+- +-


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

+-Stats ezBlock

Total Members: 42
Latest: eranda
New This Month: 1
New This Week: 0
New Today: 0
Total Posts: 9178
Total Topics: 233
Most Online Today: 1
Most Online Ever: 52
(November 29, 2017, 04:04:44 am)
Users Online
Members: 0
Guests: 0
Total: 0

Post reply

Warning - while you were reading 71 new replies have 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
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: 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.   

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: November 24, 2017, 06:03:38 pm »


Climate State

Published on Nov 23, 2017

Rapid collapse of Antarctic glaciers could flood coastal cities by the end of this century. Based on an article written by Eric Holthaus. Read the full story https://grist.org/article/antarctica-...
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: November 22, 2017, 06:21:54 pm »

Agelbert (plagiarised  ;D) NOTE: This piece is particularly interesting because it’s from someone who campaigns for the Scottish Greens. He’s also a scientist, so knows what’s going on better than most politicians.


By Ian Baxter

Politics will not save us from abrupt climate change because we don’t want to be saved

Forty years ago I was studying for a Physics degree at Edinburgh University. I chose Edinburgh because it offered a course which included Meteorology and Atmospheric Physics, interests which have stayed with me since.

When I came across articles about the Greenhouse Effect, this intrigued me as a scientist, but also worried me as a human being, and although it was only a theory at the time, I felt the implications if true were so severe that at the very least, we should adopt the precautionary principle and take immediate action to prevent it.

It was this that led me to join the Ecology Party in 1979 and since then, politics for me has always been about climate change and the need to address it before it became unstoppable. In the seventies and eighties, the threat of an impending nuclear war was on everyone’s minds, but here was another existential threat to humanity that although distant, required no less attention to defuse or at least to quantify.

Then it was a theory and if proven, we still had time to do something about it. Forty years on and the Greenhouse Effect is now known as Global Warming or Climate Change. The effects predicted are not only happening, but they are happening much faster than predicted and events over the last three years have led me to believe that this is not only irreversible, but we are now entering a period of what is known as ‘abrupt climate change’, which will lead to the breakdown of society within 30 years and near human extinction by the end of the century.

To understand how this will happen so quickly, we need to appreciate that climate change is not linear. We are on an exponential curve. The three warmest years on record globally have been 2014, 2015 and 2016 (with 2017 set to join them).  Floods, droughts, wildfires and storms are this year setting records and records are not only being broken, but they are starting to be broken by some margin. We’re on an curve where not only will events happen more often and be more severe, but the rate at which they increase will itself be increasing. That’s what exponential means.

We also need to appreciate some of the deficiencies in climate modelling. Specifically, climate scientists (in common with nearly all scientists) are experts in their own fields only. Looking at a specific aspect of science in isolation is fine if nothing else is changing, but if everything else is changing, you need to take that into account if you’re predicting what will happen in the future.

There are around 70 feedback effects now kicking in, and few if any models are taking these into account. For example, scientists studying the Arctic sea ice may take into account higher sea surface temperatures, but not the incursion of water vapour (a greenhouse gas) into the Arctic resulting from a distorted jet stream, or the impact of soot on ice albedo from increased wildfires thousands of miles away.

A recent example is the speed with which this year’s Atlantic hurricanes strengthened from tropical storms to Category 5 hurricanes due to higher sea surface temperatures. This surprised meteorologists as the computer models were only forecasting Cat 2 or 3 at most. Only now are they recognising that the models are underestimating the effect of warmer sea surfaces and the additional energy and water vapour they provide.

As Peter Wadhams writes in his recent book ‘A farewell to ice’, to reverse the effects of man made carbon dioxide in the atmosphere would demand a switch in global focus on the scale of the post war Marshall plan. We would need not only to stop producing CO2 but also turn over many of our factories to producing carbon capture and storage machines, and we would need to start right now. The cost to the world economies would be huge, possibly running to over $100 Trillion.

If, and it’s still an if, we are capable of reversing the trajectory we’re on, there are no signs of a willingness to do so – neither from politicians nor people in general. CO2 takes over a decade to become fully effective as a greenhouse gas, and lingers in the atmosphere for decades. Methane (CH4) is 130 times as effective as a greenhouse gas in the first 3 years after release and due largely to melting permafrost is starting to rise rapidly in global concentration (another feedback).

So what are we actually doing about it? ‘Emissions’ as measured by countries themselves levelled out over the past three years – but are now rising once again. Leaving aside allegations that the figures have been doctored anyway, the extra CO2 from increasing wildfires is not included (as an example, the CO2 from those in British Columbia, just one Canadian province, this year equated to the annual emissions from 40 million cars on the road). The litmus test is the actual measure of CO2 in the atmosphere – now reaching a peak of around 410 ppm and rising at a record annual rate of around 2.5 ppm per year.

In 1989, the UN issued a warning that we had only ten years to address global warming before irreversible tipping points start kicking in. That was 30 years ago. Similar warnings have appeared since, none of them heeded. Instead of issuing warnings, more and more scientists are now coming round to the view that it really is too late. What I have witnessed over the last three years has led me to believe the same. We really are too late and are now entering the sixth mass extinction.

Too many articles on climate change contain the phrase “By 2100…” or “By the end of the century…”. That really is too far away for most people to treat as urgent. While it’s difficult to make predictions, it should be made clear that the catastrophic impacts of climate change will affect us well before then.

Within five to ten years I expect to see food prices rising well above inflation – perhaps by as much as 50% to 100% with some empty shelves appearing in supermarkets as specific crops are devastated (we already had a ‘taste’ of this earlier this year with courgettes and lettuce crops hit by unusual weather in Spain; world wine production is now at a 50 year low due to extreme weather events).

Wildfires are already becoming uncontrollable. Portugal has seen six times its average this year. There have been fires in Greenland and in Australia during its winter, not to mention the devastation in California, Canada and Siberia. Hurricanes are becoming stronger and appearing in unusual places (Ophelia was the strongest on record in the east Atlantic and Greece is currently being hit by what is called a ‘Medicane’). Sea surface temperatures need to be over 28.5 C for a hurricane to strengthen. The Mediterranean off Italy’s coast reached 30 degrees this year. With the right conditions, it would only take one stray east Atlantic hurricane to head into the Med to cause widespread devastation. I can easily see this happening within ten years. Elsewhere we will see hurricanes and typhoons strong enough to flatten cities within the next decade.

The economic implications will be immense. The impact of hurricanes Harvey, Irma and Maria in the US is expected to be around $400 Billion this year, not counting the wildfires in California and drought in Montana. Over the next decade, super hurricanes, flooding and drought will cause insurance companies to collapse. Banks will follow and pension funds will start to come under pressure. With food prices increasing way ahead of wages, disposable incomes will be hit hard, leading to worldwide economic depression.

And that’s not taking into account the hundreds of millions of climate refugees (already begun in the Caribbean). With the jet stream already getting seriously messed up, or if the Hadley cells become severely disrupted, it’s not out of the question that the Indian monsoon could fail permanently and within a year we have a billion people starving.

There’s a saying that if something is unsustainable it will not be sustained. Obvious, perhaps, but we have been living well beyond the sustainability of the planet for decades and continue to believe that somehow we can do so increasingly and indefinitely. That will not be sustained.

So for forty years I tried to warn people. Now I tell them it’s too late and we’re f***ed, they say I’m being too negative need to give people a positive message. OK then, will “We’re positively f***ed” do?, because when we could save ourselves nobody listened, and even now when they think we still can, there is absolutely no will to do so.

For a long time, we have needed to change our lifestyles and that, for most people, is a red line area. There are no quick fixes. We cannot continue with mass air transport – the only non polluting alternative to fossil fuels requires huge areas of land to be removed from food production, which is already coming under pressure due to climate change and increasing population. We need to stop owning cars (not just leaving them in the driveways) – the resource requirements and human rights implications of even switching to electric cars present largely insurmountable problems. And even if these problems can be fixed, the solution needs to come first, rather than assuming as always that the next generation will somehow pick up the bill and sort out the mess we are creating by our profligate lifestyles.

And so we continue to build more runways and roads, drill for more oil, burn more forests for palm oil plantations and clear the rainforests for agriculture and logging, despite the fact that these massive environmental problems are no longer a theory but are staring us in the face. But we keep on driving and keep on flying and keep on buying things we don’t need from halfway across the globe without the slightest thought that all this will kill our children.

I was perhaps naive to believe that politics would solve the problem. If the bottom line is that people will not change their lifestyles, then they will not vote for politicians who say we need to. So politicians will not tell people the truth and tell them instead that we can get by with replacing petrol cars with electric ones by some decade well in the future and convince people we’re all ‘doing our bit’ for the planet by planting a few wind turbines. They talk vaguely about carbon capture and how air transport is important for economic growth and without that we cannot tackle climate change. As a councillor I was the only one even vaguely interested in the council’s climate change plan (including both councillors and officers).

And people believe them because they want to. I’ve long maintained that people get the politicians they deserve (good and bad) and they certainly don’t want politicians to tell them they can’t have their cheap holidays in Spain. I joined the Ecology Party (which became the Green Party) because it was, and still is, the only party to come anywhere close to telling people the truth on climate change. That people are generally not in the least interested in the environment that keeps them alive is borne out by the derisory vote Greens get – around 2% support except where they campaign strongly on non-environmental issues.

And Green Party activists have also realised this. So they focus on being more user friendly and campaigning on issues that ‘matter to people’ like independence or austerity, rather than lose votes by telling people it’s about time they faced the harsh truth.

I’ve been accused of being too Utopian, that before we address climate change we need an independent Scotland, or a Socialist Republic, or something else. And those arguments were rational thirty years ago – after all, it’s the free market Capitalist system that brought us to this position. However, thirty years ago is not now – when your house is on fire, you don’t try and get ownership of the keys, you reach for the hose. When I attend a climate rally and see it attracts less than a tenth of the numbers at a Scottish independence rally, it brings home how insane our politics has become. What planet do these people expect an independent Scotland to exist on? Venus by the look of it.

So we might be f***ed, but should we give up? No, I don’t think so. We may not be able to stop the process, but we can slow it down and offer the next generation at least some kind of palliative care. I have not flown or owned a car for around 20 years and will continue that way. Because very soon my children’s generation will become angry with mine, and will ask why, in the face of so many warnings from scientists for decades, we did nothing about it.

It will be little consolation, but at least I will be able to say I tried.


Posted by: AGelbert
« on: November 06, 2017, 03:08:40 pm »

I live to see your posts, these are so warming, do I have permission to abscond a few of them? ;D

Certainly! I heartily support any subsequent publication, in whole, or in part, of anything I post, with or without attribution. 

Posted by: GWarnock
« on: November 06, 2017, 02:51:41 pm »

I live to see your posts, these are so warming, do I have permission to abscond a few of them? ;D
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: November 05, 2017, 07:53:20 pm »

Where do you get those awesome emoji?

I built up a collection slowly over the past five years. I have them saved on documents for quick retrieval. 

I have posted many of them at a forum thread here when I was teaching a member on how to post images over a year ago.

Below is the link to the "How to make a comic" thread. I update it every now and then to show new images I have come up with. I had a lot of great kudzu bunny emojies and the people that produced them stopped allowing hot linking.
In order to avoid losing emojies in my collection, I have slowly uploaded them to the gallery here in gif or jpg format so I will always be able to link to them.

Here's a nice one with falling leaves appropriate to this season:

At any rate, I hope you get some good laughs from the thread, in addition to learning this and that about images. 

Posted by: GWarnock
« on: November 05, 2017, 04:26:07 pm »

Where do you get those awesome emoji?
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: November 05, 2017, 03:54:15 pm »

Can I scream now?

Yes! This is the appropriate smiley for the way decent people feel about this dystopian horror:   

Here is another one that is justified:

Posted by: GWarnock
« on: November 05, 2017, 03:42:09 pm »

Can I scream now?
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: November 05, 2017, 02:10:11 pm »

Agelbert NOTE: This news is a year old, but I post it because it is about a hellish future the Military Industrial Complex is trying to convince all of us to believe so that, OF COURSE, the massive funding for WAR and BRUTALITY will continue. Friends, it is the MILITARY itself that creates all these social problems so it can then claim to be "defending" us from them. These lackeys for the 1% are firmly convinced that the "moral Hazard" of a military that disingenuously warns of trouble to justify more military funding is actually a "prudent, practical, profitable (and so on) Might is Right Opportunity".

The military, like the 1% that OWNS them, does not DO ethics and thinks ethical behavior is a "weakness". There is no future for humanity if the Military Industrial Complex has its way. I pray to God that the MIC fails in their hellish quest.

According to a startling Pentagon video obtained by The Intercept, the future of global cities will be an amalgam of the settings of "Escape from New York" and "Robocop" — with dashes of the "Warriors" and "Divergent" thrown in.

It will be a world of Robert Kaplan-esque urban hellscapes — brutal and anarchic supercities filled with gangs of youth-gone-wild, a restive underclass, criminal syndicates, and bands of malicious hackers.

At least that's the scenario outlined in "Megacities:

Urban Future, the Emerging Complexity," a five-minute video that has been used at the Pentagon's Joint Special Operations University.

All that stands between the coming chaos and the good people of Lagos and Dhaka (or maybe even New York City) is the U.S. Army, according to the video, which The Intercept obtained via the Freedom of Information Act.


Posted by: AGelbert
« on: November 04, 2017, 10:12:09 pm »

Expect A Sudden Sea Level Event

Posted on November 1, 2017, by Radio Ecoshock



+-Recent Topics

Corruption in Government by AGelbert
March 20, 2018, 10:23:24 pm

Pollution by AGelbert
March 20, 2018, 08:27:04 pm

Healthy Eating by AGelbert
March 20, 2018, 03:20:37 pm

Geothermal Power by AGelbert
March 19, 2018, 10:10:39 pm

Corporate Profits over Patient in the Health Care Field by AGelbert
March 19, 2018, 10:00:43 pm

Corporate Fascist Corruption of Christianity by AGelbert
March 19, 2018, 06:43:31 pm

Homebody Handy Hints by AGelbert
March 17, 2018, 06:42:21 pm

Fossil Fuel Skulldugggery by AGelbert
March 17, 2018, 06:20:08 pm

Global Warming is WITH US by AGelbert
March 17, 2018, 03:05:58 pm

Money by AGelbert
March 16, 2018, 09:47:49 pm

Free Web Hit Counter By CSS HTML Tutorial