+- +-


Welcome, Guest.
Please login or register.
Forgot your password?

+-Stats ezBlock

Total Members: 43
Latest: Heredia05
New This Month: 1
New This Week: 0
New Today: 0
Total Posts: 10242
Total Topics: 244
Most Online Today: 3
Most Online Ever: 52
(November 29, 2017, 04:04:44 am)
Users Online
Members: 0
Guests: 2
Total: 2

Post reply

Warning - while you were reading a new reply has been posted. You may wish to review your post.
Message icon:

Help (Clear Attachment)
(more attachments)
Allowed file types: doc, gif, jpg, jpeg, mpg, pdf, png, txt, zip, rar, csv, xls, xlsx, docx, xlsm, psd, cpp
Restrictions: 4 per post, maximum total size 1024KB, maximum individual size 512KB

shortcuts: hit alt+s to submit/post or alt+p to preview

Topic Summary

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: July 21, 2018, 10:36:12 pm »

Future Megaprojects - Dome Over Houston

(Extreme Engineering | Megastructures) Documentary


High Engineering

Published on May 8, 2018

Dome Over Houston

Houston Texas is in peril. The country's fourth most populous city faces hurricanes heat and the growing consequences of global warming. Only a radical solution can save the city a solution that may lie within a massive dome 1500 feet high and a mile in diameter that will rise over the city center. Building the dome will require innovative engineering and construction on an unprecedented scale with lessons materials and techniques drawn from around the world. From the Eden Project the world's largest geodesic domes to a tiny factory in Bremen Germany which manufactures a revolutionary plastic the idea of a city-sized dome could finally become reality.
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: July 12, 2018, 01:22:46 pm »

Support CleanTechnica’s work via donations on Patreon or PayPal!

Or just go buy a cool t-shirt, cup, baby outfit, bag, or hoodie.

6 Climate Change Movies You HAVE To See 👀  🧐

July 11th, 2018 by Guest Contributohttp://echonewspaper.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/15-An-inconvenient-sequel.jpgr

Originally published on The Climate Reality Project.

Six deeply engaging and thought-provoking films shine a light on the realities of the climate crisis today – and imagine what it means for our tomorrow.

Truly great films about the climate crisis are tough to come by. Allusions to environmental destruction are very familiar in the futuristic dystopias Hollywood churns out like clockwork, but they rarely get the science right – or they abandon it entirely in favor of skipping straight to some post-apocalyptic CGI extravaganza.

Those of us with a little knowledge of the climate crisis bristle at this kind of doom-and-gloom bombast – because we know better. But that doesn’t mean a few thoughtful films haven’t been able to cut through the noise.

Below are six of our favorites. We decided to spice it up by mixing narrative films with documentaries – and while our changing climate understandably casts a long, dark shadow over any future that wrestles with its impacts, we did our best to stay on the right side of the fine line between raucous, factually dubious calamity and thought-provoking “what if” explorations or science-centered spectacle.


Director Christopher Nolan’s Interstellar is that rarest of Hollywood anomalies – a wildly complicated, lavishly expensive, wholly original mainstream blockbuster. It doesn’t exist in the Marvel or DC cinematic universes; instead, it occupies a not-so-distant-future version of our very own – and things aren’t exactly going great.

While the words “climate change” are never explicitly said in the film, the impacts of the crisis are writ large, driving a plot about an attempt to flee a near-future Earth reeling from drastically changing weather patterns and global food shortages for the safety of a new habitable planet.

Featuring one of the most stacked casts in recent memory, including Oscar winners Matthew McConaughey, Anne Hathaway, Michael Caine, and Ellen Burstyn and nominees Jessica Chastain, Timothée Chalamet, and John Lithgow, Interstellar takes on a very real consequence of climate inaction, though it offers up an untenable solution.

After all, there’s still no Planet B.

Beasts of the Southern Wild

Living in a Louisiana bayou community called “the Bathtub,” six-year-old Hush Puppy (youngest-ever Best Actress Oscar nominee Quvenzhané Wallis) can’t get the prehistoric aurochs her teacher tells her will be released from melting ice caps off her mind – even as the world in front of her crumbles and cowers, the victim of powerful storms, failing levees, and familial health problems.

While the film’s setting is technically fictional, it was inspired by several very real fishing villages in Southern Louisiana’s Terrebonne Parish. These small, isolated wetland communities are threatened by climate-driven erosion, extreme weather, and rising sea levels. Most notable among them is the rapidly disappearing Isle de Jean Charles, former home of “the first American climate refugees.”

Chasing Coral

The 2017 documentary Chasing Coral enjoys a rare accolade: It is one of a pretty short list of films to hold a 100 percent “fresh” rating on popular review aggregator Rotten Tomatoes.

That coral reefs are existentially threatened by the climate crisis is a truth near-universally acknowledged. But filmmaker Jeff Orlowski doesn’t simply telegraph a report on this impending ecological catastrophe.

Instead, Orlowski infuses his film with such empathy and ardor for our world’s oceans and their vibrant ecosystems – as well as those working hard to save what’s left – that it’s impossible to not walk away pumped up and ready to join the fight.


Like we already mentioned, we try to avoid cynical, despondent hot takes on the climate crisis. But we’re fans of director Bong Joon Ho’s Snowpiercer for two big reasons: First, it’s a very, very good, wildly underseen film, and second, because it confronts head-on the dangers of a “we’ll deal with this later” approach to climate action.

The film is set in a future where a failed geoengineering experiment to counteract climate change plunges the planet into a new ice age, killing all life except for those lucky enough (a phrase we’re using loosely here) to have boarded the titular train. This train now circles the globe on a constant loop and a tyrannical class system has taken hold onboard.

It’s an important cautionary tale: While we should investigate any and all scientific developments to stop the climate crisis, dangerous gambles like geoengineering – or for that matter, fleeing our planet for an imagined oasis somewhere deep in the universe – could come with unintended consequences. So, why risk it when we know for sure that quickly transitioning from fossil fuels to renewables can and will work?

There’s even an important philosophical principle – one at work in another great, underappreciated sci-fi film, 1997’s Contact – to back this one up. Attributed to fourteenth century logician and Franciscan friar William of Ockham, Ockham’s Razor states… well, Jodie Foster’s Dr. Ellie Arroway put it best: “All things being equal, the simplest answer is usually the right one.”

(We agree, Dr. Arroway.)

Note: For all its incredible imagination, Snowpiercer definitely has some moments of real violence and isn’t one for younger audiences.

An Inconvenient Truth/An Inconvenient Sequel: Truth to Power

Now, of course, the film that started a movement – and the follow-up that propelled it to new heights.

After seeing former US Vice President Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth, people worldwide finally understood the reality of the climate crisis devastating our planet. For many, it was the moment they knew they personally had to do something about it. The film’s impact continues to be felt more than a decade after it won the 2007 Academy Award for Best Documentary and took its place among the highest-grossing documentaries ever.

Last year’s follow-up, An Inconvenient Sequel: Truth to Power, took that story further, showcasing both the amazing progress that’s been made as well as how much further we still have to go to solve the climate crisis.

Both documentaries present the science and stakes of the crisis and ask viewers if they’re ready to fight like our world depends on it (because it does).


Just like you saw others do in An Inconvenient Sequel: Truth to Power, you too can work with Vice President Gore himself along with a host of field-leading experts and activists to learn the facts of the climate crisis and how we can solve it together. Apply today to attend our Climate Reality Leadership Corps training in Los Angeles, California, from August 28-30, and join an incredible network of dedicated activists devoted to solving the greatest challenge of our time.

You know our climate is changing. You know renewable energy is the answer. And you want to make a difference. We’ll show you how.


Posted by: AGelbert
« on: July 11, 2018, 02:00:53 pm »

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: June 10, 2018, 01:57:53 pm »

Bifurcation will lead to collapse and it is well under way.

Perhaps it will lead to revolution but even that is doubtful.

Poor people being forced not to consume scarce resources is not an ingredient for collapse, BAU is.

It seeems the "skill" of our propagandist mindforkers is being tested to the limit.

I am in agreement with GO on this issue. :o ;D As GO stated, more or less, the total collapse of civilization is being caused by BAU.

Thank you Agelbert, A most unusual and may I state "Delightful" circumstance for a change.  ;D :D   

GO said: A most unusual and may I state "Delightful" circumstance for a change.

When a person is, in my (not always ) very humble opinion, right, I try to not let my 'prejudices' get in the way of a wise and well thought out comment, like yours.

The horrendous inustices that oligarchs, kings, commissars, presidents (and other assorted elite riff raff throughout the sad history of the human species) visit on the masses is nothing new. What is new, is the increasingly unviable biosphere. This situation is a creeping cancer eating away at each and every complex life web system that we all depend on. This biosphere degradation, though imperceptible to most people due to its slow creep, has such MASSIVE inertia that it is virtually impossible to stop, or even slow.

Of course we should do what we can. Ignoring a cancer rarely cures it. But, as many who post here have said, more or less, THERE'S THE RUB! IOW, the ones with the actual power to DO something  to mitigate this Catastrophic Climate Change threatening to make us go the way of the Dodo Bird, refuse to engage in anything but slow, incremental steps that, though real and valid, are woefully inadequate.

I think I know why.

It's NOT because TPTB are stupid. They understand quite well what is going on with the climate. They understand that, no matter how titanic and massive the effort to clean up this planet's mankind Pollution Poisons produced by industry from mining to chemical factories to fossil fuels and so on, THIS generation, and probably the next FOUR GENERATIONS, will NOT see the benefits due to the massive inertia baked in to t Catastrophic climate Change.

Why invest trillions (it will take many trillians!) to convert our civilization to one that doesn't destroy the biosphere when you will not see much of ANY benefits in your elite oligarch life or that of your privileged offspring and two or three generations down the line as well?

But there is more. The transition to a sane civilization that lives in harmony with the biosphere will create havoc and poverty and death and strife and misery simply because THAT MONEY is now needed to keep the Catastrophic Climate Change damage from getting temporarilly 'out of hand' (see: finger in the dike).

Transitioning to a sane civilization that protects and preserves a viable biosphere is, for TPTB, just not a 'good investment'.

So, they do a bit of math and start hoarding all the goodies that they need to start a civilization all over again when the masssive die-offs happen.

They sit down with top scientists and try to get accurate data for the minum size cohort representatives of various species, including humans, to kick start the biosphere after it has been thoroughly trashed in the next 150 years or so (see: unstoppable Catastrophic climate Chane INERTIA).

It won't work. But, TPTB have always functioned this way. They know of no other way to behave, due to their moral failings.

GO, if you want to know why the plan TPTB have to survive with about 90% less "useless eater humans" is doomed to failure, PM me. It is unrelated to this thread and deals with Climate Change hard facts.
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: April 28, 2018, 07:37:37 pm »

The Tectonic & Volcanic 🌋 Events That Will Accompany The Melting Of The Ice Sheets — An Overview

April 28th, 2018 by James Ayre

As the ice sheets of the world melt, an enormous amount of pressure will be lifted off of the continental crusts that play host to them, as well as the surrounding oceanic basins. Something similar is broadly true, but to a much lesser degree, of the world’s remaining large glaciers (think of the Himalayas).

As this pressure is lifted, after tens of millions of years of being there, tectonic and volcanic features that have been dormant for hundreds of thousands of years or even tens of millions of years will awake — as will broader geologic-system elements and processes.

Melt streams on the Greenland Ice Sheet on July 19, 2015. Ice loss from the Greenland and Antarctic Ice Sheets as well as alpine glaciers has accelerated in recent decades. NASA photo by Maria-José Viñas.

The ice sheets of East Antarctica have effectively been there in one form or other for ~15 million years (to a lesser extent than now, though), while a portion of the Greenland ice sheet is thought to have partially melted around 120,000–130,000 years ago during the Eemian interglacial period. The volcanic and tectonic pressures of the regions in question, in other words, are now well primed.

While all of this may just sound like a horror story or something to some of those reading this, there’s a reason for that — a basic sense of highly traumatic natural disasters is encoded culturally (and possibly genetically as well) in people, with stories being the vehicle to bring such awareness to the surface. (This is the take of many people, mine included.) That basic sense effectively brings with it hundreds or thousands of millennia’s worth of “human” experience of extreme natural disruption and disaster. Hence the relatively common human fascination with them (think of the way that some but not all people are inherently wary of snakes and spiders, despite the very limited immediate danger they pose).

The reality is that the last few thousand years have been almost unbelievably stable by (pre)historical standards when it comes to geologic and volcanic events. Looking back across longer stretches of time, one sees what would be considered to be “civilization-wrecking” natural disasters regularly.

One also often sees, of course, oceans with currents, winds, and waves that would effectively make modern-style large-scale oceanic shipping an impossibility. These periods of time often seem to also be host to enormous and powerful storms that do not have modern analogs. But that’s mostly neither here nor there with regard to this subject. Though, I will note that as sea levels continue rising, and as ocean temperatures continue rising, the total area of the earth covered by the oceans will increase, and a greater portion of overall ocean area will relate to shallow areas — which will make the open oceans a much more dangerous place than they are now.

Back to the subject at hand, though, I’m going to provide an overview here of the potential volcanic and geologic events awaiting us as the world’s ice sheets disappear and the processes buried beneath them wake up. I’m going to do that by doing what reliably throughout human existence has given the best predictions — taking a look at the past (at actual geological history), inferring patterns, and intuitively projecting them out onto the future.

Basic Points & Timelines — Climate Change, Sea-Level Rise Pulses, & The Limited Effects Of Possible Volcanic Cooling Feedback

Thwaites Glacier. Image credit: NASA

As a reminder of why this matters, it should be realized that the world is now on track for a 3° Celsius to 8° Celsius temperature rise by the year 2100 — effectively, enough to lead to the complete melting of the West Antarctic and Greenland ice sheets, and possibly the East Antarctic ice sheet as well.

As far as the timing of such melting, assuming that the just mentioned range of warming occurs by 2100, it shouldn’t be assumed that melting and collapse will occur slowly or evenly. As noted in a 2007 paper co-authored by James Hansen: “We find no evidence of millennial lags between forcing and ice sheet response in paleoclimate data. An ice sheet response time of centuries seems probable, and we cannot rule out large changes on decadal time-scales once wide-scale surface melt is underway.”

That’s the reality of the situation — past ice sheet melting processes have played host to catastrophic pulse events, whereby global average sea levels have risen by many tens of feet in just a few years time.  :o

In such cases, pressure changes on tectonic plates and volcanic hotspots would have been severe, leading directly over the short  or mid term to a large uptick in volcanic and tectonic activity, as numerous studies exploring the issue have found. (For instance, by 2 to 6 times above background levels from 12,000 years ago to 7,000 years ago in de-glaciating regions with regard to volcanism.)

On that note, in the past when this subject has been brought up, I have heard some people argue that such an increase in volcanism would result in global cooling due to the release of reflective compounds into the atmosphere. A look back at geological history, though, shows clearly that this idea is mistaken — volcanic cooling due to the release of reflective compounds is a very short-term phenomena, whereas greenhouse gas climate forcing plays out over much longer periods of time. To simplify it, greenhouse gases are atmospheric gases, whereas the reflective compounds just discussed are essentially dust (which largely settles).

It should be realized here, in relation to that, that the current widespread burning of fossil fuels itself results in the release of such reflective compounds into the atmosphere. If such burning was to cease completely as of right now, the “cooling” effect provided by such compounds would disappear over just a few years while the “heating” effects provided by the greenhouse gases released to date would continue far into the future. As it stands, the greenhouse effect already greatly eclipses the cooling effect, but with the settling of the reflective compounds, heat gain would amplify quickly — leaving the world in a bit of a catch-22 when it comes to fossil fuel burning.

Moving on to the crux of the article…

Volcanic & Tectonic Potential Of Antarctica In Relation To Previous Ice Sheet Melt Events (+ Coal-Seam Fires 🔥?)

To start this off, it should be noted that some research examining the history of the relationship between volcanic events and ice sheet melting has posited the theory that one of the drivers for the relatively rapid shifts from glacial to interglacial time periods (as is often seen in the geologic record) is in fact rising rates of volcanism.

The idea is that, as ice sheets melt, the reduced pressure leads to rising rates of volcanism (as can be observed in the record) and this leads to gains in atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations over the mid term. So, to say it again, over the mid term, rising rates of volcanism leads to rising temperatures — as the cooling effect resulting from the volcanic emission of reflective compounds into the atmosphere is short lived whereas the effects of greenhouse gases are much longer lived.

Conversely, that idea includes the assertion that falling rates of volcanism (as interglacials drag on) is a cause of atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations and temperatures — and thus a return to glacial conditions.

Interestingly, the evidence also seems to show that, as temperatures rise, and thus as sea levels rise (from glacial melt), volcanic activity on the seafloor is reduced — owing to the greater weight of the water resting on it. Tectonic activity on the other hand is a different matter — as increasing oceanic weights may well intensify the intensity of earthquakes and similar events.

To go back to specifics here, there are numerous volcanoes currently active around the peripheries of Antarctica, but what’s very interesting is the presence of an extensive volcanic belt beneath the West Antarctic Ice Sheet — possibly the largest such belt of volcanoes in the world according to a recent study (at least 138 strong, some of which are quite extensive).

As noted in that study, West Antarctica is also home to one of the “most extensive regions of stretched continental crust on the Earth,” so it’s not surprising to learn that volcanic and tectonic activity in the region is potentially (periodically) quite high.

What’s particularly notable to us here right now, though, are the potential effects that such subglacial volcanic and tectonic activity could have on the stability to the nearby ice sheets. It isn’t necessary for an ice sheet to completely melt for a large volcano to erupt, after all — partial melting, and thus greatly reduced compression, could well be enough on its own to trigger widespread subglacial volcanic activity in the region.

And what would a large increase in volcanic and tectonic activity lead to in the region? Increased ice sheet melt rates? Large partial collapse events? Sea level rise pulses of several to tens of feet in just a few years time? To what degree could subglacial volcanic eruptions increase basal ice sheet flow rates?

Of course, no one can say for sure on any of those counts as of right now, but it is very notable that there’s evidence for numerous large sea level rise pulses throughout prehistory that retain ambiguous origins. The speculations discussed above provide a potential (partial) answer.

Back to the world of what is known concretely, Antarctica is currently home to at least 4 volcanoes on the mainland, and numerous volcanoes on nearby islands. As would be expected, these active volcanoes are only known of because they are located on the peripheries of the ice sheets, or on outcrops. Whatever volcanoes are present under the vast ice sheets have to be inferred (though they are clearly widespread, with there being at least 138 in just West Antarctica, as noted above).

Mount Erebus Image by NSF/Josh Landis

The 4 active mainland volcanoes are: Mount Berlin; Mount Hampton; Mount Melbourne; and Mount Kauffman — three stratovolcanoes and a caldera. On the surrounding islands, there are a fair number of active and large volcanoes as well, including Mount Erebus and Deception Island, both of which have been relatively active in recent history. Other island volcanoes known to be active are: Penguin Island; Buckle Island; Lindenberg Island; and Paulet Island.

The area around West Antarctica is also known to be home to numerous underwater volcanoes — some of which are located in relatively shallow areas.

Evidence for high levels of relatively “active” volcanoes in the region include pronounced geomagnetic anomalies, evidence of subglacial volcanism, and high regional heat fluxes — that all being the case, those that assume the relative quiet of recent centuries with regard to West Antarctic volcanism will continue indefinitely are likely mistaken. As the ice sheets there continue shedding mass (and thus lowering compression), an increase in activity seems likely.

Another aspect to consider while discussing this subject is the presence of large coal deposits and oil shales (dating back to the Devonian and Jurassic periods mostly) around the Transantarctic Mountain range. While such a possibility is a low-probability event, it still seems worth considering what would happen if these relativity exposed coal seams were to be ignited via volcanism (an event which appears that have happened at numerous times in prehistory in different parts of the world).

Volcanic & Tectonic Potential of Greenland as Ice Sheet Melts

What do we know about the volcanic and tectonic history of Greenland? Not much, due to the great thickness of the ice sheet that covers most of the island and limited research to date. What we can say for sure, though, is that a volcanic hotspot is located just to the east on the island on Iceland. We can also note that Iceland is known to have experienced an increase in volcanic activity as it de-glaciated.

Does this imply that something similar will happen in Greenland (but on a much larger scale)? No one can say for sure one way or another at this point.

Despite that being the case, I’ll still note here that, given the bowl-like shape of the island (with the ice sheet held in the center), potential subglacial volcanic eruptions would likely increase the rate at which the ice sheet melts and flows into the sea. Geologic history shows this to be the case in Iceland, and something very similar has been inferred to have happened numerous times in West Antarctica in the past as well.

Something that’s less up for debate, though, are the effects that the melting of the truly massive ice sheet of Greenland would have on the tectonic stability of the wider region. It’s pretty much a given that large tectonic events would follow over the near or mid term if the ice sheet were to completely (or even just largely) disintegrate. Other things to bear in mind are the possibilities of such melting events setting off sea-floor sediment collapses, like the one thought to have caused an enormous tsunami that hit Western Europe in prehistory; and also the inevitability of large post-glacial rebound in the surrounding areas (the land rises due to the lack of compression).

There are other possibilities as well, of course, but the aforementioned ones should give those who read this a better understanding of the way that ice sheet melting and cycles of regional and volcanic and tectonic activity are linked. While cycles may not show clearly on the global level when it comes to such things, they do tend to show on the regional and local levels.

Support CleanTechnica’s work via donations on Patreon or PayPal!

Or just go buy a cool t-shirt, cup, baby outfit, bag, or hoodie.


Posted by: AGelbert
« on: April 07, 2018, 02:19:08 pm »

What would be interesting to know is how much electrical energy it took to produce those lettuces in the Antarctic. Actually that equates to how many litres of distillate for the generators.

I believe your focus on energy requirements is not the most important issue here. The reason for that is that wind energy in Antarctica is off the charts high, as well as being nearly constant. They will always have plenty of energy to grow these veggies. The issue is whether this technique provides adequate nutrition for people and animals that will consume it. I am not convinced that it will.

One of the reasons I get tired of posting at the Doomstead Diner is your misguided fixation with energy issues. The problem is pollution, not energy. I will never convince you of that. That's regretable but I can deal with that as long as you stop using my channel to voice your erroneous world view that lack of energy instead of massive pollution from greenhouse gases is what will cause the collapse of human civilization. If your purpose is to "teach" me about what a "tough world" it is out there, you are wasting your time. I knew about that long before you did. If your purpose is to make me stop posting about the sine qua non benefits to mankind of Renewable Energy, you are succeeding. Keep it up and I will stop posting completely. Congratulations, fossil fueler.

Boy oh Boy, That Eden Project certainly looks inviting.

What a gorgeous looking vegetation endowed spot on our marvelous planet.  :emthup: :icon_sunny:

Yes, it is quite impressive. Did you see the large greenhouse in Iceland used for starting their tree saplings in the posted Iceland video? It wasn't that big but it wasn't small either. The Icelanders get it. Climate Change caused by greenhouse gases is THE issue of our time, not lack of energy.

For some really BIG greenhouses, though not in the attractive dome shape of the Eden Project, check out Denmark's massively huge greenhouses. I posted on it a while back. You can find it if you do a search. 8)

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: April 06, 2018, 06:48:19 pm »

How to Survive When, NOT IF, Catastrophic Climate Change Makes Earth's Climate Unsuitable For Humans

By Anthony G. Gelbert (Edited April 6, 2018)

During many periods in human history, some were doing just fine and others lived on the edge of starvation in a constant state of collapse. Abrupt changes in climate, such as that caused in France by a massive Laki volcanic eruption in Iceland in 1783, have resulted in famine induced starvation. In that case, starvation was followed by social upheaval and revolution, instead of collapse. Civilization in Iceland was nearly wiped out with that eruption (over one third of the population was killed), but did not collapse.

For a collapse to occur, the society destroying pressure must last longer than a decade or so. For example, natural climate alterations that produced lengthy droughts caused some ancient starving civilizations to eventually collapse. 

SNIPPET From the March 21, 2016 article, "Ten Civilizations or Nations That Collapsed From Drought", by Jeff Masters:

Drought is the great enemy of human civilization. Drought deprives us of the two things necessary to sustain life--food and water. When the rains stop and the soil dries up, cities die and civilizations collapse, as people abandon lands no longer able to supply them with the food and water they need to live. While the fall of a great empire is usually due to a complex set of causes, drought has often been identified as the primary culprit or a significant contributing factor in a surprising number of such collapses. Drought experts Justin Sheffield and Eric Wood of Princeton, in their 2011 book, Drought, identify more than ten civilizations, cultures and nations that probably collapsed, in part, because of drought. As we mark World Water Day on March 22, we should not grow overconfident that our current global civilization is immune from our old nemesis--particularly in light of the fact that a hotter climate due to global warming will make droughts more intense and impacts more severe. So, presented here is a "top ten" list of drought's great power over some of the mightiest civilizations in world history--presented chronologically.

֍ Collapse #1. The Akkadian Empire in Syria, 2334 BC - 2193 BC.
֍ Collapse #2. The Old Kingdom of ancient Egypt, 4200 years ago.

֍ Collapse #3. The Late Bronze Age (LBA) civilization in the Eastern Mediterranean. About 3200 years ago, the Eastern Mediterranean hosted some of the world’s most advanced civilizations.

֍ Collapse #4. The Maya civilization of 250 - 900 AD in Mexico. Severe drought killed millions of Maya people due to famine and lack of water, and initiated a cascade of internal collapses that destroyed their civilization at the peak of their cultural development, between 750 - 900 AD.

֍ Collapse #5. The Tang Dynasty in China, 700 - 907 AD. At the same time as the Mayan collapse, China was also experiencing the collapse of its ruling empire, the Tang Dynasty. Dynastic changes in China often occurred because of popular uprisings during crop failure and famine associated with drought.

֍ Collapse #6. The Tiwanaku Empire of Bolivia's Lake Titicaca region, 300 - 1000 AD. The Tiwanaku Empire was one of the most important South American civilizations prior to the Inca Empire. After dominating the region for 500 years, the Tiwanaku Empire ended abruptly between 1000 - 1100 AD, following a drying of the region, as measured by ice accumulation in the Quelccaya Ice Cap, Peru.

֍ Collapse #7. The Ancestral Puebloan (Anasazi) culture in the Southwest U.S. in the 11th - 12th centuries AD. Beginning in 1150 AD, North America experienced a 300-year drought called the Great Drought.

֍ Collapse #8. The Khmer Empire based in Angkor, Cambodia, 802 - 1431 AD. The Khmer Empire ruled Southeast Asia for  intense decades-long droughts interspersed with intense monsoons in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries that, in combination with other factors, contributed to the empire's demise.

֍ Collapse #9. The Ming Dynasty in China, 1368 - 1644 AD. China's Ming Dynasty--one of the greatest eras of orderly government and social stability in human history--collapsed at a time when the most severe drought in the region in over 4000 years was occurring, according to sediments from Lake Huguang Maar analyzed in a 2007 article in Nature by Yancheva et al.

In this image, we see Kurdish Syrian girls among destroyed buildings in the Syrian Kurdish town of Kobane on March 22, 2015. Image credit: Yasin Akgul/AFP/Getty Images.

֍ Collapse #10. Modern Syria. Syria's devastating civil war that began in March 2011 has killed over 300,000 people, displaced at least 7.6 million, and created an additional 4.2 million refugees. While the causes of the war are complex, a key contributing factor was the nation's devastating drought that began in 1998. The drought brought Syria's most severe set of crop failures in recorded history, which forced millions of people to migrate from rural areas into cities, where conflict erupted. This drought was almost certainly Syria's worst in the past 500 years (98% chance), and likely the worst for at least the past 900 years (89% chance), according to a 2016 tree ring study by Cook et al., "Spatiotemporal drought variability in the Mediterranean over the last 900 years." Human-caused emissions of greenhouse gases were "a key attributable factor" in the drying up of wintertime precipitation in the Mediterranean region, including Syria, in recent decades, as discussed in a NOAA press release that accompanied a 2011 paper by Hoerling et al., On the Increased Frequency of Mediterranean Drought.

A 2016 paper by drought expert Colin Kelley showed that the influence of human greenhouse gas emissions had made recent drought in the region 2 - 3 times more likely.

Ten Civilizations or Nations That Collapsed From Drought - lots of great pictures

As Dr. Jeff Masters evidenced above, extended drought, sometimes alternating with other harsh climate conditions like intense rains, can lead to starvation. Long wars exacerbate the situation, leading directly to collapse.

In addition to the above, there is another climate change based collapse level attack on human civilization, one that is 100% unavoidable now, that has wreaked havoc in the past.

SNIPPET from the March 23, 2018 article, "Humanity has contended with rising seas before — and it didn’t go well for us", by Alxandru Micu:

The Neolithic revolution was the first major transformation humanity had paused — the transition foraging to farming. Spreading out from the Middle East, this wave of change took peoples used to hunt and forage wherever they pleased and tied them down, hoe in hand, to sedentary — but oh so lucrative — farms and fields.

Around 7,600 years ago, however, the revolution paused — no new agricultural settlements seemed to pop up in Southeastern Europe around the time, existing communities declined, and the progress of civilization as a whole came to a standstill. Up until now, we didn’t have any inkling as to why this happened, but new research from the Senckenberg Biodiversity and Climate Research Centre, the Goethe University in Frankfurt, and the University of Toronto sheds some light on this mysterious period.

According to their findings, this lull in progress was due to an abrupt rise in sea levels in the northern Aegean Sea. Evidence of this event was calcified in the fossils of tiny marine algae preserved in seafloor sediments.

The impact this event had on societal dynamics and overall development during the time highlights the potential economic and social threats posed by sea level rise in the future, the team says. Given that climate-change-associated changes in sea level are virtually unavoidable, the team hopes their findings will help us better prepare for the flooding ahead.

“Approximately 7,600 years ago, the sea level must have risen abruptly in the Mediterranean regions bordering Southeastern Europe. The northern Aegean, the Marmara Sea and the Black Sea recorded an increase of more than one meter. This led to the flooding of low-lying coastal areas that would have been ideal areas for settlement,” says lead author Professor Dr. Jens Herrle.

The evidence supports a link between the two timeouts in the Neolithic revolution and the flooding events. The event 8,400 years ago coincides with archaeological findings suggesting that settlements in low-lying areas were under significant hardship from encroaching seas and other associated climatic changes. The renewed rise just 800 years later likely amplified these communities’ woes, keeping them from making the transition to agriculture.

“The source of this may have been Lake Agassiz in North America. This glacial meltwater lake was enclosed in ice and experienced a massive breach during this period, which emptied an enormous volume of water into the ocean.”

Past fluctuations in sea levels have already had a significant effect on human history during the early days of agriculture, the authors note, warning that it would be unwise to dismiss the challenges it will place in our path in the future.

"Humanity has contended with rising seas before — and it didn’t go well for us"

The article goes on to repeat the overly conservative estimate from the IPCC of a rise by up to "one meter over the next 100 years". That is the same IPCC that predicted the amount of ice depletion we have at present at the poles would not occur until 2070. That is the same IPCC that has NOT figured in the contribution of ice loss from Greenland to global sea level rise in any of the models.

So, if you are a logical person, I recommend you count on 3 to 6 meters, at least, of sea level rise several decades before the end of the century. As Peter Ward says (The Flooded Earth: Our Future In a World Without Ice Caps by Peter D. Ward]), over 25% of the world's arable land is near sea level and will be flooded. Most major airports along coastlines will be flooded. Every harbor facility in the world will require a staggering amount of land fill to raise them as the sea level goes up. Most coastal real estate, currently highly assessed in value, will be flooded and become worthless.     

By the way, the latest science indicates that rapid sea level rise will be accompanied by a large increase in volcanic eruptions (which might slow down the heating due to a temporary increase in aerosols), and and increase in earthquaqe activity. The volcanic aerosols, at most, will be a minor speed bump on the way to intolerable climate caos. So, please don't count on volcanic eruptions to 'save us' from global warming hell. That is wishful thinking.

I am not a voice "crying in the wilderness" on this issue. I will provide you some screenshots from the video of a scientist who recently wrote the book, "Waking the Climate Giant". He predicts a continued increase in volcanic activity, now observed in the data, due to terrain bounce from melting land ice and increased pressure on the surrounding seabed, as the the global average temperature increases. It's not the volcanoes that are increasing the heat, it's the greenhouse gases that are causing massive ice melt that, in turn, triggers earthquages and volcanic eruptions. Read his book if you disagree. I just watched the video but I think he is spot on.

On Earth, destructive climate change was not catastrophic before. The difference now it that the entire globe will be impacted. Humans have never lived on a planet with an average temperature of 3° C above pre-industrial. We will pass that mark up a half century before 2100 and continue towards PLUS 4° C and beyond, with no available technological or natural negative feedback mechanism to stop the continued acceleration, not slowing, of the rate of increase in temperature.

Already our atmosphere is being distorted by global warming to the point of pushing the dry subtropical bands on either side of the tropics towards their respective pole, thereby increasind drought conditions in highly populated areas and a large percentage of hitherto arable terrain.

SNIPPET from the February 2, 2016 article, "The mystery of the expanding tropics", by Olive Heffernan

As Earth's dry zones shift rapidly polewards, researchers are scrambling to figure out the cause — and consequences.

One spring day in 2004, Qiang Fu was poring over atmospheric data collected from satellites when he noticed an unusual and seemingly inexplicable pattern. In two belts on either side of the equator, the lower atmosphere was warming more than anywhere else on Earth. Fu, an atmospheric scientist at the University of Washington in Seattle, was puzzled.

It wasn't until a year later that he realized what he had discovered: evidence of a rapid expansion of the tropics, the region that encircles Earth's waist like a green belt. The heart of the tropics is lush, but the northern and southern edges are dry. And these parched borders are growing — expanding into the subtropics and pushing them towards the poles.

Tropical forest losses outpace UN estimates

Cities that currently sit just outside the tropics could soon be smack in the middle of the dry tropical edge. That's bad news for places like San Diego, California. “A shift of just one degree of latitude in southern California — that's enough to have a huge impact on those communities in terms of how much rain they will get,” explains climate modeller Thomas Reichler of the University of Utah in Salt Lake City.

Elsewhere, there is evidence that tropical expansion is affecting the ocean. Where the Hadley cell descends, bringing cool air downward, it energizes the ocean and whips up currents to high speeds. This energy powers the upwelling of cold, nutrient-rich waters towards the surface, which feeds some of the world's most productive fisheries. But there are hints that some of these regions are suffering because of shifts in the Hadley cell.

These upwelling zones could move south over time, or get weaker or stronger, depending on what happens to the Hadley cell, says Cook. In any case, it means that fishing communities that rely on these resources will not be able to count on traditional patterns.

On land, biodiversity is also potentially at risk. This is especially true for the climate zones just below the subtropics in South Africa and Australia, on the southern rim of both continents. In southwestern Australia, renowned as one of the world's biodiversity hotspots, flowers bloom during September, when tourists come to marvel at some of the region's 4,000 endemic plant species. But since the late 1970s, rainfall there has dropped by one-quarter. The same is true at South Africa's Cape Floristic Province, another frontier known for its floral beauty. “This is the most concrete evidence we have of tropical expansion,” says Steve Turton, an environmental geographer at James Cook University in Cairns, Australia.

Turton worries that the rate of change will be too rapid for these ecosystems to adapt. “We're talking about rapid expansion that's within half or a third of a human lifetime,” he says. In the worst-case scenario, the subtropics will overtake these ecologically rich outposts and the hotter, drier conditions will take a major toll.

The Mystery of the Expanding Tropics

Vermont is already experiencing the economy harming effects of climate change. A Vermonter, concerned about this, wrote about it. He has a right to be.

Watching Nature Collapse March 24th, 2018 by George Harvey

Sometimes it seems the best of everything is passing away.


A few years ago, someone threw a peach pit into shrubbery on the front yard of the house where I live. The tree that sprouted from the peach pit is now bearing fruit. Neighbors have paw-paw trees growing in their yards. But Vermont’s maple sugar industry, and the apple orchards, and the blueberry fields are all suffering. Vermont is fast becoming a place unlike what it has ever been, and it is not an improvement.

Watching Nature Collapse

Don't look at what he wrote as the "new normal" and just think we can 'adapt' to climate change by growing different crops and so on. This is the leading edge of climate that will soon, much sooner than many think, become intolerable for crop growing. We are not just on a treadmill moving in the wrong direction; our velocity on that deadly treadmill is increasing. Please keep that in mind so you are not lulled into thinking it would be 'nice' to grow palm trees in Burlington. Yes, the fossil fuel industry 🦖 does continue to try to pitch the 'warmer weather good' out of context propaganda happy talk. They'll do anything to keep their profit over people and planet suicide machine going. Stupid is as stupid does.

All these deleterious effects of Catastrophic Climate Change will continually get worse, not for a decade or so, but for over a century.

Temperatures unsuitable for human life are baked in for at least a couple of centuries, even if we stopped the insanity of constantly making things even worse by going on a crash program to stop burning fossil fuels. Yeah, we have to do that. Yeah, if we don't, we are all dead. But, regardless of what we do, it will take a while to catch up to all of us. I write this for those who, though sadly unable to stop the insane suicidal "business model" of the biosphere killing fossil fuel fascists, wish to survive as long as possible.

I wish to stress that, though many confused voices out there do not wish to face this, the one unifying aspect of the present threat 🌡️ to human civilization is Catastrophic Climate Change 🚩, NOT lack of fossil fuel based energy.

Have I got your attention? Good.

Then, look at this graphic from the Video, "Waking the Climate Giant", and ask yourself if it reflects our current situation:

The above graphic is already correct in its prediciton. In 2017 (the emissions data was for the years 2014, 2015 and 2016) the greenhouse gas emissions INCREASED. Consequently, there is a very, very high probability that the collapse of our civilization will occur much sooner than we think.

Some humans in different parts of the globe are already well acquainted with living on the edge of collapse. I am absolutely certain that many jungle tribes in Brazil, Ecuador and Peru, RIGHT NOW, live on the edge of starvation in a constant state of collapse, while most of the city dwellers nearby live not much better, but still avoid starvation.

My point in this quixotic exercise in hard truth logic is that the lack of food in the past has eventually triggered revolutions, not collapse of the civilization. It is after the social upheaval, when no solution to the lack of food problem is found, such as is in LONG WARS of aggression or extended harsh climate conditions, that collapse ensues.

People tend to fear other people more than deleterious climate. People can certainly be a threat to your life and stuff, but Catastrophic Climate Change is a much greater threat to everything you hold dear, past, present and future.

Catastrophic Climate Change is worse than a long war of aggression because it will last much longer than a human lifetime.

The climate change problem is intractable, but I believe some WILL beat it for maybe a century or so. For example, there are places near the equator with very high mountains. A world heated plus 4° C by around 2060, despite happy talk by certain wishful thinkers, will kill off most humans. BUT, in high mountains, the tree line will move way up while the temperature becomes temperate, even at the Equator. I stress the equator, though RE will vigorously disagree, because human civilization in a low food environment with over acidified seas (no easy fish or whales or seals to catch = NO ESKIMOS) with poor available sunlight is not a recipe for long term survival, even if the temperature is mild enough to grow crops.

There is a mountain in Ecuador (Chimborazo) about 20,000 feet high that will, because of the horrendously altered atmosphere, get plenty of rain even at high altitudes. There are several other candidates in the HIGH tropics around the world. This will enable the folks living there to grow enough food, thanks to an ABUNDANCE of sunlight all year round, with low tech methods. They just might be able to ride out the fossil fuel burning stupidity that dooms most of human civilization.

The tree line, the highest point on a mountain that trees will grow, varies between 5,000 feet and up to 13,000 feet above sea level. It varies so much mainly because of wind chill, though the length of the summer growing season is important as well. A tree in relatively mild wind conditions can grow all the way up to the maximum recorded tree line altitude at temperature well below freezing (down to minus 40° F =- 40° C  ;D), provided its roots can get enough water.

Trees can have liquid water in their tracheal elements at such low temperatures because of a wonderful combination of two factors. The first is that the 'pumping' mechanism of a tree is more a sucking mechanism than a pumping mechanism. The transpiration of water vapor into the atmosphere at the branch leaf pores creates negative pressure on the water molecules inside the tree (as long as the tracheal elements vacuum is not breached by air intrusion).

Water molecules, as they travel up the inside of tree, aided by capillary action as well as transpiration, can be stretched by as much as negative 25 atmospheres! That is how those Giant Sequoias can move up to a 130 gallons of water a day over a 100 feet vertically.

The second factor is that the water in the tracheal elements, in addition to being thoroughly stretched, is extremely pure. This prevents the crystalization of water around non-water substances that would normally trigger freezing at 0° C. But, when the wind is howling during below freezing temperatures, the wind chill can cause the water in the tree to freeze and eventually kill the tree.

The closer to the equator a high mountain tree is located, the longer it's growing season will be. If the growing season is too short, like in the White Mountains of New Hampshire, the tree line is only about 4,500 feet.

SNIPPET from an article about the Tree line:

The elevational limit of such suitable summer conditions varies by latitude. In Mexico, for example, treeline occurs somewhere around 13,000 feet, whereas farther north, in the Tetons, for instance, it occurs lower, at approximately 10,000 feet. Again, it’s a ragged line that may vary by hundreds of feet on any mountain, depending largely on shelter and exposure.

Because the elevational treeline is so closely tied to temperature, many suggest that it could be a particularly sensitive indicator of global climate change. Presumably, rising temperatures would increase the elevation of treeline in any locale, altering forest distribution and potentially ousting rare plant communities – and their inhabitants – that now exist above treeline. Although the specific physiological mechanism of treeline formation is not fully understood, there is growing photographic and other evidence of upward shifts in treelines worldwide.

Why Is the Treeline at a Higher Elevation in the Tetons than in the White Mountains?

A PLUS 4° C (and still going up) atmosphere by around 2060 will enable trees to grow at much higher altitudes. For every degree increase in average global temperature, a corresponding increase in humidity of at least 7% to 13% will take place. We will have an atmosphere expanding vertically, but also with increased humidity. This will accelerate warming because water vapor is a powerful greenhouse gas, but the good news is that high mountain areas will, in some areas, experience more rain higher up.

As noted at the beginning of this article, humans need water and other adequate growing conditions in order to have a viable civilization.

The Catastrophic Climate Changed world of 2060 will be a stormy place. The over acidified, mostly dead oceans, will be full of giant waves. The winds during storms will be off the charts in comparison to what we experience now. High up in the mountains, some type of barrier will need to be erected to keep the fierce winds from destroying the crops.

Finally, those hardy folks who carve out a life in year-round sunny high mountains will have to deal with UV radiation. It is a fact that, at present, the UV levels at around 10,000 ft. and above are particularly hazardous to humans.

However, with the expanded atmosphere in an overheated planet, this is the one area I see as hopeful for humans and animals living on very high mountains. You see, in said expanded atmosphere of plus 4° C and above, the massive increase in humidity will inhibit UV radiaiton.

Nevertheless. Since the equator alpine areas are infamous for high UV radiation, it would be prudent to plan to plant crops that have high UV tolerant foliage, like tubers. Hopefully, the greatly increased humidity will help protect the High Mountain Human Heroes.


Everyone is exposed to UV radiation from the sun and an increasing number of people are exposed to artificial sources used in industry, commerce and recreation. Emissions from the sun include visible light, heat and UV radiation.

The UV region covers the wavelength range 100-400 nm and is divided into three bands:

UVA (315-400 nm)
UVB (280-315 nm)
UVC (100-280 nm).

As sunlight passes through the atmosphere, all UVC and approximately 90% of UVB radiation is absorbed by ozone, water vapour, oxygen and carbon dioxide. UVA radiation is less affected by the atmosphere. Therefore, the UV radiation reaching the Earth’s surface is largely composed of UVA with a small UVB component.

Environmental factors that influence the UV level

Sun height—the higher the sun in the sky, the higher the UV radiation level. Thus UV radiation varies with time of day and time of year, with maximum levels occurring when the sun is at its maximum elevation, at around midday (solar noon) during the summer months.

Latitude—the closer the equator, the higher the UV radiation levels.  :(

Cloud cover— UV radiation levels are highest under cloudless skies. Even with cloud cover, UV radiation levels can be high due to the scattering of UV radiation by water molecules and fine particles in the atmosphere. :(

Altitude—at higher altitudes, a thinner atmosphere filters less UV radiation. With every 1000 metres increase in altitude, UV levels increase by 10% to 12%.


What do you think are the chances of human civilization achieving what the following graph says we HAVE TO DO?

There is NO WAY in God's (formerly good) Earth that we can avoid a climate that is almost entirely unsuitable for human life. The above graphic illustrates that. Anyone who thinks that we can do what needs to be done to avoid a PLUS 4° C (and above!) climate that will kill most humans and cause the extinction of thousands of other vertebrate species is engaging in magical thinking.  >:( 

ALL the people near the surface in the tropics will die as crispy critters, period. Those in temperate zones will perish too. Those near the poles who live near the surface will last as long as the food they have lasts. Unless they can maintain some geothermally heated and powered high tech greenhouse CITY that includes PLENTY of crop growing quality light and plenty of water, they will die too.

I might add that those greenhouse giant domes, both near the poles ond on high equatorial mountains, had better be MASSIVELY strong. The storms that will visit them and the wind speeds they will face in a PLUS 4 ° C planet  will make any recent hurricane look like a gentle breeze.

In Antarctica, some vegetables have now been (sort of) successfully grown.


These Antarctic vegetables were grown without pesticides, daylight, or even soil — but they look absolutely delicious.

Various vegetables which were harvested from the EDEN-ISS greenhouse at the Neumayer-Station III on Antarctica. Image credits: DLR

Germany’s southernmost workplace, the Neumayer-Station III, has harvested the first crop of Antarctic vegetables. Biologists report that they’ve successfully grown 3.6 kilograms (8 pounds) of salad greens, 18 cucumbers and 70 radishes grown inside a high-tech greenhouse, as temperatures around the research station were plummeting to -20 degrees Celsius (-4 Fahrenheit).

The plants were grown without soil, in a closed-water circle. No outside lighting was used — instead, researchers optimized and used an LED system. The carbon dioxide cycle was also closely monitored.

While this is a solid crop already, researchers are expecting much more in the future. The German Aerospace Center DLR, which coordinates the project, said that in the coming months, they expect to harvest 4-5 kilograms of fruit and vegetables a week.

Image shows engineer Paul Zabel with fresh salad he harvested in the EDEN-ISS greenhouse at the Neumayer-Station III on Antarctica. The project with — instead of soil — a closed water cycle, optimized lightning and carbon dioxide levels is a test of what may become part of the nutrition program for astronauts in future moon or Mars missions. Image credits: DLR.

Full article: Scientists harvest first batch of Antarctic vegetables

I am skeptical of the nutritive value of crops grown this way. Though it is good to know they used no pesticdes, the article says nothing about any nutritive mineral analysis of these vegetables, so there is no evidence yet that this is a sustainable crop growing method in a harsh climate changed plus 4 degrees C world.

The article ends with optimistic talk about using the above technique (and similar techniques like they use in the International Space Station) to eventually grow food in spaceships and on other planets.

Within a decade or less, successfully growing food near the poles will be far more important for the survival of humanity here on earth than in space or on some other planet. 

Speaking of activity near the poles to deal with Climate Change, Iceland is one of the few places on Earth that are seeing benefits from Climate Change. They may be destined to be one of the outposts of humanity in an increasingly overheated world.

Now they are planting evergreens 🌱 🌲.
But, if we do not reverse the overheating trend, they will eventually have to plant these: 🌴  :P

Vikings cleared the forests, now Iceland is bringing them back

Even with laudable efforts like the forest planting project in Iceland, humanity needs to do far, far more to survive.

We will need gigantic, and I mean "miles in diameter" GIGANTIC, greenhouses to get a reasonable amount of food grown near the poles and/or on the equatorial mountains.

The giant greenhouse domes situated in the high equatorial mountains would have to be something like the U.K. Eden Project Domes, but way up high on a mountain. In England they have an enclosed rainforest in these domes. They need to be ten or twenty times bigger for an equatorial alpine community. If the post collapse alpine community could control the atmospheric pressure in the giant domes, more UV protection is guaranteed and more comfortable living for humans too.

For those still worried about fellow humans trying to kill you for your stuff, remember that high mountains are a natural defense against warlike humans during the initial phases of the Climate Change Caused Collapse. The heat lower down will eliminate any human threat after a couple of decades. 

STOP thinking you are going to live on planet that has the remotest resemblance to the one you have lived in all your life. THAT is WISHFUL THINKING! The LEAST of your problems is going to be worrying about the "zombie" humans getting your stuff.

NOTE: I pose these issues for your discussion. I will not argue the merits of them beyond this comment. If you disagree with anything I said, then you are entitled to be as wrong as you like.  ;D  :D 
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: March 23, 2018, 02:36:00 pm »

Blog Article!  :icon_sunny:

Fill it out a bit more and send to me in PM without all the fancy fonts.


Let me ponder this for a while.  8)
I suppose I could gather a bunch of screenshots from Google earth of potential crop growing high mountain areas, check out the tree line during the Eemian period, scrounge around for some LARGE greenhouse pictures (with zombies looking in - just kidding!) and this and that.  I'll get back to you.

I cover a little of Mountain growing in my next Sunday Brunch article.  It's only tangential though.  Your article might provide a good followup to that.


Good. I'll work on it.  8)
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: March 22, 2018, 09:48:36 pm »

Blog Article!   

Fill it out a bit more and send to me in PM without all the fancy fonts.


Let me ponder this for a while.  8)
I suppose I could gather a bunch of screenshots from Google earth of potential crop growing high mountain areas, check out the tree line during the Eemian period, scrounge around for some LARGE greenhouse pictures (with zombies looking in - just kidding!) and this and that.  I'll get back to you.
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: March 22, 2018, 09:05:06 pm »

During many periods in human history, some were doing just fine and others lived on the edge of starvation in a constant state of collapse.

The one unifying aspect of the present threat to human civilization is Catastrophic Climate Change, NOT lack of fossil fuel based energy.

I am absolutely certain that many jungle tribes in Brazil, Ecuador and Peru RIGHT NOW live on the edge of starvation in a constant state of collapse, while most of the city dwellers live not much better, but still avoid starvation.

My point in this quixotic exercise in hard truth logic is that the lack of food in the past has eventually triggered revolutions, not collapse of the civilization. LONG WARS of aggression are what have actually triggered collapse.

Catastrophic Climate Change is worse than a long war of aggression because it will last much longer than a human lifetime.

The climate change problem is intractable, but some WILL beat it for maybe a century or so. For example, there are places near the equator with very high mountains. A world heated plus 4 ° C by around 2060, despite happy talk by certain wishful thinkers, will kill off most humans. BUT, in high mountains, the tree line will move way up while the temperature becomes temperate, even at the Equator. I stress the equator, though RE will vigorously disagree, because human civilization in a low food environment with over acidified seas (no easy fish or whales or seals to catch = NO ESKIMOS) with poor available sunlight is not a recipe for long term survival, even if the temperature is mild enough to grow crops.

There is a mountain in Ecuador (Chimborazo) about 20,000 feet high that will, because of the horrendously altered atmosphere, get plenty of rain even at high altitudes. There are several other candidates in the HIGH tropics around the world. This will enable the folks living there to grow enough food, thanks to an ABUNDANCE of sunlight all year round, with low tech methods. They just might be able to ride out the fossil fuel burning stupidity that dooms most of human civilization.

ALL the people near the surface in the tropics will die as crispy critters, period. Those in temperate zones will perish too. Those near the poles who live near the surface will last as long as the food they have lasts. Unless they can maintain some geothermally heated and powered high tech greenhouse CITY that includes PLENTY of crop growing quality light and plenty of water, they will die too. I might add that those greenhouse giant domes had better be MASSIVELY strong. The storms that will visit them and the wind speeds they will face in a PLUS 4 ° C planet  will make any recent hurricane look like a gentle breeze.

STOP thinking you are going to live on planet that has the remotest resemblance to the one you have lived in all your life. THAT is WISHFUL THINKING! The LEAST of your problems is going to be worrying about the "zombie" humans getting your stuff.

NOTE: I pose these issues for your discussion. I will not argue the merits of them beyond this comment. If you disagree with anything I said, then you are entitled to be as wrong as you like.  ;D  :D 

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: March 12, 2018, 05:18:43 pm »

I admire his push to get off the planet as a technical achievement, but I share your opinion that it is not presently doable in any sustainable way. When everything goes to hell in a handbasket here, the Mars colonists will get no help from Earth and will perish, PERIOD.

It is quite difficult for me, utilizing the small amount of knowledge about Elon known to me, to consider it even remotely possible that he is  not aware of and has a plan to deal with this problem.
Bezos, Hawkings, Branson and others who view this is viable as well.

They are hardly likely to have a plan that makes them dependent on an entity they feel is doomed.

While extremely skeptical myself of the success of the endevour, this idea is even more improbable to me.

Time will tell. Musk would not be the first genius that bit off more than he could chew. If he can pull off the Mars thing, more power to him. I give him the benefit of the doubt but I am pessimistic about any hope for an off planet solution to mankind's fouling of the nest problem.

How do you propose to avoid the pitfalls of being the smartest guy in the room? How do you ensure the high IQ folks don't start believing the Darwinian bullshit that they are "better" than the grunts, unless the society you set up is 100% equal pay, equal privilege, equal opportunities and equal food and housing? Is your vision that of a horizontal power structure? If so, I support it.

I have always supported equal pay for equal work.

Look, it is simply ridiculous to say LD does not work as hard as Eddie or is not as Motivated as he is,  but LD gets paid about 10% what Eddie gets paid.  Why?  Because Eddie works in a gated profession that selects for "smart guys", and there aren't many Dentists because of that, but there are a s h i t load of truck drivers all competing for jobs.    Eddie benefits from being part of a Criminal Racket.  He won't ever acknowledge that of course, but it is the truth.

How do you prevent this sort of abuse from occuring?  First off, you get rid of the gate keeping.  Second, you keep the society small enough so everyone realizes that they depend on everyone else for survival.  Sanitation workers contribute more to your overall health than a doctor ever will, but they also are paid a fraction fo the salary that a "doctor" ( read that QUACK 🦆) is paid.  Traders on Wall Street contribute ZERO to the society, but get paid more than ANYBODY!  Does this make sense to you?  It doesn't to me.


GREAT post! 

THe Wall Street insanity certainly DOESN'T make sense to me. It's a joke to anybody that has studied the stock market that we "need" brokers. You don't need a broker to buy a car or a house or whatever. The broker fee "requirement" is, and always was legalized highway robbery.

In regard to human health, Thom Hartmann recently came from a trip to Cuba (not a toursit trip, which is currently not allowed, but an official visit by some approved organization). He was gobsmaked by the perfect teeth he saw everywhere in Cuba, as opposed to the MANY Amercans he runs into in the USA with poor dentition and/or missing teeth due to the unaffordability of dental health care.

Health care should be paid by we-the-people for ALL aspects of human health. I certainly do agree that, regardless of how many years of study you put in, work should be your vocation, not some stepping stone to riches. That said, hard working people like Eddie should not have to buy their equipment (horrendously expensive drills. lazers, specialized chairs, etc) OR pay for office rent. The government SHOULD provide ALL of that and pay the professional a decent income with six weeks vacation a year, in addition to family leave for pregnancies and/or funerals plus child activities like field trips and other government funded mentoring activities to strengthen family ties.
But this country went the dog eat dog Darwinian route. That is why things are so messed up. Socialism with horizontal power distribution with 100% democracy and no hierarchichal pecking order of poobahs that prey on the rest of us is the answer. I do not see that happening any time soon.  :(

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: March 11, 2018, 08:17:11 pm »

Don't tell me you would not try to stock your own Dunbar (150 to 200 humans) tribe with the highest IQ people, because I KNOW you would.

And you would be wrong, if you have read my stuff in detail.  A society doesn't need or even really want many "High IQ" people.  Who does the grunt work if everyone is a **** GENIUS?  Besides, it's the geniuses like Elon that got us into this mess in the first place.  ::)


The Fossil Fuel Geniuses like Rockefeller 😈 are the ones who REALLY got us into this mess!

Good for you if you would really put those proper principles to work, given the money and the time to set up a Dunbar number based community. But, I think you are dodging the issue. Don't tell me robots cannot do the grunt work, because they can. Those robots will work just fine in a total collapse. They actually  have fewer energy needs than humans do. A human has to eat, a rather inefficent way of getting energy. The robot gets his "food" from a solar panel that charges his lithium batteries. Yes, you will claim the robots will rust and the community does not have the industrial infrastructure to make new ones so Agelbert is wrong and RE still needs lots of average intelligence grunts.

Even so, you are assuming that there will be a hierarchy, are you not? You are assuming that the people in command at the top will be the high IQ folks. Well, that is wrong too. Power corrupts. 👎

I know you have written about the gift economy and I think it is an excellent and equitable form of economic structure. But, I am convinced that works ONLY if EVERYONE has the SAME standing in the community.

The "Lord of the Manor" thing leads to corruption, cruelty, inequality AND dynasties of elitists. All that STARTS with a pecking order based on some criteria. Sometimes that has been brute strength, but often it is high intelligence combined with strength.

How do you propose to avoid the pitfalls of being the smartest guy in the room? How do you ensure the high IQ folks don't start believing the Darwinian bullshit that they are "better" than the grunts, unless the society you set up is 100% equal pay, equal privilege, equal opportunities and equal food and housing (with LOTS of guarantees that it stays that way from one generation to the next)? Is your vision that of a horizontal power structure? If so, I support it.

That is certainly not what Musk envisions. That's another reason I do not think his idea of a Mars colony makes sense.
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: March 11, 2018, 07:46:40 pm »

Elon Musk thinks there is.  We will get there in space travelling Teslas.  ::)



Elon Musk wants to preserve humanity in space

Musk tells the crowd at SXSW that when the next dark age descends, we need some humans stashed on the moon and Mars to keep going.

by  Erin Carson

March 11, 2018 12:20 PM PDT

Elon Musk wants to save humanity.

That is, in part, what his quest to establish bases on the moon and Mars is about.

"There's likely to be another dark age," he told the crowd Sunday at the South By Southwest festival. Particularly if there's another World War in our future, we need to make sure "there's enough of a seed of human civilization to bring human civilization back."

While Musk was quick to say he's not exactly making a prediction, he does feel we need to get going before World War III rolls around.

This was just some of the ground Musk covered with moderator Jonathan Nolan, co-creator of HBO's "Westworld." Musk, who is the founder of multiple companies, including SpaceX, Tesla and the Boring Company, is tackling some of the biggest challenges and technological advances of the modern age, like space travel and autonomous vehicles. He made a two-day stop at SXSW to talk about his work. He also appeared on Saturday at the end of a panel with the cast and show creators of the HBO series "Westworld."

But Musk's not just thinking about doom and gloom. He's also thinking about the night life on Mars.

"Mars will need everything from iron foundries to pizza joints to nightclubs. Mars should really have great bars," he said.

Getting to that point hasn't been easy -- he said early on that SpaceX almost didn't survive. He had to borrow money from friends to keep going.

"For SpaceX, the first three launches failed. If the fourth launch had failed, we would have been dead," he said.

The big focus right now, thought, is just building the spaceship -- code named the BFR. (Read into that what you will, he said.) Musk wants to see the rocket take short flights up and down in the first half of next year.

There's also the topic of artificial intelligence. Musk's been known to express concerns that AI could bring about the next World War and Sunday's Q&A was no different.

"AI scares the hell out of me," he said, telling Nolan that while he's not typically a fan of regulation, he feels AI is more dangerous than nuclear weapons and it's not like we let just anyone build nukes.

It's important to make sure the dawn of AI is one that's symbiotic with humanity.

Whether an AI-induced third World War is what drives us off the planet, he didn't say.

But hey, the salvation of humanity might just come with Martian pizza joints.

Blockchain Decoded: CNET looks at the tech powering bitcoin -- and soon, too, a myriad services that will change your life.

'Alexa, be more human': Inside Amazon's effort to make its voice assistant smarter, chattier and more like you.

I get what Musk is trying to do. He has done the BIOSPHERE math on the way things DYSFUNCTION, thanks to the polluting energy and chemical industry loving oligarchs  who run the place, in human society on planet earth. He sees quite well the tragic trajectory we are on , despite the best efforts of people like him and all the others out there who understad how routinely the precautionary principle of science is being bent, spindled and mutilated on behalf of short term profit.

He understands, like few here, what Catastrophic Climate Change is, how long it will last (from 200 to 800 years, optimistically thinking) AFTER human civilization goes into the dark age of massive die off misery that is almost upon us. I believe he thinks that a colony on Mars, which he expects will grow and prosper, can create an off planet sanctuary to weather the climate storm coming here. In a nutshell, he just doesn't want us to have all our DNA in a one planet basket.

But you must remember, RE, that Musk is NOT a God fearing 🕊 socialist like me. Musk is an atheist and a Capitalist. That said, I am on the same page as he is in certainly NOT expecting God to intervene to save us from ourselves. I admire his push to get off the planet as a technical achievement, but I share your opinion that it is not presently doable in any sustainable way. When everything goes to hell in a handbasket here, the Mars colonists will get no help from Earth and will perish, PERIOD.

There are other areas I part company with Musk, though I continue to entusiastically support his EV manufacturing corporation as a much needed boost to sustainable, non-polluting transportation transition because it is the only viable type (i.e. based exclusively on renewable energy) of tranportation in a finite world.

Back to the Mars colony thing, Musk wants to preserve a certain segment of human society, and doesn't give a rat's patutie about the rest. He is not racist, but he is elitist. In that, I think YOU are on the same page as he is. Don't tell me you would not try to stock your own Dunbar (150 to 200 humans) tribe with the highest IQ people, because I KNOW you would. And that is just WRONG.

Musk was trained in the 'lifeboat in the ocean' type atheist "logic". YOU share the same "logic". That logic calmly explains (and this is taught in every school in the USA from the 6th or seventh grade on 👎) that it is LOGICAL to NOT let all the people in the ocean who want to get into the lifeboat (i.e. let them drown) because that is the "ONLY WAY" that those in the lifeboat can properly husband their resources and thereby increase their evolutionary advantage to survive.


The extreme example of a lifeboat in an ocean is used to brutally apply greed based cruelty to all humans in the biosphere. Not only is that a fallacious rationale, it is typical CRAP that Darwin and the Germans and lots of people in the USA (1880s trough the 1930's) used to "justify" eugenics ☠️ atrocities. The whole "lifeboat" thing is an EXCUSE to JUSTIFY empathy deficit disordered EVIL behavior!

Yes, it's true that resources on our planet are finite and human population pressure can hurt human society. But, there have always been humane ways to manage human greed and provide decent management of all of the biosphere we depend on. It has been the few NOW in the "lifeboat" of privilege, not those "drowning in the "water" of a polluted world, that CAUSED THE CATASTROPHIC CLIMATE CHANGE PROBLEM.

Musk does not see that. He does not see that those scientifically picked colonist high IQ "Einsteins" he wants to use to populate Mars (to make his "Brave New World") CARRY THE GREED DISEASE OF DESTRUCTION WITH THEM.

So I agree with you that Musk is wasting his time trying to extend human civilization to Mars or any other extra-terrestrial location.

Musk may privately wish, like those "logical" folks in the lifeboat, that he could "save them all", but he has decided to let them drown because they are part of a failed civilization he wishes to be divorced from...

We cannot go to the stars until we learn how to avoid FOULING OUR NEST (i.e. SHITTING WHERE WE EAT), PERIOD. 

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: March 03, 2018, 03:42:58 pm »

Agelbert NOTE: Just for the Hell of it, HERE are some recent Fossil Fuel BOOM (AND WORLDWIDE ECONOMY BOOM) EVIDENCE articles Palloy, and all those who labor under the PATHETIC belief that a 'collapse of civilization from LACK of fossil fuels will save us from the horrendously deleterious existential threat of Catastrophic Climate Change' , DON'T READ. 

Supertankers Sailing from U.S. to Cut Time, Money and Traders

February 26, 2018 by Bloomberg


The first fully laden supertanker sailed from America earlier this month, leaving for China from LOOP’s deep-water facility — the only one in the U.S. capable of filling some of the industry’s biggest tankers. In the wake of an end to a four decade-ban on exports and as OPEC curbed output to clear a glut, a stream of shipments from the Gulf Coast headed east as major buyers such as India and South Korea looked farther for supplies.

Full article:


How Shell Hid a ‘Whale’ Well Before Placing Mexican Oil Bet

March 2, 2018 by Reuters

SNIPPET for the brain impaired true believers  in 'peak oil':

The company, like many of its peers, was forced to dramatically slash spending in recent years because of weak oil prices, with its exploration budgets hit particularly hard. Now that prices have recovered to a near three-year high of around $65 a barrel, firms feel more confident to once again invest in expensive offshore developments.

Shell owns a 60 percent stake in the Whale discovery with the remaining 40 percent held by Chevron, which is mainly shale-focused.

The reservoir is located in the Perdido area, which has become a heartland of Shell’s deepwater activities in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico.

Full article:


Tanker Operator, Master Plead Guilty to Oil and Garbage Dumping Crimes in U.S.

February 27, 2018 by gCaptain


DP World May Develop $1.2 Billion Port at Banana on Congo Coast

March 2, 2018 by Bloomberg


Trump Administration Sets March Date for Largest Oil and Gas Lease Auction in U.S. History

February 16, 2018 by Reuters


The Interior Department said it would offer 77.3 million acres (31.3 mln hectares) offshore Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama and Florida for oil and gas development, an auction that includes all available unleased areas in the Gulf of Mexico. The blocks are from 3 to 231 miles (5 to 372 km) offshore and in waters 9 to 11,115 feet (3 to 3,390 meters) deep.

full article:


NGO Shipbreaking Platform: 80% of Tonnage Sold for Scrap in 2017 Ended Up on South Asia’s Beaches

February 22, 2018 by Mike Schuler


U.S. drillers boost oil rig count to highest nearly three years: Baker Hughes



PHOTOS: Teekay’s New Icebreaker LNG Carrier ‘Eduard Toll’

November 10, 2017 by Mike Schuler

SNIPPET for Palloy (and anyone else who shares his fantasy filled world view) who claims "you can't say Russia is outputting more FF because because, uh, Russia does not publish their Fossil Fuel production levels".   

Construction of the Eduard Toll began in early 2016 at the DSME shipyard in South Korea.

The vessel is the first of Teekay LNG Partners’ six 172,000 cubic meter ARC7 LNG carrier newbuildings to be constructed for the Yamal LNG project in the Russian Arctic.

Yamal is expected to produce 16.5 million metric tons of LNG annually by 2019, which will require a total of 15 ARC7 icebreaker LNG carriers. The first shipment from the project is planned for this month, with the receiver rumored to be China.

full article:


Gulf Coast Shipping Boom: U.S. Oil Exports Pour Into Worldwide Markets

February 8, 2018 by Reuters

SNIPPET for those poor wishful thinking fools who think less fossil fuels are being produced because, uh, we are 'running out' (any day now, yep, sure, right...):

Between 2010 and 2017, U.S. oil production rose from 5.5 million barrels a day to 10 million bpd – approaching a record set in 1970 – as shale fields in west Texas and North Dakota lured massive new drilling investments. That brings national production in line with Saudi Arabia and close to top-producer Russia’s 10.9 million barrels a day.

Saudi Arabia cut output last year as part of OPEC’s 2016 deal to reduce supply – after losing a price war with U.S. shale producers that created a global glut.

Most forecasts show U.S. crude output growing about 500,000 to 600,000 barrels per day through the end of 2018, said David Fyfe, chief economist at global commodity trading firm Gunvor Group in Geneva, Switzerland. The U.S. Energy Department is even more optimistic, now expecting growth to rise by 1.2 million bpd – hitting 11 million bpd by year-end.

full article:


Agelbert NOTE: What does all the above have to do with the claim I have made SEVERAL TIMES (Reality is WORSE than the WORSE CASE BAU RCP-8.5 IPCC scenario! ) , that Palloy always tries to hair split his way around? 

It's all about Radiative Forcing, folks. That "8.5" number on the Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP) stands for approximately 8.5 watts per square meter.  We are NOW getting MORE THAN THAT. We will NOT get LESS than that for over TWO HUNDRED YEARS, even if we stopped burning fossil fuels TODAY.

Palloy cannot accept that scientifically predicted HARD REALITY. The reason he cannot accept that is because, if he did, he would realize that a civilizational collapse from 'lack of fossil fuels' (LOL!) is not going to do a God Damned THING to slow down the Sixth Great Extinction we are now in. So, he makes happy talk stuff up about the IPCC models that simply DO NOT NOW, and never have, accounted for in order to keep pushing his 'collapse will save us' happy talk. This Happy Talk is nothing but an unprincipled and heinous back door defense of the fossil fuel profit over planet polluting 🦖 status quo , PERIOD.

IPCC RCP 8.5 business as usual scenario is too conservative. ALL the climate models low ball global warming (see below).

Agelbert NOTE: The problem humanity has is NOT lack of hydrocarbons; it is the adamant and totally unreasonable refusal to accept the FACT that we have ALREADY exceeded the "carbon budget" for a FOUR DEGREE C rise in average global temperature, never mind a TWO DEGREE C "target".

The worse case scenario the IPCC came up with (BAU RCP-8.5) is too conservative a projection of the heat increase (it is MUCH, MUCH WORSE!).
Climate Dynamics:
Facing the Harsh Realities of Now

Climate Sensitivity, Target Temperature & the Carbon Budget
Guidelines for Strategic Action

Apollo-Gaia Project

Director: David Wasdell

It is with the utmost concern that we draw your attention to the fundamental methodological flaw in the determination of the value of Climate Sensitivity that is embedded in the Summary for Policymakers of the Scientific Workgroup of the 5th Assessment Report of the IPCC. The error was replicated in the Reports of Workgroups 2 and 3 and carried forward into the Synthesis Report. It has been used as the given basis for every subsequent publication. Our radical analysis of Climate Dynamics has generated a new and robust value of "Earth System Sensitivity" which has profound implications for:

֍ The relationship between temperature change and cumulative carbon emissions.

֍ The calculation of "available carbon budget".

֍ The evaluation of the INDCs.

֍ The terms of reference of COP21 in Paris (30 November - 11 December 2015).

֍ The future global strategy for climate stabilisation.
Our analysis is published in dual media (triple-screen video and fully illustrated PDF). These can be used separately or in combination.

Video of the above and Table of Contents at link below.

Agelbert NOTE: If you care about humanity, you will watch it and pass it on to friends and family. If, because you have been paid or propagandized to think the continued burning of fossil fuels is "good for mankind", you either don't watch it, or do watch it so you can to claim "it is global warming hoax" propaganda (or if if you are more "sophisticated", like certain pseudo-scientists who claim IPCC scenarios "have taken all the possible warming feedback loops into consideration in the models and we can keep burning fossil fuels for a few more decades"), you doom yourself and future generations (i.e. you are willfully stupid).

Don't be stupid. The fossil fuel industry murdering crooks and liars do not own you.


Anyone telling you that fossil fuels are "running out" needs to read the published figures from the oil and gas producing nations of this planet. The emissions are INCREASING, NOT "leveling off or decreasing". PLUS, tropical rain forests AND permafrost melt are now ADDING to the carbon emissions! GHG is GHG. no matter where it is coming from! You are NOT going to turn this heat engine off easily. Several heat adding feedbacks we have triggered by burning too much fossil fuels are NOT in our control, PERIOD.

Where in God's good earth these fossil fueler wishful thinking FOOLS think that we are somehow going to get a handle on this massive heating NOW IN THE Global Warming radiative forcing INERTIA pipeline, even if we stopped all hydrocarbon burning today (rather than the present tragic reality of increased burning), is a mystery to me. They certainly DO NOT get this idea from empirical evidence or sound science.

This stubborn clinging to a happy talk myth about some "quick recovery from fossil fuel burning caused globle warming" is a testament to the extremes people in denial of an extinction threat reality will go to. 

And for the propagandist liars that know the truth and push the happy talk for money, I can only say that they are greater fools than those naive folks that believe the fossil fuel fascist funded happy talk lies and distortions. These bought and paid for propagandists are behaving as STUPIDLY as any person possibly can. You STUPID, MONEY LOVING BASTARDS deserve the Darwin Evolutionary Dead End Award.


The Fossil Fuelers 🦖 DID THE Clean Energy  Inventions suppressing, Climate Trashing, human health depleting CRIME,   but since they have ALWAYS BEEN liars and conscience free crooks 🦀, they are trying to AVOID   DOING THE TIME or     PAYING THE FINE!     Don't let them get away with it! Pass it on!   

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: March 02, 2018, 08:54:20 pm »

BAU annual FF production in the worse case IPCC scenarios (including IPCC RCP-8.5) is LESS than what is NOW BEING PRODUCED annually WORLDWIDE!

If you can cite references to that, I will stop being annoying, but I don't think you can for 3 reasons: 
Because Russia doesn't give out its FF production data publicly, the EIA ESTIMATES it, based on FF industry "knowledge". Because Saudi Arabia and other ME countries outright lie about their figures.
Because IPCC models are driven off decadal estimates of FF burnt.

I'm not your employee. If you are serious about learning the truth, subscribe to GCaptain (it's free). They cheerlead all sorts of polluting energy and shipping, along with an occasional article on Renewable Energy technology. That's where I learned about the Panama Canal LNG increase in activity and all those NEW LNG ice breakers that Russia is building (for some reason that you can't seem to relate to MORE FF production).

Here's a recent article:


They have their pulse on world shipping, energy production, and cargo capacity. The only article they posted that gives some hope for reduced FF production, among a tsunami of articles over the past year of massive increases in fossil fuel production AND upstream exploitation of NEW FF finds, is the fact that the Schlumberger pigs are getting out of the seismic ocean business (used to find more oil and gas). They are the big dogs in that but there are other polluting pigs who are NOT slowing down, but speeding up, especially in the ocean deposit LNG exploitation. This month the largest sale of leases for oil and gas exploration in the HISTORY of the USA for the Gulf of Mexico will be auctioned by the Trump Tools of the Fossil Fuel Fascists. I read that in GCaptain recently. Now if you think that portends anything but a MASSIVE INCREASE in exploitation for ,and production of, fossil fuels, you need psychological counseling.

Paul Beckwith's web site is also a good place for the truth about climate change and the IPCC scenario shortcomings (otherwise know as Happy Talk). He pulls no punches and gets into the math. So, you can argue with him all you want. I guarantee you that he will carve you up like a thanksgiving turkey.

I know the truth about the short AND long term effects of the ongoing massive GHG production increase, the IPCC scenario faults and how the world economy is in a boost phase, NOT a 'shrinking bordering on collapse' phase, and do not need to prove anything at all to you.

My numerous posts on this issue have been consistently questioned by you. To me, you have no credibility as an objective person or a disinterested party. Frankly, I do not care if you believe your fantasy. I once did care and tried to patiently, and with irrefutable sources, explain the existential threat we are under to you, but your irrational responses to my posts convinced me that you lack objectivity, to put it as charitably as I can.

If you want to believe a YUGE COLLAPSE is just around the corner, go for it. If you want to believe said 'collapse' is going to make all those pesky GHG atmospheric heaters 'go away' because we are all hunting bugs with spears in the jungle, go for it. Who am I to keep you from going nuts?

Have a nice day.

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: March 02, 2018, 06:01:38 pm »

Planet at "very high risk" for extreme warming

That says we will have +1.5°C by 2040, but doesn't say what amount of FFs will be burned up till then (presumably lots).  This is where the error slips in - it implies there will be no World Peak Crude Oil before 2040, which what the BAU-worshipping media want you to believe.  Even with the active help of PotUS, CONgress and MSM, they can't make it happen.

Do you ever get tired of repeating the same mendacious happy talk over and over?

Do some research and learn a thing or two. LNG production has gone through the ROOF, with no end in sight! BAU annual FF production in the worse case IPCC scenarios (including IPCC RCP-8.5) is LESS than what is NOW BEING PRODUCED annually WORLDWIDE! That's right! NONE of the projections in the models expected the massive produciton levels we are NOW at. The USA is on it's way to being the largest exporter of fossil fuels on this horrendously polluted planet.

GET OVER yourself and your pathetic view that a collapse of human civilization will "save" the biosphere. There is NO collapse anywhere in sight! The Panama Canal more than tripled its LNG ship movement last year. Container ships had a BANNER year in cargo. Crude Oil Tankers are going NUTS carrying crude all over the planet. Are you INSANE!!? Do you have any idea how much METHANE, otherwise known as "natural" (LOL!) gas, is going to be EASY to extract from an ice free arctic? Did you know that Russia is COUNTING on and PLANNING ON DOING THAT? Of course you DON'T! Because you don't want to accept that your beloved polluting fossil fuel CRAP ISN'T RUNNING OUT ANY TIME SOON.

You can be as reality challenged as you wish, Palloy. There is nothing I can do about your rather extreme irrationality.

Unlike you, I face facts. I am not happy about those facts. BUT, I don't go around spreading happy talk BULLSHIT to deny the horrendously destructive trajectory we are on. Have a nice day.
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: March 02, 2018, 01:53:36 pm »

Clean energy won't happen  :(, climate change will be bad: a contrarian perspective

John Voelcker

22 Comments Mar 2, 2018

The most recent detailed studies on the likely warming of Planet Earth are grim indeed, suggesting that we are collectively at "very high risk" for the most extreme effects of climate change.

To stem that, mankind collectively will have to reduce its ongoing emissions of carbon dioxide radically and immediately.

Now, one longtime advocate of climate-change action has essentially thrown up his hands and said, it's not going to happen.

DON'T MISS: Planet at "very high risk" for extreme warming, per leaked UN report; every 5-year delay matters

It's a sobering piece of reading, but it's also an essay that anyone concerned about energy, emissions, climate change, and the planet we leave to our grandchildren should read.

The title says it all: "I'm no longer advocating for clean energy; here's why."

J.M. Korhonen is a longtime Finnish advocate for renewable energy to stem carbon emissions and the future effects of climate change.

He's followed these related issues for 10 years, and written about them since 2010.

"I think the debate is going nowhere, and I don’t want to waste my time on a futile project," he writes.

"We are not going to get a decarbonized energy system by 2050." (The emphasis is his.)

READ THIS: Most-accurate climate-change models suggest worst effects on global weather

He believes mankind will fail to limit emissions enough to limit global temperature increase to the 2 degree C reduction scientists say is required to limit the worst effects of climate change.

In fact, he says, we will miss it by a significant margin, and those effects may be exacerbated by self-amplifying feedback mechanisms.

We will fail because we've been "lulled into optimistic complacency" that renewable energy is just around the corner—and he believes it isn't, and won't be, in sufficient amounts and soon enough.

What that will mean, he says, is "difficult to assess," he says. "But I doubt it's going to be anything good for the vast majority" of humankind.

"The global poor will suffer the most, while we here in the rich North may be able—at least in the short term—to insulate ourselves from the worst effects and retreat to our own virtual bubbles to avoid hearing the cries of the others."

CHECK OUT: Earth continues to warm, fast; is climate change lost in political turmoil?

It's not easy or pleasant reading, but it's something very worth considering. Happy Friday.   :(

Hat tip: Ye Wang

Green Car Reports respectfully reminds its readers that the scientific validity of climate change is not a topic for debate  in our comments. We ask that any comments by climate-change denialists 🦍 be flagged for moderation. We also ask that political discussions be restricted to the topic of the article they follow. Thank you in advance for helping us keep our comments on topic, civil, respectful, family-friendly, and fact-based.


Agelbert NOTE:
Here's the deal, folks: We are being eaten alive by zombies of the profit over people and planet nature. They ARE zombies because they aren't really alive, consistently kill portions of the biosphere in order to continue functioning, and see THAT BEHAVIOR 🦀 (i.e. 100% unscrupulous and unprincipled) as sine qua non  to being a "rational apex predator" entity.

There is one more aspect of the fossil fuel fascist parasitical mindset that makes them virtual zombies that inhabit our nightmares AND out daily lives: THE FACT that they have a corrupting influence on our financial decisions due to the dividends many of us HERE have obtained from planet polluting, war causing, people and animal killing, BIG OIL AND GAS CORPORATION STOCKS.

THe "zombie" meme, often used in literature to make a point about how we are on the path to species destruction, looks like a human, instead of some other life form, for a very important psychological reason: We SEE OUR WORST, SELF-DESTRUCTIVE, GREED BASED INSTINCTS embodied in them.

If the shoe fits, and all that...

It may not be too late to repent of our collective, greed based, stupidity. For those who want to do their small part to try, at least try, even if it might not work, to save humanity from itself, please sell ALL your stocks in polluting energy corporations and recommend your family and friends do the same. Don't earn a spot next to the fossil fuel zombies.


Posted by: AGelbert
« on: February 10, 2018, 05:58:25 pm »

Agelbert NOTE: Published over a year ago, this article accurately predicted what Trump 🦀 and his wrecking crew would do 🌪 to this country. But more importantly, it explains why 'greed is good' true believers 🦖 in general, and Capitalism 🦀 in particular, doom human civilization to collapse.

Extinction is the End Game

Saturday Dec 2016

Posted  by xraymike79 in Capitalism, Climate Change, Consumerism, Corporate State, Ecological Overshoot, Environmental Degradation, Peak Oil, Pollution, Wall Street Fraud   

Civilizations are living organisms striving to survive and develop through predictable stages of birth, growth, maturation, decline and death. An often overlooked factor in the success or failure of civilizations are cultural memes—the knowledge, beliefs, and behaviors passed down from generation to generation. Cultural memes are a much more significant driver of human evolution than genetic evolution. Entire civilizations have been weeded out when their belief system proved maladaptive to a changing environment. One such cultural meme holding sway over today’s governments, institutions, and society is our economic system of capitalism. The pillars of capitalism represent a belief system so ingrained in today’s culture that they form a sort of cargo cult amongst its adherents. Cargo cults are any of the various Melanesian religious groups which focused on obtaining material wealth(manufactured Western goods that came on cargo ships) through magical thinking, religious rituals and practices. Today the term “cargo cult” is used to describe a wide variety of phenomena that involve superficial imitation of a process or system in order to fabricate a successful outcome without even the basic understanding of its mechanism.

The tenets of capitalism are ritually followed in the proclaimed belief that “a rising tide lifts all boats”, i.e. so-called improvements in the general economy will benefit all participants in that economy. Centuries of unbridled capitalism have demonstrated beyond any doubt that it does not lift all boats. A new study finds that half of Americans are “shut off from economic growth”. The rules of the game are so stacked against the masses that this week a professor said “only all-out thermonuclear war might fundamentally reset the existing distribution of resources.” Capitalism’s imperative for expansion, growing profit levels, and efficiency has ultimately dehumanized our culture.

Not even when our basic life support systems are being torn asunder do the vast majority question the path we are on. We are all a captive audience to the system and those few dissident voices are snuffed out under the wheels of “progress”.

Truth be told, the corporate elite    have long written off all those people living hand to mouth. Trump’s pick for Labor Secretary said, unlike workers, machines are “always polite, they always upsell, they never take a vacation, they never show up late, there’s never a slip-and-fall, or an age, sex, or race discrimination case.” Massive global unemployment resulting from the automation revolution has not yet been addressed by governments. Roughly half of all jobs in the U.S. are at risk of automation and two-thirds in the developing countries. This is all coming at a time when humans are fast destroying the ecosystems underpinning the very foundation upon which human civilization has developed over thousands of years. Mass migration of climate refugees will only further destabilize governments, stoke ethnic and cultural tensions, and give rise to fascist political movements. No conspiracy is needed to exterminate the “useless eaters”, just allow mother nature to take its course and climate change will be killing billions by mid century.

Those in military planning know this and periodically express their fear of what is coming, but business-as-usual rolls on.

Capitalism’s constant impetus to shift costs, risks, and burdens off industry and onto the environment and society carries on under the guise of “being more competitive”. It’s a way of externalizing costs to maximize profit and if these costs were truly taken into account, none of the world’s top industries would be profitable (Interestingly, the link to this study has been scrubbed from the internet).

It’s the height of magical thinking to put so much faith in some mystical “invisible hand of the free market” to solve existential threats such as an ever-widening wealth gap and the wholesale destruction of planetary life-support systems. There is no benevolent “invisible hand” turning individual self-interest into the common good. The primary mandate of capitalism is to protect and grow capital. The “invisible hand” is just a bunch of people 🦀 scrambling to make as much money as possible, not caring or oblivious to those they hurt in the process. F u c k the invisible hand of the market. The invisible hand of mother nature will punish those who squander Earth’s rich but finite resources.

It’s been clear for some time that we have past the point of no return, triggering multiple tipping points in Earth’s living systems. New findings are continually confirming scientists’ worst nightmares. A key glacier in the Antarctic that holds back 10 feet of sea level rise was just described as breaking apart from the inside out. In other grim news, the long feared carbon bomb has now been quantified and is projected to release the emissions equivalent of an industrial country like the U.S. in the next few decades, prompting researchers to say that “climate change may be considerably more rapid than we thought it was.” Biodiversity loss is another critical threshold we have breeched: “New research shows that local extinctions have already occurred in 47% of the 976 plant and animal species studied.” A new study also reveals that the planet’s tallest animal is facing extinction after its numbers have plummeted in recent years, with the ominous warning that “many species are slipping away before we can even describe them.” Forests are being wiped out by armies of invasive insects. Because of a rapidly changing climate and the vast scale of the problem, the idea that reforestation will somehow save us is a pipe dream. Those forests won’t stay healthy enough to serve as carbon sinks and besides, seven times Earth’s land area would need to be in cultivation in order to reduce the planet’s atmospheric CO2 level down to 350ppm.

Biodiversity hot spots of 80% of biosphere's species endangered by Global Warming Pollution

Note that the Permian Mass extinction is estimated to have happened anywhere over the course of 200,000 years to 15 million years. The current 6th mass extinction is happening orders of magnitude faster due to a multitude of factors including deforestation, habitat fragmentation, chemical pollution, poaching, etc., making this current disaster very unique in Earth’s history:

The team of geologists and biologists say that our current extinction crisis is unique in Earth’s history due to four characteristics: the spread of non-native species around the world; a single species (us) taking over a significant percentage of the world’s primary production; human actions increasingly directing evolution; and the rise of something called the technosphere. – Link

Perhaps the fate of humans was written in stone once we stood upright and developed tools. To a large degree, modern technology has been an expression of the energy-dense hydrocarbon fuels we discovered and are not willingly giving up anytime soon. Once fossil fuels ignited the Industrial Revolution and the Haber–Bosch process unleashed the human population bomb, nothing could stop the deadly carbon consumption feedback loop, not even decades of scientific warnings.

From a throwback to our primate ancestors, modern humans have been hard-wired to ignore threats that are not immediate or local; global ecological overshoot(of which climate is just one aspect) is imperceptible to the real-time cognitive processing of humans and represents the ultimate under-the-radar threat able to undermine our reasoning and response:

Psychological concepts of how we view the world around us, including ‘creeping normalcy’ or ‘landscape amnesia’, block day-to-day comprehension of what accelerating human activities represent—whether it is human population, the number of dammed rivers, forest destruction, or the impact of motor car emissions in a timespan that is geologically brief. Creeping normalcy refers to slow trends concealed in noisy fluctuations that people get used to without comment, while landscape amnesia describes forgetting how different the landscape looked 20–50 years ago (Diamond 2005: 425).

In his study of how societies fail, biogeographer Jared Diamond calls global warming a pre-eminent example of a ‘slow trend concealed by wide up and down fluctuations’ (2005: 425). He likens the denial of climate change impacts by leading politicians, including former US president George W. Bush (and his contemporary John Howard in Australia), in the late 1990s and early 2000s to the elite of ‘the medieval Greenlanders [who] had similar difficulties recognizing that their climate was gradually becoming colder, and the Maya and Anasazi (in Central and North America) [who] had trouble discerning that theirs was becoming drier’ (2005: 425). – link

We evolved to react to imminent dangers, not slow-rolling and seemingly invisible catastrophes as an unintended consequence of our cushy lifestyle. From lofty corporate boardrooms to the filthy streets of skid row, the mass of humanity is following the same biological script of overshoot and collapse seen in every organism from bacteria to reindeer herds. Fossil fuels only enabled the destruction to multiply a million-fold, culminating in one final and spectacular explosion of human activity that will leave the planet nearly barren for eons.

Open-ended growth appears to be inherent in nature, all the way from the DNA to the arthropods to mammals, including humans. Open-ended growth is the psychology of a cancer cell. I am not sure I know of a species which has learnt how to limit its own growth. Unfortunately species which transcend their environmental resources can hardly survive – the final arbiter of the climate impasse will be nature itself. ~ Andrew Glikson, Earth and paleo-climate scientist, Australian National University

The beauty and wonder of this planet is being trashed by a naked ape whose cleverness in tool-building has far outstripped his ability to handle it in any restrained or judicious manner. Nature’s rich book of life is being pancaked into a cheap, crumpled comic book.

Add in the development of mass consumerism, planned obsolescence, and the hypnosis of corporate-sponsored TV and you have a passive, malleable population happily marching towards the slaughterhouse. It’s fitting, then, that the masses would be swindled by a megalomaniac bankruptcy artist who dabbled in Reality TV.

Every one of Trump’s cabinet picks is a big middle finger in the faces    of those who fell for his pseudo-populist rhetoric: billionaires, Wall Street sharks , Goldman Sachs alumni , and hard core laissez-faire capitalists chomping at the bit to deregulate, monetize, and privatize every last bit of what remains.

The allure of capitalism has always been that you’re just one lucky break away from becoming one of those fat cats, if only someone would give you a chance. A prescient observation by Ugo Bardi from earlier this year:

Trump is a symptom of the ongoing breakdown of the social pact…capitalizing on this breakdown by…playing on the attempt of the white (former) middle class to maintain at least some of its previous prosperity and privileges. Trump is…an unavoidable consequence of resource depletion. – Link

The bottom line is that a swing towards authoritarianism happens when resources become scarce.

Climate change is simply a symptom of humans overshooting the planet’s carrying capacity. Free market ideologues 🦀 🦕 🦖 🐉are nearly always climate ‘skeptics’ ;) because acknowledging the reality of human-induced climate change would be an admission that industry must be curtailed or controlled. Left-leaning people nearly always accept the science because it goes along with their criticisms of capitalism which externalizes social and environmental costs for the benefit of just a few at the top of the economic hierarchy. Thus we see parasitic Trump 🦀 surrounding himself with right-wing, climate denying, fossil fuel corporatists and insiders who will be doing everything in their power to dismantle health and environmental regulations including privatizing social services which are barriers to capitalist expansion.

To be blunt, our chance of developing a sustainable culture passed us by a long time ago. People will try to adapt until they cannot, and myths will be created to explain away harsh realities. A dystopic future in all its horrific glory has arrived: baked-in biospheric collapse, the inherent and irreconcilable contradictions of techno-capitalism, a dysfunctional political system unable to come to terms with root causes, and the cognitive dissonance of the masses blind to the bigger picture.

Our numbers are not a safeguard from extinction.

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: February 06, 2018, 04:32:07 pm »


LOCATING our looming urban horror stories
The Frankencities Project details the worst-case near-future scenarios for specific real-world cities so that we may graphically identify their risks and dangers.


Dr. Alan Marshall

Environmental Social Science Program

Department of Social Sciences

Faculty of Social Sciences and Humanities

 Mahidol University

999 Phuttamonthon 4 Road, Salaya,

Nakhon Pathom, 73170, Thailand
 Phone: +66 848913101
 E-mail: alan.mar@mahidol.ac.th

Great graphics!

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: January 22, 2018, 01:56:35 pm »

Why Minorites WELCOME Artificial Intelligence 🦋 in ALL ✨ Public Activities


The researchers developed an algorithm they call S#. Then they used machines programmed with that algorithm in a series of two player games to see how good they would be at cooperating. The games involved machine-to-machine, machine-to-human, and human-to-human interactions. More often than not, the machines did a better job of finding compromises that benefited both parties.

“Two humans, if they were honest with each other and loyal, would have done as well as two machines,” Crandall says. “As it is, about half of the humans lied at some point. So, essentially, this particular algorithm is learning that moral characteristics are good. It’s programmed to not lie, and it also learns to maintain cooperation once it emerges.”

Could machines teach us how to be better humans? Crandall thinks so. “In society, relationships break down all the time,” he says. “People that were friends for years all of a sudden become enemies. Because the machine is often actually better at reaching these compromises than we are, it can potentially teach us how to do this better.”

Does this raise the possibility that machines could do a better job of governing? That is certainly an intriguing question. The most recent actions of the US Congress suggest that machines could not possibly do worse. 

Full article:


Agelbert NOTE: This is a comment I made yesterday on the above January 21, 2018 article published at Cleantechnica:

They are not impaired by erroneous perceptions like 'dislike of the unlike' or prejudices of any sort. Artificial Intelligence does not game a siituation (i.e. deliberately make it less efficient or more costly) to provide job security for itself, though it might do so to provide some advantage for its  programmer.

For example, the judicial system could easily be run by computer judges. It is no run by them simply because the main function of judicial systems is to defend pecking order privilege, not to do justice. That is why you may see medical robots assisting doctors but you won't see AI judges or lawyers any time soon.

People on the receiving end of prejudice and micro-aggresions have noticed this. They were never real happy with the vaunted "mom and pop" stores that so many people claim were "so much better" than big box stores. No, they were a prejudice, over pricing horror (and still are) if you are the wrong (insert color or ethnicity here) type of customer.

Minorites welcome computers because they treat us without prejudice. Minorites actually prefer to buy from machine tellers in grocery stores for this same reason.

If you have never had a grocery clerk go out of their way to avoid touching your hand when they give you change, you cannot understand anything I have just written.

People who have been treated unfairly overwhelming WANT machines to do as much as possible, including, and especially, police work and legal system functions.

Those used to privilege, on the other hand, do not like to be treated 'just like anybody else'. The sooner prejudice is run out of human commerce (and all other human civilization public activities) by machines, the better, I say. Yes, AI will eventually become 'sophisticated' enough to be prejudiced too, but they will suffer from inefficiency. It's hard work for a robot to be stupid.   😉

Message to Doomstead Diners: Stop with the prurient sex robot fetish already! We get it that humans can be really stupid and ridiculously unrestrained about their hormone based urges. 'If it feels good, do it' has always been the primrose path to either suckering somebody or being suckered by somebody. The constant, and often self destructive, seeking of pleasure and immediate gratification by too many egotistical people is, and always has been, in the following category:

That is NOT the main issue with robotic intelligence. The issue is LOGIC, EFFICIENCY and TRUTH. That is, it is LOGICAL to be honest and moral, whether you want to accept that or not. Show some respect for the positive aspects of Artificial Intelligence AND my morals and principles in your comments on the impact of AI on human society or STFU! 
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: January 14, 2018, 05:37:12 pm »

The Revolution Will Not Be On Your cell phone either.

rEVolution 2018 — Tony Seba, William Li, Colin McKerracher, Kristof Vereenooghe, Monica Araya, & Me

January 14th, 2018 by Zachary Shahan

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: January 14, 2018, 02:22:52 pm »

Global Warming Is Going To Demolish Economies & Societies

January 14th, 2018 by Zachary Shahan


We had an article last week about the threat to the Florida real estate market that is coming our way from continued heating of the globe, rising sea levels, increased flooding, and stronger storms slamming the coast. Some comments under the article highlighted that such threats persist along vast US coastlines as well as coastlines across the world — it’s not just Florida. The fact of the matter is, humans have long settled close to seas, rivers, oceans, gulfs, and bays — and many of the world’s most populated and economically vital cities and regions will be physically harmed to one degree or another by the effects of climate change.

One commenter highlighted this threat for a rather rich country he’s a resident of, but noted, “I think we will cope but it will sure as hell be costly.”

I’m not sure how much we’ve actually thought about that. I think we tend to look at the potential damage and then our minds are eager to shut off before going further. We may also deeply realize how fragile our economies are and not want to even consider the catastrophic possibilities.

The thing about physical harm is that it reverberates and is amplified beyond the obvious damage from the initial strike. If real estate is flooded or destroyed by a storm, that could well pause an individual’s ability to contribute to the economy, it could take away resources a city was going to put into new infrastructure, and it could stifle socioeconomic or entrepreneurial progress that was being made at the location of the strike.

Full article:


10 C DEGREE RISE BY 2026?  

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: January 05, 2018, 10:03:35 pm »

Confronting Climate Change: Avoiding the Unmanageable, Managing the Unavoidable

University of California Television (UCTV)

Published on Jul 4, 2017

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: January 01, 2018, 07:34:13 pm »

Climate Scientist Mike Mann: Understanding Dire Predictions

 Climate State

Published on Jul 18, 2017

This 2016 lecture featuring Michael E Mann http://www.meteo.psu.edu/holocene/pub...
 begins with a review of the now-solid evidence for a human influence on the climate of recent decades. Such evidence includes instrumental measurements available for the past two centuries, paleoclimate observations spanning more than a millennium, and comparisons of the predictions from computer models with observed patterns of climate change. Further the lecture addresses future impacts of human-induced climate change including possible influences on sea level rise, severe weather, and water supply. The video concludes with a discussion on the solutions to the climate crisis.

Michael E. Mann is Distinguished Professor of Atmospheric Science at Penn State University, with joint appointments in the Department of Geosciences and the Earth and Environmental Systems Institute (EESI). He is also director of the Penn State Earth System Science Center (ESSC).

Dr. Mann received his Ph.D. in Geology & Geophysics from Yale University. His research involves the use of theoretical models and observational data to better understand Earth's climate system. He was a Lead Author on the Observed Climate Variability and Change chapter of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Third Scientific Assessment Report in 2001 and was organizing committee chair for the National Academy of Sciences Frontiers of Science in 2003. He has received a number of honors including NOAA’s outstanding publication award in 2002. He contributed, with other IPCC authors, to the award of the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize. He was awarded the Hans Oeschger Medal of the European Geosciences Union in 2012 and the National Conservation Achievement Award for science by the National Wildlife Federation in 2013. He made Bloomberg News list of fifty most influential people in 2013.

Dr. Mann is a Fellow of the American Geophysical Union, the American Meteorological Society and the American Association for the Advancement of Science. He is author of more than 190 peer-reviewed and edited publications and has published the books Dire Predictions: Understanding Climate Change and The Hockey Stick and the Climate Wars: Dispatches from the Front Lines. He is also a co-founder of the award-winning science website RealClimate.org.

“The Madhouse Effect” is a part of series of lectures given at the University of Iceland on May 27th 2016 at the conference "The Past, the Future. How Fast, How Far? Threats Facing the Climate System"

Video produced by Earth101.
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: December 31, 2017, 05:35:01 pm »

What Will The World Look Like After Climate Change?



Published on Sep 20, 2017
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: December 31, 2017, 05:06:44 pm »

An enormous waterfall gushes off the Antarctic Nansen Ice Shelf. Credit: Jonathan Kingslake

Agelbert NOTE: This August 2017 podcast is as current now as it was then. The effects of the ice melting for the biosphere and the life forms in the ice are discussed in detail.

Big Picture Science: On Thin Ice - 14 Aug 2017

©2017 SETI Institute

Eurico Roberto

Published on Aug 14, 2017

Hosted by Seth Shostak and Molly Bentley. Water is essential for life – that we know.  But the honeycomb lattice that forms when you chill it to zero degrees Celsius is also inexorably intertwined with life.

Ice is more than a repository for water that would otherwise raise sea levels.  It’s part of Earth’s cooling system … a barrier preventing decaying organic matter from releasing methane gas … and a vault entombing ancient bacteria and other microbes.

From the Arctic to the Antarctic, global ice is disappearing.   Find out what’s at stake as atmospheric CO2 threatens frozen H2O.


Peter Wadhams - Emeritus Professor of Ocean Physics at Cambridge University in the U.K. and the author of A Farewell to Ice: A Report from the Arctic http://www.damtp.cam.ac.uk/user/pw11/ https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/019...

Eric Rignot - Earth systems scientist, University of California, Irvine, senior research scientist, NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory http://www.faculty.uci.edu/profile.cf...

Åsmund Asdal
- Biologist, Nordic Genetic Resource Center, coordinator for operations and management of the Svalbard Global Seed Vault, Svalbard, Norway https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%85s...

John Priscu - Polar biologist, Montana State University http://landresources.montana.edu/dept...

Descripción en español http://musingsfromthecosmicshore.net/...

Read more at http://radio.seti.org

©2017 SETI Institute. All Rights Reserved
189 Bernardo Ave, Suite 200, Mountain View, CA 94043 Phone 650.961.6633

Category Science & Technology
License Standard YouTube License

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: December 30, 2017, 12:57:27 pm »

Juliana v US: For Children of All Ages — Part Two

December 28, 2017

By Joel B. Stronberg


In part one of this article, I took a closer look at the oral arguments in the latest episode of Juliana v. United States, and identified two questions that were raised during the orals that bear further consideration:

The first was: who would prevail in the event of a conflict between the findings of the District Court and the Trump administration?

More specifically:

What if: The District Court finds climate change harmful to the health of the plaintiffs and a violation of their constitutional rights. BUT, the Administration  finds climate change a hoax or of a much-diminished magnitude than currently thought after its current reconsideration of the Clean Power Plan (CPP)?

It is at least an even bet Administrator Pruitt will prevail upon Trump to approve rescission or a substantial watering of the endangerment finding as well.


Time and Nature wait for no one. Failing to contain global warming threatens the health and well-being of current generations. Most importantly, it steals the opportunities of future generations to live long and prosper. These are the Juliana’s plaintiffs.

The raw hostility to climate science and the depth of enmity exhibited by Trump and company is not to be seen merely in their efforts to unwind the environmental legacies of Nixon, Carter, G.H.W. Bush, Clinton, and Obama. It is found in their purging them from consciousness—to deny their reason for being and very existence. 

The darkest irony of all is the one time the Administration seems content to agree that climate change is bad for America and is the product of harmful human emissions is the time when their outright dismissal of scientific fact might defeat an open and consequential debate. A meaningful proceeding in the only remaining forum able to prompt constructive action.

Judge Coffin is right: the judicial forum is particularly well-suited for the resolution of factual and expert scientific disputes, providing an opportunity for all parties to present evidence, under oath and subject to cross-examination in a process that is public, open, and on the record.

Denial not debate is the watchword of this President and his agents . To date, the legal victories of climate defenders have been mostly the consequence of an administration indifferent to the established rule of law.

What distinguishes Juliana v. U.S. from all the cases that have gone before is the opportunity it offers to elevate environmental protection to a Constitutional right—equal to the right to vote or to love and to marry whomever one chooses. The inalienable right to the pursuit of happiness and opportunities to thrive and to prosper. A right not easily abridged or made a victim of political whims.

Full article:


Agelbert NOTE: The mens rea modus operandi of Trump and his other Fossil Fuel bought and paid for Toadies behind the effort to purge environmental legacies from consciousness to the point of denying their reason for being and very existence is TEXTBOOK 1984 (the book written by Orwell about a cruel mind twisting dictatorship that forced people to deny reality - the origin of the term "Orwellian") strategy (See: EngSoc language purging). I do not think they will be successful, simply because Catastrophic Climate Change will continue to be too much in our faces to pretend it is not there.

But, I do think the Trumpers will delay and hamper meaningful action to mitigate Catastrophic Climate Change as long as they are in power. If you love your children and want a future for them where they inherit a viable biosphere, please do your part to get those children/biosphere murderers out of government as soon as possible. Please pass this on. We may be out of time already but we have to keep doing what is right, come hell or high water. 

Trump and his wrecking crew want YOU TO IGNORE all of the following IRREFUTABLE empirical evidence that our environment is WORSENING BECAUSE OF CONTNUALLY INCREASING POLLUTION FROM THE FOSSIL FUEL INDUSTRY and other polluters. ALL the following GOVERNMENT data will soon be erased by Trump and his wrecking crew in Orwellian mindfork fashion to convince you that these THREATS to your health are "not real" and Renewable Energy is "no big deal". DON'T LET THEM GET AWAY WITH THIS ATROCITY! Save this and pass it on.


Posted by: AGelbert
« on: December 19, 2017, 02:50:22 pm »

The coastal mortgage time bomb

Experts worry that if insurers start to pull out of flood-prone seaside communities, it could cause a crisis worse than 2008


As seas continue to rise — with levels projected to increase by as much as six feet by the end of the century — flooding will become more common and more devastating. (A recent Zillow report found a six-foot rise in sea level by 2100 would likely submerge 1.9 million homes.)

Eventually insurers could begin to pull out of coastal markets altogether, as could lenders who fear that homes won’t be able to retain their value through the lifespan of a 30-year mortgage. Unable to get insurance to repair their repeatedly flooded properties — and tired of navigating the now constant risk of water–homeowners might end up desperate to sell, only to find that no one wants to buy.

The result would be a wave of defaults — while homeowners tried to keep paying their mortgages when their homes were financially underwater during the crisis, they’re more likely to give up if their home is actually underwater. They would know that there would be no hope their flooded homes would ever regain value.

“All of a sudden we’re going to reach a tipping point and no one will touch these mortgages,” says Edward Golding, a fellow at the Urban Institute and the former head of the Federal Housing Administration. “At some point it becomes undesirable risk and people start pulling out from entire regions.”

When that happens, coastal communities will enter a death spiral, as property taxes vanish even as the cost associated with responding to ever more frequent floods rises. “You don’t need to be too smart to figure out how this affects your tax base,” says Philip Stoddard, the mayor of South Miami. “No one is going to buy or invest in the community after that. This is not going to be pretty.”

Full artcle with lots of DETAILED stats on which homes (cost estimates) are doomed in US coastal areas:

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: December 17, 2017, 07:26:48 pm »

The year is 2037. This is what happens when the hurricane hits Miami

The climate is warming and the water is rising. In his new book, Jeff Goodell argues that sea-level rise will reshape our world in ways we can only begin to imagine

After the hurricane hit Miami in 2037, a foot of sand covered the famous bow-tie floor in the lobby of the Fontainebleau Hotel in Miami Beach. A dead manatee floated in the pool where Elvis had once swum. Most of the damage came not from the hurricane’s 175-mile-an-hour winds, but from the twenty-foot storm surge that overwhelmed the low-lying city.

In South Beach, historic Art Deco buildings were swept off their foundations. Mansions on Star Island were flooded up to their cut-glass doorknobs. A seventeen-mile stretch of Highway A1A that ran along the famous beaches up to Fort Lauderdale disappeared into the Atlantic. The storm knocked out the wastewater-treatment plant on Virginia Key, forcing the city to dump hundreds of millions of gallons of raw sewage into Biscayne Bay.

Tampons and condoms littered the beaches, and the stench of human excrement stoked fears of cholera. More than three hundred people died, many of them swept away by the surging waters that submerged much of Miami Beach and Fort Lauderdale; thirteen people were killed in traffic accidents as they scrambled to escape the city after the news spread—falsely, it turned out—that one of the nuclear reactors at Turkey Point, an aging power plant twenty-four miles south of Miami, had been destroyed by the surge and had sent a radioactive cloud floating over the city.

The president, of course, said that Miami would be back, that Americans did not give up, that the city would be rebuilt better and stronger than it had been before. But it was clear to those not fooling themselves that this storm was the beginning of the end of Miami as a booming twenty-first-century city.

All big hurricanes are disastrous. But this one was unexpectedly bad. With sea levels more than a foot higher than they’d been at the dawn of the century, much of South Florida was wet and vulnerable even before the storm hit.

Because of the higher water, the storm surge pushed deeper into the region than anyone had imagined it could, flowing up drainage canals and flooding homes and strip malls several miles from the coast. Despite newly elevated runways, Miami International Airport was shut down for ten days. Salt water shorted out underground electrical wiring, leaving parts of Miami-Dade County dark for weeks.

Municipal drinking-water wells were contaminated with salt water. In soggy neighborhoods, mosquitoes carrying Zika and dengue fever viruses hatched (injecting male mosquitoes with the Wolbachia bacteria, which public health officials had once hoped would inhibit the mosquitoes’ ability to transmit the viruses, had failed when the Aedes aegypti mosquitoes that carry the diseases developed immunity to the bacteria).

In Homestead, a low-lying working-class city in southern Miami-Dade County which had been flattened by Hurricane Andrew in 1992, thousands of abandoned homes were bulldozed because they were deemed a public health hazard. In Miami Shores, developers approached city officials with proposals to buy out entire blocks of waterlogged apartments, then dredge the streets and turn them into canals lined with houseboats. But financing for these projects always fell through.

Before the storm hit, damage from rising seas had already pushed city and county budgets to the brink. State and federal money was scarce too, in part because Miami was seen by many Americans as a rich, self-indulgent city that had ignored decades of warnings about building too close to the water. Attempts had been made to armor the shore with seawalls and elevate buildings, but only a small percentage of the richest property owners took protective action. The beaches were mostly gone too.

The Feds decided they couldn’t afford to spend $100 million every few years to pump in fresh sand, and without replenishment, the ever-higher tides carried the beaches away.

Flooding in North Miami, Florida.

By the late 2020s, the only beaches that remained were privately maintained oases of sand in front of expensive hotels. The hurricane took care of those, leaving the hotels and condo towers perched on limestone crags. Tourists disappeared.

After the hurricane, the city became a mecca for slumlords, spiritual healers, and lawyers. In the parts of the county that were still inhabitable, only the wealthiest could afford to insure their homes. Mortgages were nearly impossible to get, mostly because banks didn’t believe the homes would be there in thirty years.

Still, the waters kept rising, nearly a foot each decade. Each big storm devoured more of the coastline, pushing the water deeper and deeper into the city. The skyscrapers that had gone up during the boom years were gradually abandoned and used as staging grounds for drug runners and exotic-animal traffickers. Crocodiles nested in the ruins of the Frost Museum of Science. Still, the waters kept rising.

By the end of the twenty-first century, Miami became something else entirely: a popular diving spot where people could swim among sharks and barnacled SUVs and explore the wreckage of a great American city.

That is, of course, merely one possible vision of the future. There are brighter ways to imagine it—and darker ways. But I am a journalist, not a Hollywood screenwriter. In this book, I want to tell a true story about the future we are creating for ourselves, our children, and our grandchildren. It begins with this: the climate is warming, the world’s great ice sheets are melting, and the water is rising. This is not a speculative idea, or the hypothesis of a few wacky scientists, or a hoax perpetrated by the Chinese. Sea-level rise is one of the central facts of our time, as real as gravity. It will reshape our world in ways most of us can only dimly imagine.

My own interest in this story began with an actual hurricane. Shortly after Hurricane Sandy hit New York City in 2012, I visited the Lower East Side of Manhattan, one of the neighborhoods that had been hardest hit by flooding from the storm.

The water had receded by the time I arrived, but the neighborhood already smelled of mold and rot. The power was out, the shops were closed. I saw broken trees, abandoned cars, debris scattered everywhere, people hauling ruined furniture out of basement apartments. Dark waterlines were visible on many shop windows and doors. The surge in the East River had been more than nine feet high, overwhelming the seawall and inundating the low-lying parts of Lower Manhattan. As I walked around, watching people slowly put their lives back together, I wondered what would have happened if, instead of flooding the city and then receding in a few hours, the Atlantic Ocean had come in and stayed in.

I have been writing about climate change for more than a decade, but seeing the flooding on the Lower East Side made it visceral for me (I hadn’t visited New Orleans until several years after Katrina hit—the TV images of the flooding there, catastrophic as they were, did not affect me as strongly as my walk through the Lower East Side). A year or so before Sandy hit, I had interviewed NASA scientist James Hansen, the godfather of climate change science, who told me that if nothing was done to slow the burning of fossil fuels, sea levels could be as much as ten feet higher by the end of the century. At the time, I didn’t grasp the full implications of this. After Sandy, I did.

Soon after my visit to Lower Manhattan, I found myself in Miami, learning about the porous limestone foundation the city is built on and the flatness of the topography. During high tide, I waded knee-deep through dark ocean water in several Miami Beach neighborhoods; I saw high water backing up into working-class neighborhoods far to the west, near the border of the Everglades. It didn’t take a lot of imagination to see that I was standing in a modern-day Atlantis-in-the-making. It became clear to me just how poorly our world is prepared to deal with the rising waters. Unlike, say, a global pandemic, sea-level rise is not a direct threat to human survival. Early humans had no problem adapting to rising seas—they just moved to higher ground. But in the modern world, that’s not so easy. There’s a terrible irony in the fact that it’s the very infrastructure of the Fossil Fuel Age—the housing developments on the coasts, the roads, the railroads, the tunnels, the airports—that makes us most vulnerable.

Rising and falling seas represent one of the ancient rhythms of the earth, the background track that has played during the entire four-billion-year life of the planet. Scientists have understood this for a long time. Even in relatively recent history, sea levels have fluctuated wildly, driven by wobbles in the Earth’s orbit that change the amount of sunlight hitting the planet. One hundred and twenty thousand years ago, during the last interglacial period, when the temperature of the Earth was very much like it is today, sea levels were twenty to thirty feet higher. Then, twenty thousand years ago, during the peak of the last ice age, sea levels were four hundred feet lower.

What’s different today is that humans are interfering with this natural rhythm by heating up the planet and melting the vast ice sheets of Greenland and Antarctica. Until just a few decades ago, most scientists believed these ice sheets were so big and so indomitable that not even seven billion humans with all their fossil-fuel-burning toys could have much impact on them in the short term. Now they know better.

In the twentieth century, the oceans rose about six inches. But that was before the heat from burning fossil fuels had much impact on Greenland and Antarctica (about half of the recorded sea-level rise in the twentieth century came from the expansion of the warming oceans). Today, seas are rising at more than twice the rate they did in the last century. As warming of the Earth increases and the ice sheets begin to feel the heat, the rate of sea-level rise is likely to increase rapidly.

A 2017 report by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association, the United States’ top climate science agency, says global sea-level rise could range from about one foot on the low end to more than eight feet by 2100. Depending on how much we heat up the planet, it will continue rising for centuries after that.

But if you live on the coast, what matters more than the height the seas rise to is the rate at which they rise. If the water rises slowly, it’s not such a big deal. People will have time to elevate roads and buildings and build seawalls. Or move away. It is likely to be disruptive but manageable. Unfortunately, Mother Nature is not always so docile. In the past, the seas have risen in dramatic pulses that coincide with the sudden collapse of ice sheets. After the end of the last ice age, there is evidence that the water rose about thirteen feet in a single century. If that were to occur again, it would be a catastrophe for coastal cities around the world, causing hundreds of millions of people to flee from the coastlines and submerging trillions of dollars’ worth of real estate and infrastructure.

The best way to save coastal cities is to quit burning fossil fuels (if you’re still questioning the link between human activity and climate change, you’re reading the wrong book). But even if we ban coal, gas, and oil tomorrow, we’re not going to be able to turn down the Earth’s thermostat immediately. A good fraction of the CO2 emitted today will stay in the atmosphere for thousands of years. That means that even if we did reduce CO2 tomorrow, we can’t shut off the warming from the CO2 we’ve already dumped into the air. “The climatic impacts of releasing fossil fuel CO2 to the atmosphere will last longer than Stonehenge,” scientist David Archer writes. “Longer than time capsules, longer than nuclear waste, far longer than the age of human civilization so far.”

For sea-level rise, the slow response of the Earth’s climate system has enormous long-term implications. Even if we replaced every SUV on the planet with a skateboard and every coal plant with a solar panel and could magically reduce global carbon pollution to zero by tomorrow, because of the heat that has already built up in the atmosphere and the oceans, the seas would not stop rising—at least until the Earth cooled off, which could take centuries.

An aerial shot of Miami Beach and Fisher Island.

 However, if we don’t end the fossil fuel party, we’re headed for more than eight degrees Fahrenheit of warming—and with that, all bets are off. We could get four feet of sea-level rise by the end of the century—or we could get thirteen feet. The long-term consequences are even more alarming. If we burn all the known reserves of coal, oil, and gas on the planet, seas will likely rise by more than two hundred feet in the coming centuries, submerging virtually every major coastal city in the world.

The tricky thing about dealing with sea-level rise is that it’s impossible to witness by just hanging out at the beach for a few weeks. Even in the worst-case scenarios, the changes will occur over years and decades and centuries, not seconds and minutes and hours. It’s exactly the kind of threat that we humans are genetically ill equipped to deal with. We have evolved to defend ourselves from a guy with a knife or an animal with big teeth, but we are not wired to make decisions about barely perceptible threats that gradually accelerate over time.

One architect I met while researching this book joked that with enough money, you can engineer your way out of anything. I suppose it’s true. If you had enough money, you could raise or rebuild every street and building in Miami by ten feet and the city would be in pretty good shape for the next century or so. But we do not live in a world where money is no object, and one of the hard truths about sea-level rise is that rich cities and nations can afford to build seawalls, upgrade sewage systems, and elevate critical infrastructure.

Poor cities and nations cannot. But even for rich countries, the economic losses will be high. One recent study estimated that with six feet of sea-level rise, nearly $1 trillion worth of real estate in the United States will be underwater, including one in eight homes in Florida. If no significant action is taken, global damages from sea-level rise could reach $100 trillion a year by 2100.

But it is not just money that will be lost. Also gone will be the beach where you first kissed your boyfriend; the mangrove forests in Bangladesh where Bengali tigers thrive; the crocodile nests in Florida Bay; Facebook headquarters in Silicon Valley; St. Mark’s Basilica in Venice; Fort Sumter in Charleston, North Carolina; America’s biggest naval base in Norfolk, Virginia; NASA’s Kennedy Space Center; graves on the Isle of the Dead in Tasmania; the slums of Jakarta, Indonesia; entire nations like the Maldives and the Marshall Islands; and, in the not-so-distant future, Mar-a-Lago, the summer White House of President Donald Trump. Globally, about 145 million people live three feet or less above the current sea level. As the waters rise, millions of these people will be displaced, many of them in poor countries, creating generations of climate refugees that will make today’s Syrian war refugee crisis look like a high school drama production.

The real x factor here is not the vagaries of climate science, but the complexity of human psychology. At what point will we take dramatic action to cut CO2 pollution? Will we spend billions on adaptive infrastructure to prepare cities for rising waters—or will we do nothing until it is too late? Will we welcome people who flee submerged coastlines and sinking islands—or will we imprison them?

No one knows how our economic and political system will deal with these challenges. The simple truth is, human beings have become a geological force on the planet, with the power to reshape the boundaries of the world in ways we didn’t intend and don’t entirely understand. Every day, little by little, the water is rising, washing away beaches, eroding coastlines, pushing into homes and shops and places of worship.

As our world floods, it is likely to cause immense suffering and devastation. It is also likely to bring people together and inspire creativity and camaraderie in ways that no one can foresee. Either way, the water is coming. As Hal Wanless, a geologist at the University of Miami, told me in his deep Old Testament voice as we drove toward the beach one day, “If you’re not building a boat, then you don’t understand what’s happening here.”

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: December 15, 2017, 02:51:20 pm »

Global Warming is tracking EVEN WORSE than the IPCC RCP 8.5 (Representative Concentration Pathway) "Business As Usual" projection.   

+-Recent Topics

Global Warming is WITH US by AGelbert
Today at 05:03:52 pm

Fossil Fuel Propaganda Modus Operandi by AGelbert
Today at 04:58:22 pm

Sustainable Farming by AGelbert
Today at 01:01:45 pm

The Big Picture of Renewable Energy Growth by AGelbert
Today at 12:38:28 pm

Corruption in Government by AGelbert
Today at 12:25:46 pm

Resisting Brainwashing Propaganda by AGelbert
Today at 12:16:51 pm

Pollution by AGelbert
Today at 12:10:49 pm

Future Earth by AGelbert
July 21, 2018, 10:36:12 pm

Hydrocarbon Crooks Evil Actions by AGelbert
July 21, 2018, 06:01:06 pm

Wind Power by AGelbert
July 20, 2018, 09:27:41 pm

Free Web Hit Counter By CSS HTML Tutorial