to assume that. We take his word for it, or assume the cold reader is the only example of a psychic.

    See the diversion? A is not the same as B (or C or D), yet to Randi’s inexperienced and biased audience, they are all one and the same. So, in fact Randi has not debunked B, C, or D sufficiently, or even at all, he’s just created a diversion by debunking A (a known and not disputed act of trickery), and then equated A and B as being one and the same (which they are not, at least not necessarily … he hasn’t proven that.) That’s his whole lecture, repeated through several examples, and it’s just his own sort of logic trick. It does fool most people.

    That’s Randi’s one trick pony routine. He’s just a good arguer and bull-shitter, and his logical slight of hand illusions works best on those unfamiliar with a broader range of psychic phenomenon, or it works on people all to ready to ignore his faulty logic in order to confirm their own confirmation bias. Whenever Randi is ever confronted by a phenomenon that doesn’t fit into his ability to confuse A with B so easily, every time (like the psychic dogs, etc.), then we see him then resort to lying about supposedly thoroughly investigating the phenomenon (when he really hasn’t), and then resorting to the public character assassination of the claimant in order to get rid of the uncomfortable challenge to his usual routine of BS. Oldgrothforest gave an example of where Randi has done this, and he’s done it other times as well.

    This, Bud, is what I am going to accuse you of doing as well in your discourse. So, let’s break it down. This was your reply to me.

    “Regarding your September 27th, 2015 at 2:53 pm comment, to disagree with someone explaining how and why does not qualify as an “ad hominem smear” as you suggest.”

    Yes, as I dissect your statement, you should easily see that this logical fallacy of equating A with B is exactly what you have done, and is just a sneaky (or dysfunctional) way of undermining the credibility of someone’s argument (as well as denigrating the character of the person at the same time.) Remember the drill … taking an argument about B and proceeding to equate it (falsely) to situation A, where A is something so ridiculous so as to immediately ‘smear’ the credibility of the opponent in the debate, and also falsely (try and) discredit their argument?

    Let’s look further at your statement about our previous discussion to see this in play.

    “Based on much compelling evidence, all of the alleged phenomena I referred to fall under the heading “nonsense”.”

    I agree. But you see, you were the one who introduced unicorns and gnomes and other such silly things into the discussion, not us. So, by bringing these things yourself into the discussion, things which no one else was laying claim to, and then pointing to their obvious ridiculousness, well that’s just a false argument. You have done the Randi diversion of taking a discussion about situation B, a situation you probably don’t even have any experience with at all, and then you’ve just introduced a separate discussion A (unicorns, gnomes etc.) and called it nonsense (thinking you’ve made some sort of point), when really no one was ever talking about situation A in the first place. They were instead talking about something completely different (situation B.) Remember … A is not B.

    You then go on and on in the same fashion having already performed the ‘A is B’ mental slight of hand. Let’s look at your words.

    ”The evidence in support of them remains highly controversial and weak at best.”

    Yes, unicorns and gnomes, we agree. But those were your topics, not ours.

    ”The evidence against them strong in comparison.

    Again, for unicorns and gnomes, we agree. See how disingenuous this all becomes? I would add that in this case, calling you disingenuous is not an attack on your character, it is a charge against your use of the logical fallacy of ‘A equals B’ in your argument, which is disingenuous. At least I assume it’s disingenuous, because I don’t think you’re unintelligent enough to not knowingly see what you’re doing here, and to not be doing it on purpose, which is dishonest.

    Let’s finish with your statement to me.

    “Writing these things does not qualify as “dishonest”, “ridiculing”, a “smear”, or “mocking”.”

    Um, if it’s on purpose in order to denigrate a serious discussion of unexplained phenomenon by equating it with unicorns, gnomes, and trips to planet zenon to see the magical overlord of the bunnies, then yes, it is a sort of character smear. One indented to discredit your opponent by degrading their credibility in the eyes of any third party who observes the argument.

    Surely you’ve encountered this tactic from the global warming deniers, haven’t you? You talk AGW, and they crack jokes about 911 conspiracies, unicorns, and gnomes. The room laughs and goes away thinking A equals B, and that anyone who believes in global warming is a loon, like those planet zenon gnome crazies? It’s a foul tactic indeed, one that works quite well on right wing republican audiences, it’s appealing to a confirmation bias. That’s the Randi argument in a nutshell. He only ever debunks the obviously silly cases, and then just equates the obvious fraud to being the same as all other claimed phenominon. He implies A = B. But, A is not B.

    Your (semi) final comment.

    “You and others certainly have the right to disagree with all of this, if you wish, but it would help greatly if you would stick to the evidence and reasoning while avoiding the personal attacks on me and others.”

    Evidence of what, your conversation with yourself about unicorns?

    I did find your argument disingenuous. If you were doing it on purpose, then yes, I do find it a form of degrading people, which I do consider an ad hominem. As far as me attacking you, all these words are just comments about your dishonest argument style, not about you … I don’t know you. As I pointed out about how the dishonest denier often seeks to degrade the character of the AGW believer through associating them with the likes of unicorn belief and conspiracy theories and such, then yes, I think it is equivalent to a character smear of sorts. And, if you smear someone’s character in that way, then they’ll probably give you the same back, and soon people aren’t even communicating anymore at all.

    Finally, and this discussion really is a long waste of time and energy already, there is much more dishonesty regarding Randi’s ‘show’ (and that’s all it is, a ‘show’ by a master showman.) His million dollar challenge was set up to be hundreds of times harder to pass than any accepted scientific experiment would require. Like, p < 0.000001, which is ridiculous. Then he does his tired old A = B argument yet again … he claims that because no one ever passed his dishonest test (or even bothered to try), that this must mean there is no such thing as psychic (or any other) phenomenon. It’s really all just a well crafted scam created by him, but it sure pays his bills and amuses his audiences, I’ll give him that.

    So see? It’s all just a crafty sham. Randi is just another one of the charlatans here. I always liked what the expert in quadruple blind studies for the pharmacology industry said about Randi’s conditions that he personally sets up as requirements in order to pass his phony challenge.

    “ You can’t study football on a basketball court using baseball players and the rules for hockey because if you get negative results you can’t say, “I’ve disproven the phenomenon of football” in that case because you’re on a basketball court using baseball players and the rules for hockey. That’s not a proper experiment.”

    That’s about where it’s at with his dishonest and very unscientific challenge.

    Anyway. Sorry to waste everybody’s time on such a silly subject as James Randi. Using Guy’s famous line, Randi “isn’t intelligent … he’s just very, very clever.” It’s not about the silly stuff he will debunk, like gnomes and your unicorns Bud … it’s about the stuff he refuses to debunk and instead wiggles out of. Aye, now there’s the rub.

    If you’re so rational Bud, then why can’t you see through Randi’s so very obvious game here?

    Anyway, again, have a good day Bud. :)

  • The antidote to Whitney Houston is…..
    someone real, who can play an instrument and is her own person:


  • Think we’re going to have to agree to disagree on this one folks, but valiant effort LWA!
    Another short arse here by the way, I sometimes wonder if we trippy types are some subset of humanity, all little people?!
    Maybe we did all fly in on the backs of unicorns from planet Zenon :).
    Great artist Wren. My favorite T.C. song must say “fast car”, desperately sad song about how even pathetically small dreams like having half decent parents, job,home and partner are out of reach for so many.

  • ‘I do not like the word sheeple at all.
    It implies to me a kind of vulgar elitism.’ -wester

    i love the word because it constantly reminds me and a few others that we’re all indeed very much domesticated animals thanks to the cultures we’re born into. there’s virtually nothing wild, spontaneous, or authentic in the way we’re forced to live within these societies of hierarchy, control and domination. in this forum where i feel most understood and accepted, i feel free-est to use it. among others, i generally don’t for the obvious reason that it’s widely misunderstood and causes resentment, similar to what u expressed. i agree there’s a sort of vulgar elitism being indulged, an elitism related to being one of the very few who understand the severity of our domestication, and how ‘unfree’ it makes us. even for those who steadfastly argue that we possess free will, u must admit that freedom is severely compromised by the authoritarianism of our societies. if it makes u feel any better, i consider myself as much a sherson as anyone, in fact, probably i’m more domesticated than most other sheeple, in spite of my ‘elitest’ comprehension/perception. knowledge doesn’t make one free, it just makes one understand how unfree (s)he is.

    ‘The Buddhists have this idea of the returner. The one who attains enlightenment and though they could continue to Nirvana, choose to return to the fold of the damned in order to assist them in their troubles.’

    i suppose i’ve attained partial enlightenment. lacking complete enlightenment (or the dogmatic faith that such enlightenment even exists), i’m unaware of the possibility of continuing down the road to nirvana, assuming, again, that such a possibility exists. however, i do relate to the part about returning to ‘the fold of the damned’, for i see no way of separating myself from the rest of society and it’s fate, much as i wish that i could. no way, that is, except for suicide, which i take cold comfort in considering a possible future ‘choice’.

    ‘trust me, people are suffering. I live with the damned, much to the consternation and fury of the privileged Euro people squatting on Turtle Island. And believe me, it is not pretty and not fun at all, In fact most of the time it is an unbearable and impossible hardship.’

    we’re all damned, aren’t we? even ‘privileged’ ones.

    i don’t understand what u’re talking about when u say that the ‘choice’ u made to live with the ‘damned’ (i assume u’re referring to the sheeple of thailand?) has caused much ‘consternation and fury of the privileged Euro people squatting on Turtle Island’. perhaps u’re referring to some family or friends of yours? surely u’re not referring to me or the vast majority of others who could care less about where u choose to live, i hope. i rather admire anyone with the courage/ability/resolve to live as an ex-pat self exile from ‘the land of the free and the home of the brave’ (a great orwellian phrase of deceit/delusion). i like to think that there exists many happier places to live than in the land of immense ‘wealth’, inequality, injustice, and great sadness that’s always been my home (where i feel very alienated). considering how in the recent past u’ve urged others to follow your example and get the hell out of amerika, it seems odd now that u’re complaining of the hardship of having done so. perhaps the search for ‘nirvana’ or haven from the great surreal ‘evil empire’ of the west is fraught with it’s own frustrations, sacrifices, and disappointments?

  • Tracey Chapman is wonderful! I have loved her for a really long time.

    I’m not a Whitney fan at all, but I do really like that one performance a lot.

    LWA, voices do run in families. I cannot sing at all, and neither could most anyone related to me. It is a great disappointment in my life, and certain artists can do me in just with their voice alone. I think many friendly thoughts toward you, and that’s all I’m going to say.


  • LWA,

    Nice job replying to Bud.
    Your A =/= B works better than my perfect-game bowling analogy.
    For me anyhow…we’ll see how it works on our focus group in Tacoma.

    Here’s your prize.

    So, who knew that angels were mammalian?

  • wester, i hope u can download video. the documentary film linked below is about 22 amerikan p.o.w.s in korea who chose after the war to live in china, rather than return to usa. some very remarkable, if little known (at least in the usa) ex-pats. apparently most of them eventually chose to return to the usa because of the great difficulty in trying to adapt to a foreign culture, but at least one of them, highlighted in this film, stayed for life, raised a family with a chinese woman, and never regretted his choice. i think u and others here will enjoy/appreciate this:

  • The Oregon killer was “Stupid, Crazy, Greedy, Evil, and Innocent?!”

    Only to kooks!