It's Eerie; Climate Disaster Is Happening Right Now & Humanity Is Just Pretending It's Not Happening

[Hissyspit]

http://www.alternet.org/environment/its-eerie-global-climate-disaster-happening-right-now-and-humanity-just-pretending-its?akid=9330.24869.ZNOkhq&rd=1&src=newsletter703564&t=8&paging=off

By George Monbiot

It's Eerie -- The Global Climate Disaster Is Happening Right Now... and Humanity Is Just Pretending It's Not Happening

We are going to pay a terrible price for this charade.

August 28, 2012 |

There are no comparisons to be made. This is not like war or plague or a stockmarket crash. We are ill-equipped, historically and psychologically, to understand it, which is one of the reasons why so many refuse to accept that it is happening.

What we are seeing, here and now, is the transformation of the atmospheric physics of this planet. Three weeks before the likely minimum, the melting of Arctic sea ice has already broken the record set in 2007. The daily rate of loss is now 50% higher than it was that year. The daily sense of loss – of the world we loved and knew – cannot be quantified so easily.

The Arctic has been warming roughly twice as quickly as the rest of the northern hemisphere. This is partly because climate breakdown there is self-perpetuating. As the ice melts, for example, exposing the darker sea beneath, heat which would previously have been reflected back into space is absorbed.

This great dissolution, of ice and certainties, is happening so much faster than most climate scientists predicted that, one of them reports, “it feels as if everything I’ve learned has become obsolete.” In its last assessment, published in 2007, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change noted that “in some projections, Arctic late-summer sea ice disappears almost entirely by the latter part of the 21st century.” These were the most extreme forecasts in the panel’s range. Some scientists now forecast that the disappearance of Arctic sea ice in late summer could occur in this decade or the next.

As I’ve warned repeatedly, but to little effect, the IPCC’s assessments tend to be conservative. This is unsurprising when you see how many people have to approve them before they are published. There have been a few occasions – such as its estimate of the speed at which glaciers would be lost in the Himalayas – on which the panel has overstated the case. But it looks as if these will be greatly outnumbered by the occasions on which the panel has understated it.

MORE[p]

[a la izquierda]

1. This is really important...

but I think many people don't acknowledge this tragedy, and its consequences for mankind, because it's not something they can see everyday.

[coldbeer]

5. The cause is over-population.

[Ship of Fools]

7. Too many rats in the cage. Yup!

[The2ndWheel]

11. Overpopulation is a symptom

[TalkingDog]

13. Of what, exactly?

Overpopulation is a eminently fixable problem.


Seriously... if overpopulation is a "symptom", wtf do you think the "real" core problem is?

[BlueinOhio]

20. Over consumption

All the people on the earth can stand inside 430 sq miles. So obviously not the problem. Some countries use more resources than all the others, hyper consumerism is the economic plan, not sustainable.There needs to be a real discussion on earth changes. Fact over history there has been the climb and fall of civilizations and they almost always occur with some climate disaster. So part of the problem is already natural cycle now add man's contribution by pollution, digging for more natural resources it is hurrying up the process.

[tabasco]

46. Good lord. You set a record

for most logical fallacies in one post.

[BlueinOhio]

83. Sorry facts are stubborn things.

[AverageJoe90]

109. Try telling that to either the deniers OR the doomers, though. nt

[renie408]

119. You are kidding, right?

What other species of our size matches our population density? If we just EXIST in the numbers we have accumulated, we would effect climate change.

Over consumption is ALSO a problem, but this is not a matter of one or the other. We need intelligent population control (or trust me, the world will figure out a really crappy way to take care of that problem for us) and we need to promote less 'stuff' driven societies.

[The2ndWheel]

42. Our ever increasing attempts to control nature/the environment/whatever you want to call it

on both bigger and smaller scales, over however many thousands of years.

[raccoon]

18. And overconsumption of resources by citizens in first world countries. nt

[Nikia]

39. The cause is not switching over to almost all alternative energy by now

There were scientists who discovered that fossil fuels were a problem decades ago, this should have been a top priority even if there was a big financial cost. Future generations could have talked about how we averted a big environmental catastrophe while living similar or better lives than we now enjoy. Now there are going to be big lifestyle changes for the worse and probably wars and starvation that will kill many people. From a social organization stand point anarchy or oppressive dictatorships are a real possibility.

[AverageJoe90]

112. It's sad, but unfortunately, all too true.

All we can do now is try to mitigate, halt, and reverse the damage.....most of it can be done, although there will be a few certain things which Nature may have to fix on it's own(like the Arctic ice problem).....and I don't think we can ever recover the numerous species we've lost, either.

[LWolf]

89. Which is why the human world turns a blind eye.

[Warren DeMontague]

99. The cause is carbon dioxide, produced by fossil fuels.

Period.

[Zalatix]

118. Yes, so whose population should be controlled?

The real problem is OVERCONSUMPTION.

Our way out is to create a society that is sustainable on an individual level.

[longship]

2. Important is the flurry of alarming papers this summer.

All coming from reliable climate scientists who, as you aptly point out, are a conservative lot. From week to week this summer I see one after another climate records not just eclipsed, but shredded, many going back a hundred millennia or more.

The important thing for people to realize is that the longer we delay addressing this, they higher the cost and the more effort it requires. But these are not linear. The effects are compounded by positive feedback mechanisms which, if they kick in, may make a return to natural affairs not practically attainable. We may even be beyond that point already.

But these papers this year are shocking in their conclusions. The normally careful and staid climate scientists are alarmed because their climate models are failing to predict this apparent acceleration in significant near global events.

If James Hansen is worried, I am very worried. I do not think that this is hyperbole.

Thanks for this thread.

[Berlum]

3. Meanwhile, Republicans continue their greed-driven War on Truth with agressive Reality Denial

[99Forever]

35. Well yes, but...

... if you would be so kind as to point out which MAJOR political players on the Democratic side are expending time and energy giving this life or death of humanity issue public airing and sounding the alarm?

[Berlum]

41. Fatcat Republcan moneybucks liars render that irrelevant

that's what needs point out, as every honest person must agree.

[99Forever]

43. Well there's an excuse for...

... doing nothing.

Yay for excuses! And "every honest person" that makes 'em!

[AverageJoe90]

69. You know what else BADLY needs to be pointed out?

Just how much the doomsayers have helped set back our ability to get the word out. See post 63.

[Fawke Em]

61. I think they know how dire it is and keep up the charade

so that the 99 percent takes it up the ass for the 1 percent.

Seriously, we're fodder in their attempt to escape Mother Nature.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

4. It'll snow soon and FOX "News" will be sure to mention it.

[Junkdrawer]

6. Consider this:

Suppose you had to commute 30 miles to work each day and someone said:

"You must now use 1 gallon of gas a week or your grandchildren will see a slightly hotter world." Most people would fill their tank.

Now if I said:

"You must now use 1 gallon of gas a week or YOU will see an even hotter world and food prices will double." Most people would fill their tank, tune into ANYONE who would tell them it's all a lie, and buy a 6 pack of beer on their way home.

That's where we're at.

[dixiegrrrrl]

31. Well stated. Sadly.

It's human nature.
The relatively few of us who have seen..even forseen....this crisis are really no match for majority of people who don't want to see it.
Unless change is dircted via an inforced legal mandate, there will be no significant change.

Even Pres. Obama does not get it. Remember he recently, proudly, announced mandated MPG rates to take effect in... 2025.

[AverageJoe90]

66. Read post number 63 for a part of the answer as to why people can't see the truth. nt

[AverageJoe90]

64. You can blame the doomers for a good part of the problem. nt

[loyalsister]

115. Aside from that

There are people who do care and would be happy to give it more consideration in their lives, but do not have that luxury. They are taking care of elderly parents, trying to raise families, barely surviving, trying to maintain their own personal health....

[Le Taz Hot]

8. Anyone who farms or gardens is aware of it.

Pests, good and bad, showing up at weird times of the year, plants/trees maturing at odd times. I'm in CA and some of the leaves on the trees are already turning for fall. This doesn't usually happen until October here.

This is it. The politicians aren't going to do anything because there's too much money to be made destroying the planet. WE have to do it, individually, by reducing our carbon footprint. There are MANY affordable ways to do this:

Recycle
Use cloth bags instead of plastic
Buy used items instead of new
Grow more veggies/fruits and less decorative plants and grass (a HUGE waste of water resources)
Support the 'Buy Local' movement in your area
Start a compost pile
Buy more raw stuff and less packaged stuff

There's much more but you get the idea. Put BACK to Mother Nature whenever you can instead of taking away from her.

[TalkingDog]

15. Local action by individuals is pointless.

Stricter regulation of the polluters is not.

I don't have the article here in front of me, but it is accessible on the web and it pencils out the numbers. If every person in America lived a 'perfect' environmentally correct life it would change very little. There just aren't that many of us.

Coal fired plants, Industry... for instance the airline industry that lets jets sit on the runway for hours burning fuel, Manufacturing ... which is now mostly overseas, hence the need for pacts, are the overwhelming source of the kind of pollution we are talking about.

Taking the kind of action you are talking about feels good, but it lulls us into a false sense that "something is being accomplished". When in reality, we need to be using that energy to bug the crap out of our legislators and get the power of Big Energy lobbyist out of the process.

[Le Taz Hot]

17. I disagree with everything you said.

Who is going to write and implement this "strict regulation?" We have a DEMOCRATIC president and he's not shown that he's particularly environmentally aware (see BP and the pipeline). If the Democrats aren't going to do it, the Republicans sure as hell aren't going to do it. So, who is going to do it? And what about world leaders? Who's going to force them to write, implement and monitor "strict regulations?" As I said earlier, there's too much money to be made in destroying Mother Earth so the PTB have absolutely NO incentive to do otherwise.

I don't know what article to which you are referring but I'd have to read it myself AND look directly at the actual study and the numbers and, of course, follow the money, which is ALWAYS key.

There are THOUSANDS of article clearly stating exactly the opposite of what you claim. Here's just ONE:

http://www.time.com/time/specials/2007/environment/article/0,28804,1602354_1603074,00.html

What I and MILLIONS of others are doing is not just making us "feel good," it's making a direct impact on our little parts of the world. I've been in my home for 13 years now and in 13 years I've been bringing my yard from a beautiful, landscaped yard to a WORKING yard. I now grow fruits and vegetables and I have enough ladybugs, praying mantis and lacewings to take care of all the pests. That happens because I don't use pesticides.

One needs to first be AWARE of the the signs Mother Earth sends to us for she tells us when she is happy by sending us more life. I live in the city and I have a part-time bunny living here (wild) and a couple of toads. Thirteen years ago they would have never been here because the previous owners were obsessed by insecticides, herbicides and all kinds of other icides so there WAS NO wildlife.

If you want to wait for your gummmit to take care of global warming for you, if you're waiting for the Koch Brothers to become more environmentally aware, then good luck with that. As for me and MILLIONS of others, we'll take the Sustainability route where we don't rely on the actions of others.

And might I suggest that you start looking up things like aquaponics (raising fish), vermiculture (raising worms), gardening, capturing rainwater, naturally filtering water, solar/wind power -- getting off the grid. This is a HUGE movement and you seem to be completely unaware of it. I suggest that you educate yourself on this vast subject before denigrating it.

[bhikkhu]

47. Local action by individuals can have a massive effect

Demanding action without taking action individually just makes us the biggest hypocrites in the world, and in the end kills any political effort.

For instance, why do we have people so upset about the price of gas one day, and then so upset about global climate change the next? If you don't understand the connection you are very unlikely to effectively support the politics that will make a difference. The best way to understand the connections between things is to make them a part of your own life - to do yourself what you are asking other people to do. How many people hang their clothes out to dry? Bicycle to work? Bring their own reusable bags to the grocery store? and so on...individual action makes a great deal of difference over time, and is very much needed if we are to ever reach the "cultural tipping point" where we can live sustainably as a people.

At some point, those who reject individual action will be replaced by those who embrace it, whether it is a matter of being replaced from within by transformation of our culture, or replaced from without by another culture that lives within the means of the planet.

[guardian]

98. a "massive effect"???

I thought we were already past the tipping point. That what so many of the most ardent proponents of global warming say. If they are right then whatever you do will have NO discernible impact.

OR are you saying that everyone who says we are past the tipping point is full of shit?

[bhikkhu]

104. The days after the tipping point, the world is still here

and people still have to get on with things. There are more than two possible states to the climate, so its not like a switch gets flipped and its all over; if we're past a tipping point it still makes a difference what we do now.

There is about a 50 year lag time between carbon emissions and their effects, so anyone at any time could say "screw it - nothing I do is going to matter for years!"

Its still worthwhile to do the right thing, even if its only our grandkids who benefit or suffer.

[datasuspect]

24. the earth doesn't need us, we need it

all the busy body green bs you could ever imagine doing doesn't make a hill of beans stacked against physics.

if we don't see an extinction level event, we'll have to live with the new normal: sustained lightning strokes, killer thunderstorms (inland hurricanes), droughts, floods, and fires.

and you know what? the herd NEEDS to be thinned a little.

we made this mess, now we live with it.

end of story.

[tavalon]

30. Correct

An extinction level event would be a kindness. I hope Gaia chooses that.

[magical thyme]

93. I'm halfway up the Maine coast

Our trees should have started turning 3-4 weeks ago. They are just now barely getting started.

I grew *melons* this year. I've been getting peaches in large quantities for 3 years now.

It used to be a battle to get tomatoes ripe in early Sept. This year, I started harvesting them in early August.

My apples came in a month early and are tiny -- about 1/4 their normal size.

I started getting butterfly moths a couple years ago. I'd never heard of them before (and I grew up in PA).

They rarely saw ticks in Maine. Now my vet gives everybody extensive lectures on ticks, complete with enlargements (bleah!).

Babesiosis is a malaria-like, tick-borne disease that used to be confined to Martha's Vinyard and the cape area. We started getting outbreaks up here last summer.

I've seen the changes in the 9 years I've been here. Especially so in the last 3 years...

[eShirl]

9. why do anything to stop it

Jesus will come back to earth when it gets bad
Then we'll all go to heaven happily ever after
Knowing the wrong people are spending eternity burning in a lake of fire
Because God loves us

[kestrel91316]

51. What teh bible fails to tell us is that "lake of fire" ain't somewhere else,

it's HERE on earth, it's what our world will turn into, metaphorically.

[AverageJoe90]

65. I have a similar view of those people......

Who say there's nothing we can do to fix it, and that we can never get back to normal, no matter what. See post 63.

[Odin2005]

10. When the Western Roman Empire was disintegrating...

...a lot of people denied it was even happening. Life without the Empire was inconceivable to them.

[sendero]

12. The only problem with the....

..... "we are going to pay" stuff is that it is already WAY TOO LATE to do ANYTHING MEANINGFUL about this problem.

So, I would suggest to anyone who is concerned that they prepare for it as best they can. Because yes, it is coming.

[Le Taz Hot]

19. This. n/t

[xchrom]

14. Du rec. Nt

[90-percent]

16. OUR INSTITUTIONS ARE INFESTED WITH CORRUPT SOCIOPATHS

The people that run our planet simply don't care if they are creating a future of biblical cataclysmic proportions. They think they're rich and privileged enough to deal with it and the health of mother earth be damned.

To paraphrase Frank Zappa, humanities awareness of the consequences of global warming will not be felt by average people until it comes up and bites them in the ass. That time is now in the present moment.

The world should have been aggressively fixing this thirty fucking years ago! It's way too late to do anything about it now. Heaven help the young and the hell on earth we have given all their futures!

-90% Jimmy

[villager]

80. Sociopaths, indeed.

That seems to be our "choice," each election: "reasonable" apologists for the status quo on one hand, deranged sociopaths on the other.

Some choice.

[freedom fighter jh]

21. A big part of the problem is a disinformation campaign that says it's not happening

Check out anything by James Hoggan. For example, look at this interview with Amy Goodman: http://www.democracynow.org/2009/10/20/pr_executive_james_hoggan_on_james (starting at about the 48-minute mark).

The media have failed us, and by "us" I mean the human race, because it's all of us that are going to suffer for this. And our government has failed us, because it's government's job to do what can't be done individually. Sure there are people who will act on their own and grow their own food and trade in their cars for bikes, but for the most part, especially given the disinformation campaign, change will not happen until it's organized.

Under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), a treaty signed by most countries in the world, including the United States (See http://unfccc.int/essential_background/convention/status_of_ratification/items/2631.php), every year there is an international meeting to try to get some cooperative action. As the crisis worsens, these meetings seem to end, year after year, with very little progress. This is a place where the United States needs to take a leading role. President Obama, at this year's meeting in Doha in November, use your charisma to get the world together on a course of action; get them to come up with a draft treaty for the most aggressive action possible to at least start to solve the greatest problem the world has known. Then come home and smack the Senate around as much as necessary to get them to STFU and ratify the damned thing before we all cook.

[theinquisitivechad]

22. Why do you think the disinformation campaign exists?

I truly want to know. Is it all politicking and "I'm going to believe the opposite of what you say is true" on the Conservative side? Is there not money enough behind forces for climate change, like there is for polluting businesses? Is there just apathy and a lack of desire to do anything, so we turn the other way?

This is one of the most important challenges of our era and future eras - why the disinformation?

[n2doc]

28. Because certain very rich people and companies don't want to change

You can be certain that oil companies and even the Koch's are preparing for the changes. They have even admitted it in the case of Exxon. But they also have billions of dollars of 'extractable' resources that need to be sold at a profit, and don't want anything to change that. It all comes down to money. And they spend a little, really very little in the grand scheme of things, to keep the disinformation (LIES) going.

[theinquisitivechad]

23. And also. . .

What is the solution to this problem? Is there any? What can the average person do to help? What can the non-average person do to help?

[spanone]

25. stupid humans

[RadiationTherapy]

26. Reasons I don't recycle number 11: grocery receipts.

Fuck your long, stupid grocery receipts with shitty coupons on the back.

[Bluenorthwest]

27. It might be eerie but it is also typical.

When the AIDS crisis hit, it took years to get the bulk of the population to so much as say the word. Years of actions. So this is exactly like that plague, we were ll-equipped, historically and psychologically, to understand it, which is one of the reasons why so many refused to accept that it was happening.
The author of this piece would not be so surprised if the author was better informed about past emerging global emergencies, that it takes time for awareness to spread and more time for action to take place.

[tavalon]

29. You know why there is such apathy?

People who truly understand how bad it is, realize that recycling a few things won't cut it and that a global response, while necessary, even vital, will not happen. So, we bow our heads to Gaia, praying that she will only take the unworthy, knowing that she will take the worthy and unworthy, with no remorse. She has to. We were trying to murder her. She will take her body back and there isn't anything to be done. There were flipping points and moments when things might have been helped but the time is past and many if not most of humanity will die. And many who will die didn't even contribute to the idiocy.

Gaia always survives. She was here before us, and in geologic terms she will be here long after we destroy ourselves. The only reason she is speeding our demise is because we have been so good at harming her. So she's going to shake us off like a dog shakes off fleas.

When I think of that in the macrocosm, it feels very right. When I think of it in the microcosm, it makes me feel very sad.

[coalition_unwilling]

34. You sound like you are channeling your inner Marcus Aurelius. Myself, I remember this

early passage from Dickens' Great Expectations (Chapter 7), told in the voice of the child narrator Pip:

"And then I looked at the stars, and considered how awful it would be for a man to turn his fuce up to them as he froze to death, and see no help or pity in all the glittering multitude."

Not sure why your post brought that to mind, other than that the universe is basically indifferent to the fate of homo sapiens.

[tavalon]

44. It's funny, I stay very engaged with life

but in the long view, I'm fairly comfortable with the idea that our planet needs rid of us.

[coalition_unwilling]

49. Since Operation Shocking and Awful, I've grown increasingly withdrawn from

the world and people in it (except for a brief 2-month interlude with Occupy Los Angeles). Taken as an abstract philosophical proposition, I find there is absolutely no compelling reason why life in any form should exist in the universe rather than not exist, much less sentient or intelligent life. I do feel badly for the other higher-order primates and mammals who did absolutely nothing to merit the fate that awaits them thanks to the action (and inaction) of homo sapiens.

I guess I'm saying I share your long view.

[WinkyDink]

55. A whole literary genre is based on this premise: Naturalism.

http://edsitement.neh.gov/lesson-plan/crane-london-and-literary-naturalism

[Odin2005]

62. I guess my view is a bit more optimistic.

I see humanity as Gaia's way of reproducing herself via space colonization. Unfortunately the mother is suffering gestational diabetes and pre-eclampia...

[ananda]

32. I've never seen denial on the scale that it's happening on this issue.

It's mindboggling to see so many people able to delude themselves
that way. And it's very emotionally embedded and nigh impossible
to make an impact with facts and logic and observation.

[raouldukelives]

33. The love and admiration people feel for Mother Nature.

The joy they might get from watching a hawk soar across the skyline or seeing a coral reef pales in comparison to the sweet, sweet money. They would sooner pucker up and kiss the ass of CEO's than divest themselves and actually try to make the world better, for once.

[Blue Owl]

36. Denial isn't just a rapidly-drying river in Egypt

n/t

[librechik]

37. catstrophe almost always has its origin at Denial River

the current is unbelievably strong there...

[CK_John]

38. Poor Canada doesn't realize what is on the way! nt

[Gregorian]

40. And it's all based on population. But we can't talk about it.

All of the problems we see are symptoms of overpopulation. There is nothing else to say. It's as simple as that. And the solution is simple, and quickly resolved.

So let's not do anything about it. Let's add another billion people, and then see if we can engineer our way back to normal oceans, forests, food production, CO2 emissions...

[tabasco]

50. I agree.

It's going to get worse before it gets better.

[WinkyDink]

56. Are you volunteering first, Dr. Kevorkian?

[GliderGuider]

58. That's a shallow, unworthy response.

Do you think that doctors who diagnose cancer wish for the death of their patients, or deserve to die of cancer themselves for the temerity of their diagnosis?

Please try growing up. It doesn't hurt much once you get the hang of it.

[Gregorian]

59. Thanks. You just proved the point I was making.

We really can't talk about it without offending most people.

As if there were only one solution.

[Trillo]

70. Please elucidate. RE:

the solution is simple, and quickly resolved.

[Gregorian]

72. Have fewer children.

[Trillo]

84. How about "0" kids? Anyway, thank you.

The feeling between your words is uncommon, at least here on this website.

It is my understanding that there are growing numbers of folks who today choose not to have children, and when I've looked in the several-years-ago past, it is seen in "developed" countries' statistics. However, there are also a few who choose to have large families, and lots who choose to have two children. One child is a good idea, zero kids even better.

If someone has no children, it will be a lonely life for those folks as they age, not having the support of their grown children when they're elderly.

To some degree our economic system seems to have been based upon the expansion of populations, and this has provided powerful forces, rationales, and support systems for those who choose to procreate.

If we were serious about reducing human populations, we could financially reward those folks who do not have them. But, here in the U.S., we do the opposite. I think the issue in the past has been stated as based on poverty, and giving financial support to poorer parents who have children is supposed to help the children during their growing years.

It's a tough and sad problem.

[Gregorian]

86. Exactly. There is a lot to this. But the solution really is trivial.

I'm going on 60, and no children. Most of the friends I grew up with have none. But then we grew up in the most liberal neighborhood in America.

We truly are in a grey zone where things have changed so quickly we don't see the results of our own actions. The skies are littered with thousands of 1/4 million pound hunks of metal flying near the speed of sound, and only 100 years ago some bicycle mechanics were trying to figure out how to get something other than a hot air balloon to fly. We went from farming to corporate stockyards and the Bosch-Haber cycle for making nitrogen to supercharge dirt so we could feed more people than the land was able to naturally.

Between men just running roughshod over women (like my grandmother who gave birth to 12 children because of no birth control), or ignorance of the consequences of world population, or what I call sexual greed, the nesting instinct, or many things, people continue to breed at a rate that is unsustainable by the planet in it's natural equilibrium. We have slowed down. But like carbon emissions, which is population based, we need to do more than slow down. We need to go backwards. That's not in the context of human society.

I predict we'll slowly ramp down, but only too late, and with consequences that will, and have already, diminish the diversity and livability of the planet.

The hardest part is that like global warming, there isn't a consensus among those who are causing it, and there really is no meaningful dialogue.

I'm personally upset by it because I bypassed opportunities to travel the world. I still watch as people I know bike the stages of the Tour de France before each race. I'd give a lot to do that. But I won't entertain myself at the planet's expense like that, as most people do. The same applies to having children. How selfish.

[Trillo]

116. Congratulations! Applause ... Really! ... anyway, The solution seems simple.

Unfortunately, our species is biologically hardwired to procreate. My own reasons for not breeding have less to do with Saving the Earth, and more to do with Saving my Children, perhaps explained best as, "If you love your children, then why would you bring them here?"

Perhaps recognizing and applauding folks who do not have children can be something each of us as individuals can do to encourage childless lifestyles. Even while it may be perceived as a small matter, let me personally congratulate you on your choice to remain childless.

I was just looking for some studies about the desire to have children, and whether there are gender differences, and found a much more complicated topic than I could quickly assimilate in the time I was willing to allot. I found one curious Google result:

It takes guts to say: 'I don't want children' | Polly Vernon | Comment is ...
www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/.../polly-vernon-childlessness-ca...
Jun 14, 2009 – It takes guts to say: 'I don't want children'. Cameron Diaz admits she's happy to be childless. Yet few women - or men - will praise her stance ...

If we want to encourage a particular behavior, ignoring that behavior -- when exhibited -- would seem the wrong tactic.

[Gregorian]

117. My introduction to Ted Rall, the cartoonist

was a flier that I cannot for the life of me find on the internet. It was called "Thank You For Not Breeding". It was before the net. I used to listen to a great radio station in the SF area, and heard about it. I've still got the several page booklet around somewhere. It was like a tiny ray of hope.

[NutmegYankee]

71. Then lets talk about it. Forget the euphemisms! Lets really TALK about it.

"And the solution is simple, and quickly resolved".

I figure that comment isn't about birth control, as that is a complex solution, dealing with multiple faiths and poor education of women in many countries. Based on weak government structures and the lack of resources, it will be extremely difficult to slow the birth rate down fast enough to prevent an extra billion people in the next few decades.

So what is this simple and quick solution?

[Gregorian]

73. Personal responsibility. Have less children. One. None.

That's simple. But it appears people would rather put their kid's futures, and those of future generations in jeopardy than take control and reverse the situation.

[NutmegYankee]

81. Ah. So the poor poverty stricken people of the world are just irresponsible?

It's so simple! It couldn't be culture, lack of access to birth control, and lack of education for women...

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

100. Yup, that's a BIG part of it

Also important is the fact that third world people in places like India, China, Brazil and others, even if they reduce their population growth are trying to become ultra consumers like us, drive cars like us, destroy the natural landscape to produce food and destroy natural habitats like us. The poor don't get a free pass on this. Every one of us on this planet has to bear responsibility and recognize that we are all assholes in this together. The entire human race has become poison to this planet because either they are consuming without conscience or hoping to become consumers without conscience.

[upi402]

45. The Media are worse than mere traitors

They are tacitly complicit in mass genocide.

[mick063]

48. Earth becomes Venus.

It will happen

You might be surprised to know that Venus is the hottest planet in the Solar System. With a global temperature of 735 Kelvin (462 degrees C), the surface of Venus is hot enough to melt lead. And if you could stand on the surface of Venus, you would experience atmospheric pressure 92 times greater than what you’re used to on Earth. Why is Venus so hot? The Venus greenhouse effect shows you what happens when this the process of trapping sunlight goes out of control into a runaway process

Scientists think that Venus used to be more similar to Earth, with lower temperatures and even liquid water on the surface of the planet. At some point, billions of years ago, the planet started to heat up. At some point, all the water on the surface evaporated into the atmosphere. Water vapor is an even more powerful greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide and this caused temperatures to rise even more. Then the surface of Venus got so hot that the carbon trapped in rocks sublimated into the atmosphere and mixed with oxygen to form even more carbon dioxide. And so today we have a carbon dioxide atmosphere on Venus which is 92 times more dense than Earth’s atmosphere at the surface.

I disagree with the notion that Earth can come back after man is extinct. We just may be creating an uninhabitable planet for life as we know it. The "runaway effect" isn't a linear term. It is logarithmic. The process constantly accelerates. Although there is a final endpoint when there is no more available carbon to put into the atmosphere, that endpoint is Venus. Further, three quarters of the earth is covered with water and water vapor is an even greater greenhouse threat than carbon. Imagine all of Earth's oceans evaporated into the atmosphere. There is potential for Earth to become even hotter with atmosphere more dense.

We are past the point of no return. Hug your grandkids and apologize now.

[Art_from_Ark]

52. Earth will not become Venus

For one thing, Venus is approximately 70% of the distance to the sun that the earth is-- in other words, it's much closer to the sun and consequently receives a higher dose of solar radiation.

For another thing, Venus' atmosphere, which is 96.5% carbon dioxide, is 100 times denser than the Earth's (which is only 0.03% CO2), and traps much more solar heat than the Earth's atmosphere.

Finally, a day on Venus is equal to 243 Earth days. The extremely slow axial rotation coupled with the planet's proximity to the sun can be likened to the planet being turned very slowly on a very hot spit.

So the Earth will not become Venus. However, environmental damage, including not only greenhouse gas emissions but also such things as deforestation, destruction of ecosystems, and overurbanization, are definitely taking a toll with the Earth's climate.

[AverageJoe90]

67. I'm sorry, no. Bullshit. Caca. Schiess. Merde. ETC.

This kind of wacko bullshit isn't helping anybody. There is simply NO way Earth can possibly turn into Venus II thanks to global warming alone. Even comets burning up in our atmosphere can't do that.

[AverageJoe90]

68. I'm sorry, no. Bullshit. Caca. Schiess. Merde. ETC.

This kind of wacko bullshit isn't helping anybody. There is simply NO way Earth can possibly turn into Venus II thanks to global warming alone. Even comets burning up in our atmosphere can't do that. Honestly, stop embarrassing us, Mick.

[slackmaster]

82. We're almost there already

[Frank Cannon]

103. LOL

"2 degree guarantee".

[truebrit71]

53. And they're still being too conservative...

...at the rate of loss we're seeing this year we will be ice-free within the next two years...we are so well and truly screwed it's not even funny...

[WinkyDink]

54. There is nothing anymore humanity can do.

[WillyT]

57. This Is Denial... And There Is NO Bigger Denial Than That Of Climate Change... And Our Own Fate

[Fire Walk With Me]

60. Yep.

[AverageJoe90]

77. The doomers didn't help either. See post 63..........The truth has to come out. nt

[AverageJoe90]

63. We are in trouble.

But the truth is, the massive amounts of disinformation that we've had to deal with, and the backing of it by people like the Koch Bros., etc., while a major part of the problem, isn't the only significant factor we have to acknowledge in understanding why we've had such trouble getting things done. The "doomsday" people have done a LOT of damage as well.

For those of you who consider yourselves doomers, whether or not you actually are, ask yourselves this: what do you think will really wake people up? This screaming incoherent mess of, "Stop consuming or Earth turns into Venus II!" or, "Stop pumping gas or humanity will go extinct!!!1!!one!!!one!!1!"; or actually trying to inform people and say "Here, I found this stuff and I thought you might be interested." or, "There is evidence that certain human activities are influencing climate change and that we do need to act as soon as possible because there may be long-term problems ahead."?
Sad thing is, those who really are doomers(and not just those who think they are!), although a pretty small minority, were easy pickings. The deniers and their buddies saw them and thought they hit the jackpot, and they used them as the brush & paint used to smear the rest of the community. And sadly, it worked.

Had it not been for that, ACC denial would have been a much harder sell; the Koch Bros. & their llk would have had a far harder time convincing the public to buy their cock-and-bull stories, and about the only ones selling it would likely be that nutter Alex Jones and FOX News cronies. Instead, we even have a large number of well-meaning people who have been misinformed, on top of the crooks & liars. And decent, knowledgeable people like Peter Sinclair and James Hansen now have a major uphill battle to face, worse than what it would have been if the doomers had just stepped back(and it probably would have already been a challenge!) and took five.

[NickB79]

74. The problem is, a lot of us were told the same thing 10-20 years ago

With platitudes that the Arctic wouldn't melt away for another 50 years, that massive wildfires and droughts were still decades away, that food riots weren't going to happen, that there was no need to worry about methane releases, etc.

Now all these things have happened decades faster than previously predicted, and your words ring hollow.

[AverageJoe90]

75. Told what, exactly?

Nick, while it may be true that some scientists may have been a *tad* too optimistic back in the '90s(honestly, I can't help but think sea-level rise predictions are actually way too optimistic), it doesn't at all change the truth(nor does it give the doomers ANY ground whatsoever). The doomers did real harm to the credibility of climate change research; not out of malice on their part, but because they ended up becoming very convenient stereotypes to be used, by the Koch Bros. and others, to tar anyone who knows that this is a real problem.

We could have made quite a bit more progress than we had, at least in terms of the West. We might not be facing many of the problems we do now, at least in terms of severity, even if someone like Bush II still won the 2000 election. It's largely because of the doomers, that WUWT, and all the other disinfo organs were able to work so well; it's because their wacky bullshit(mick063 posted a real crap post about Earth turning into Venus not long ago on here, as one good example.) turned off a large number of people who could have woken up to reality years earlier, perhaps including some Democrats. Without that factor, CC denial & 'skepticism' probably wouldn't have become nearly as prominent as it did, outside the far right and the fans of fringe conspiracy theorists like Alex Jones, or whoever's doing Coast to Coast these days.

That's why I do get pissed off at these people, Nick. They cost us valuable time, too, like it or not; we should have cast them off a long time ago, and left the talking to people like Katherine Hayhoe, Peter Sinclair and others who actually know what they're doing & saying.

[Uncle Joe]

90. You're deflecting the blame, if your house or building is on fire, you don't tell the people

residing inside that it's just getting warm.

If anything as evidence continues to mount regarding global warming climate change, the position of the "doomsday people" is reinforced.

The Earth's climate doesn't handle like a sports car, it would be more like turning a giant super tanker.

Humanity is playing Russian Roulette with the Earth's climate and the nations of the Northern Hemisphere aren't dividing up borders in the Arctic for no reason, they know it's melting.

The science behind the potential devastation from global warming climate change is decades ahead of corporate media reporting but that doesn't mean the scientists of the world should slow down their warnings and wait for the so called "Fourth Estate" to wake up.

[AverageJoe90]

91. Not at all, Uncle Joe.

I am merely stating the truth of the matter; they do share some of the blame for our problems....perhaps not as much as lying scumbags like the Koch Bros. or big oil, but they're not totally blameless, either.
And there is, btw, a real difference between realizing that there's a sense of urgency(which there is!!), and going off and making wild predictions & claims such as humanity going extinct as a direct result of climate change or Earth turning into Venus II, literally or otherwise, etc. I place the doomers exclusively in the latter category.....

And, btw, if anything at all, I would actually agree that some of the scientists may indeed have been a little too optimistic back in teh day. But this doesn't give credence to the doomers, not one bit.

[Uncle Joe]

92. Two points 1. Humanity could go extinct and if not at least civilization as we know it

could easily come to an end.

2. Earth only needs to reach a fraction of Venus' temperature for such an event to take place.

It's not just temperature it's the changing ocean's acidity levels and/or a massive release of methane from the thawing tundra's regions there are several self-sustaining tipping points which could threaten or eliminate the food chain and/or major resources of fresh water.

As the Earth's glaciers melt, the pressure for major wars will increase over the fight for water, Asia is particularly susceptible to this but it can happen elsewhere as well.

I believe the last thing we should be doing is underestimating the threat posed by global warming climate change.

[AverageJoe90]

95. Civilization as we know it may indeed be in grave danger.

And I don't doubt there very well could be a significant culling of Earth's population.

But we should NOT be OVERestimating climate change, either. Earth will not turn into Venus, nor will humanity go extinct.....Need I remind you that we have survived disasters more sudden, and even more traumatic than global warming(which is a tragedy in it's own right!), such as the Toba eruption 70k years ago?

[NickB79]

102. The Toba eruption is in no way comparable to global warming

There is a very real possibility that, given current warming trends, global warming will progress to the point of the Permian mass extincition event, which wiped out 90% of all life on Earth. Toba, on the other hand, wasn't even a blip on the radar in comparison. It was destructive, but it's effects on the Earth's biosphere was barely recorded in the fossil record.

Also, there is conflicting evidence if the Toba eruption even caused a genetic bottleneck in humanity: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toba_catastrophe_theory

Furthermore, a 2010 geneticists' study seems to question the foundations of the Toba bottleneck theory: analysis of Alu sequences across the entire human genome has shown that the effective human population was already less than 26,000 as far back as 1.2 million years ago, suggesting that no Toba bottleneck was necessary. Possible explanations for the low population size of human ancestors may include repeated population bottlenecks or periodic replacement events from competing Homo subspecies.[41]

[AverageJoe90]

106. Sorry, but your point hasn't been proven.

All the quote really says, is that population bottlenecks happened before the Toba event and that there was more than one possible way to create bottlenecks, and that Toba may not have been the only factor.

And "barely recorded"? I'm sorry, but not likely. If Yellowstone erupted tomorrow, there are many scientists who believe that it could seriously disrupt life on earth, by introducing sudden, and dramatic changes, within perhaps months, or even weeks of the event; there is even the possibility that a miniature ice age could set in afterwards......which would wipe out a majority of life as we know it for sure.
Global warming is no picnic(trust me, I understand this more than you may think), that is true. But we've survived disasters far worse than this, and unlike a volcanic eruption or meteor strike(at least for now), we can, in fact, mitigate, stop, and even reverse global warming.

This issue is simply too important to allow fearmongering to rule the day.....because it only helps the Koch Bros. and all those others who want to continue trashing the planet for profit.

[NickB79]

110. Then point to evidence of a global mass extinction 70,000 yr ago

The fossil record doesn't support your position.

[AverageJoe90]

111. Notice I never threw out any percentages?

I never claimed that any supervolcanic eruption killed as much life as the Permian extinction event.
But when you think about it, you don't need 90% of life to die for a mass extinction to occur, since there are millions of different species on Earth........In fact, it can be legitimately argued that one is happening now, with the many species that have already been lost.

The only claim I have really made so far is that humans have survived worse catastrophes before. And honestly, for all we know, we may actually get lucky and not see more than a 2*C increase by 2100(that is, if drastic changes DO occur)....or, we could see something like a ~4*C change by 2100 even if we did take some action. But if the former does come to pass(unlikely but possible), then it will have been but a blip on the radar compared to something like the K/T event.

I take no comfort in what's ahead; mega-famines never before seen in human history, water wars in Africa & Asia, climate refugees and related strife, etc. That's not needless optimism, it's reality as it could be by 2100. But going on & on about fringe hypothetical scenarios isn't helping our case. Instead, we need to keep working on solutions to the problems we face.

[Scootaloo]

76. It's not that humanity is pretending it's not happening.

It's that seven people are looking to the person next to them and going "Well? What are you going to do about it?"

[AverageJoe90]

78. And don't forget the damage the doomers did, too.

Without them, let's just the Koch Bros. would have had a far harder time hoodwinking any member of the public who wasn't a far-right Fundie or Alex Jones fanatic.....

[Overseas]

97. No it is that multi-million dollar PR campaigns to sow doubt have been very successful in America.

From 1998 to 2005, ExxonMobil directed almost $16 million to a group of 43 lobby groups in an effort to confuse Americans about global warming. After being criticized by the Royal Society in 2006, Exxon promised to end funding to groups questioning climate change. In May 2008, Exxon again issued a public mea culpa and pledged to cut funding to groups that “divert attention” from the need to develop and invest in clean energy. Yet, in 2008, while cutting contributions to the most extreme groups, Exxon still funded the National Center for Policy Analysis, the Heritage Foundation, and the American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research, all groups which publicly question or deny global warming:

Company records for 2008 show that ExxonMobil gave $75,000 (£45,500) to the National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA) in Dallas, Texas and $50,000 (£30,551) to the Heritage Foundation in Washington. It also gave $245,000 (£149,702) to the American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research in Washington. The list of donations in the company’s 2008 Worldwide Contributions and Community investments is likely to trigger further anger from environmental activists, who have accused ExxonMobil of giving tens of millions to climate change sceptics in the past decade.

Exxon’s continued duplicity should come as no surprise. Just as ExxonMobil makes public promises to end funding to groups that work to deny climate change, it also has devoted millions to ad campaigns touting clean energy without actually investing significantly in renewable energy. In 2007, Exxon-Mobil spent $100 million on advertising and “green-washing” campaigns in an attempt to exaggerate their commitment to renewable energy, producing ads that focused on global warming, efficiency, and alternative energy. That’s despite the fact that ExxonMobil spent more on CEO Rex Tillerson’s salary than on renewable energy in 2007. While Tillerson took in $21.7 million, Exxon invested only $10 million or so in renewable energy – just a tenth of the amount they spent talking about investing in clean energy.

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2009/07/02/174370/exxonmobil-continues-funding-denier/

[AverageJoe90]

108. Very true, sadly.

Although to be honest, the doomers didn't help, either; the real out-there stuff that was, and still is, being put out, that Earth would literally turn into Venus or that humanity would go extinct, did, unfortunately, make things quite a bit easier for the Koch Bros. & their ilk to hoodwink the public and discredit those who actually realized the urgency of the situation and were trying to wake people up.

To be fair, though, at least a majority of the doomers are well-meaning and sincere people, and money IS a powerful tool. If we can get big oil to mess off for once, we can start making more progress.

[Overseas]

113. Actually, earlier warnings (in the 80's) tried to be more moderate, not to alarm people.

When we were first growing concerned about global warming back in the 1980's, there were different scenarios about what could happen, from a moderate heating of a degree or so, through to more accelerated climate disruption and faster melting of ice caps and glaciers, to the most severe stopping or reversal of ocean current flow our climate has depended on for thousands of years.

Environmentalists didn't want to seem too alarmist so they presented the milder possibilities to give people hope that there was still time to take action and avoid major climatic disruption. But instead of seizing the opportunity to make changes while there was still time, people just said-- "Aw, we'll adapt. No need to make major changes in our use of fossil fuels over that!"

And then it was "Morning in America"-- time to believe that cutting taxes on the rich would trickle down to great wealth for all, and all that environmental consideration was just bothersome crap pushed by those gloomy Democrats.

And the oil companies then rushed in with their PR campaigns to sow doubt that global warming was even a problem. They pushed the easy ideas that "Hey, the earth has always heated and warmed-- it's natural!" And that was good enough for folks who also believed that tax breaks at the top would trickle down to greater wealth for all and "voluntary regulation" was all that was needed to preserve our environment and protect consumers. Reagan said America is Great and Wonderful and forget all that "doom and gloom." That attitude was just fine for the big oil companies and they built upon it, ignoring the beautiful ideas about using American ingenuity to create conservation technologies and alternative energy sources to slow down our use of oil, so that future generations could still enjoy it and so that we could prevent accelerating climatic disruption.

Unfortunately, because we didn't heed those earlier warnings and make adjustments to use oil more judiciously and build in a mix of renewables to slow down the burning of fossil fuels, we have fallen into a more accelerated scenario for the warming and climate disruption. The ice caps and glaciers are melting much faster than we had expected and there have been severe climatic disruptions all over the globe.

[AverageJoe90]

114. You left out a key problem. The Doomers.

What you've said is definitely true to a point, but unfortunately, you did leave out a key reason for the success of the deniers: The doomers.
It is certainly true that the scientists may have been a little too optimistic for their own good back in the '80s......but when the doomers started coming out with their out-of-left-field claims that Earth would turn into Venus II, or that humanity was going to go extinct, etc. there were undoubtedly a lot of people who began to think, "Oh my God, is everybody who believes in global warming this fucking insane?".

And when big oil started taking advantage of the confusion, one of their key tactics was to paint everyone who believed in climate change as a doomer. And sadly, that one worked really well, because it enabled them, more than anything else in fact, to double down on the rest of the bullshit, while the majority of us, scientists and laymen alike, who were realists, and not a bunch of nutty Chicken Littles, were scrambling to defend ourselves, and to get the truth out there: "No, Earth isn't going to turn into Venus, and humanity isn't going to die out, but we are facing a serious problem, and here's why....."

Honestly, we should have told the doomers to kindly STFU when we still had the chance. Had it not been for their foul-ups, big oil would have had a significantly harder time selling their B.S.(and, for that matter), and we'd have made quite a bit more progress, even if we still elected Bush II. It's a hard piece of truth to swallow for some, but it had to be said.

And now we have to make up for lost time.

[Agnosticsherbet]

79. Humanity isn't ignoring it. Those who pass as leaders are ignoring the problem.

Perhaps this is an expression of the Great Filter Concept in the Fermi Paradox. Civilizations made up of individuals will not submit their individual moment to moment survival for the survival of the species.

[PowerToThePeople]

85. I agree completely

This guy would have done something to help.



But these guys allowed Democracy to be overthrown by tyranny.



We are in serious trouble on this planet...

[dimbear]

101. Read "The Last Flight of Dr. Ain" by James Tiptree, jr.

It discusses a practical solution. Still in copyright I believe, check library.

Things have changed since then, I believe a talented amateur who knew enough chemistry to run a meth lab could pull it off.

[countryjake]

87. Pissing on Paradise...

that's what I call it. After hearing about all of the newest dire warnings this past year, measurements and meltings that pretty much fall on deaf ears, it truly gives me a mournful feeling. I'll continue to do all that I can in my area to raise awareness, to attempt to stop the destruction of this life on our beautiful planet, but with terms like "turning point" now a focus of many current articles on the warming of our globe, I'm sadly just waiting to wake one day and find that Mr. Peabody's coal train has hauled it away.

[LWolf]

88. Nero fiddled...

[DonRedwood]

96. i don't want rome to burn :0(

[Initech]

94. No - people are being brainwashed into thinking it's not happening.

To reverse that we need to stop the brainwashers *COUGH* Koch Brothers *COUGH*.

[AverageJoe90]

105. That would be a major step forward. nt

[flvegan]

107. But bacon tastes good!

Humanity is selfish.

Flame away.