Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiThe Planet's Future: Climate Change 'Will Cause Civilization to Collapse'
Authoritative new study sets out a grim vision of shortages and violence – but amid all the gloom, there is some hope too
An effort on the scale of the Apollo mission that sent men to the Moon is needed if humanity is to have a fighting chance of surviving the ravages of climate change. The stakes are high, as, without sustainable growth, "billions of people will be condemned to poverty and much of civilization will collapse".
![[The report praises the web, which it singles out as 'the most powerful force for globalisation, democratisation, economic growth, and education in history']](http://www.commondreams.org/files/article_images/planet-2.jpg "planet-2.jpg")
This is the stark warning from the biggest single report to look at the future of the planet - obtained by The Independent on Sunday ahead of its official publication next month. Backed by a diverse range of leading organizations such as UNESCO, the World Bank, the US army and the Rockefeller Foundation, the 2009 State of the Future report runs to 6,700 pages and draws on contributions from 2,700 experts around the globe. Its findings are described by Ban Ki-moon, Secretary-General of the UN, as providing "invaluable insights into the future for the United Nations, its member states, and civil society".
The impact of the global recession is a key theme, with researchers warning that global clean energy, food availability, poverty and the growth of democracy around the world are at "risk of getting worse due to the recession". The report adds: "Too many greedy and deceitful decisions led to a world recession and demonstrated the international interdependence of economics and ethics."
Although the future has been looking better for most of the world over the past 20 years, the global recession has lowered the State of the Future Index for the next 10 years. Half the world could face violence and unrest due to severe unemployment combined with scarce water, food and energy supplies and the cumulative effects of climate change.
And the authors of the report, produced by the Millennium Project - a think-tank formerly part of the World Federation of the United Nations Associations - set out a number of emerging environmental security issues. "The scope and scale of the future effects of climate change - ranging from changes in weather patterns to loss of livelihoods and disappearing states - has unprecedented implications for political and social stability."
But the authors suggest the threats could also provide the potential for a positive future for all. "The good news is that the global financial crisis and climate change planning may be helping humanity to move from its often selfish, self-centered adolescence to a more globally responsible adulthood... Many perceive the current economic disaster as an opportunity to invest in the next generation of greener technologies, to rethink economic and development assumptions, and to put the world on course for a better future."
Scientific and technological progress continues to accelerate. IBM promises a computer at 20,000 trillion calculations per second by 2011, which is estimated to be the speed of the human brain. And nanomedicine may one day rebuild damaged cells atom by atom, using nanobots the size of blood cells. But technological progress carries its own risks. "Globalization and advanced technology allow fewer people to do more damage and in less time, so that possibly one day a single individual may be able to make and deploy a weapon of mass destruction."
The report also praises the web, which it singles out as "the most powerful force for globalization, democratization, economic growth, and education in history". Technological advances are cited as "giving birth to an interdependent humanity that can create and implement global strategies to improve the prospects for humanity".
The immediate problems are rising food and energy prices, shortages of water and increasing migrations "due to political, environmental and economic conditions", which could plunge half the world into social instability and violence. And organized crime is flourishing, with a global income estimated at $3 trillion - twice the military budgets of all countries in the world combined.
The effects of climate change are worsening - by 2025 there could be three billion people without adequate water as the population rises still further. And massive urbanization, increased encroachment on animal territory, and concentrated livestock production could trigger new pandemics.
Although government and business leaders are responding more seriously to the global environmental situation, it continues to get worse, according to the report. It calls on governments to work to 10-year plans to tackle growing threats to human survival, targeting particularly the US and China, which need to apply the sort of effort and resources that put men on the Moon.
"This is not only important for the environment; it is also a strategy to increase the likelihood of international peace. Without some agreement, it will be difficult to get the kind of global coherence needed to address climate change seriously."
While the world has the resources to address its challenges, coherence and direction have been lacking. Recent meetings of the US and China, as well as of Nato and Russia, and the birth of the G20 plus the continued work of the G8 promise to improve global strategic collaboration, but "it remains to be seen if this spirit of co-operation can continue and if decisions will be made on the scale necessary to really address the global challenges discussed in this report".
Although the scale of the effects of climate change are unprecedented, the causes are generally known, and the consequences can largely be forecast. The report says, "coordination for effective and adequate action is yet incipient, and environmental problems worsen faster than response or preventive policies are being adopted".
Jerome Glenn, director of the Millennium Project and one of the report's authors, said: "There are answers to our global challenges, but decisions are still not being made on the scale necessary to address them. Three great transitions would help both the world economy and its natural environment - to shift as much as possible from freshwater agriculture to saltwater agriculture; produce healthier meat without the need to grow animals; and replace gasoline cars with electric cars."
162 Comments so far
Show AllCan you imagine a world without money?
If we build " CITIZEN CENTRAL" the energy spent in these posts can be used to experience the JOY of rebuilding society.
I can sure enough not just imagine a world without money but live in a world without money, after all, money(be it paper, coins, metals, gems) is abstract arbitrary objects that people use to make other people think that is what makes a better person or better put "money is the ostensible worth of a commodity to conceal the actual worthlessness of that commodity to make others believe in what measures power".
How many of the rockerfellers, warburgs, rothchilds or morgans & chases would last in a level playing field of using personal physical stregth as means of holding onto a positon of 'elitist power'? Then let them eat their gold, gems and money.
27 PEOPLE ARRESTED POST EARTH FIRST! USA Gathering in mass on July 8 for trying to save the climate and biosphere.
www.forestdefensenow.org or Earth First! website.
(Surely there are many other stories like this around the world but Common Dreams doesn't seem to Report them?
Perhaps Indymedia.org is the best source for civil resistance action reports?)
Surely some of you would be willing to participate in such activites or at least stand in front of the your local strip mall or Congressmen's office to advocate for ecological sanity?
As Derrick Jensen stated changing your own personal habits or lifestyles is about 10-15 percent of the problem, or like burying your head in the sand. Addressing the bulk of the problem would require systematic change of all governments, all industry and all militaries.
Social change usually comes about through small groups of people taking action and creating the political pressure by being arrested or risking arrest... the other option is waiting for collapse of the oil economy and the world's ecosystems.
Which do you prefer?
Earth First?
"As Derrick Jensen stated changing your own personal habits or lifestyles is about 10-15 percent of the problem, or like burying your head in the sand."
Jensen is very wrong. If everyone changes their lifestyles, the problem is solved. For the few who have already changed their lifestyles, your argument runs against the benefits the changed lifestyle provides to the individual. Plus, we know the way to communicate a message is by example, and without the example, we can't hope to convince anyone. It's true that we also need to engage in civic activism. Both are necessary and neither are sufficient. The either-or argument doesn't fly. We on the far left are empghasizing the changed lifestyle because it's the least familiar and most difficult. People have a great capacity to embrace multiple approaches. Admittedly, the learning curve is steep. But don't underestimate the people. We're building the alter-society, the alter-institutions. It's coming along great.
If civilization will collapse then environmentalists should be celebrating! Aftereall, isn't civilization the cause of all the woes for The Environment?
Don't confuse civilization with overpopulation. Indigenous peoples were civilized, perhaps more than we in some cases. Their systems were generally based on the needs of all, not ruthless competition and continuous growth. They had perfected socialism before it was officially invented. Smallpox did not do the American natives any good, but the concept of private property and the theft thereof by European invaders was what finally destroyed them. A better example of "might makes right" and the corrupting power of money is difficult to find. But will we change our tactics now before it is too late? Capitalism is an evil conspiracy, not the environmental movement. If “civilization” truly collapses there may be no one to celebrate anything, at least no more hairless talking monkeys.
Just Western capitalistic civilization. Which isn't really "civilization", more a chronic infection...
- Insurgent
Population limits has been a big talking point in these responses. Forget about limiting growth. In my view we passed an acceptable limit about 60 years ago when the world's population reached about 2.5 billion. Big question is whether the world could adequately support 2.5 billion let alone the 6.7 billion we have today or the optimistic peak of 9 plus billion.
North America and Europe account for about 16% of the world's population. If I take their average per capita consumption figures reduce them by about 20% over the next 20 years because of their commitment to climate control and then like a true liberal hope that the majority of the human race will achieve even half that level of consumption in the coming years, it doesn't take a genius to realize the planet is doomed. At the 1950 level of 2.5 billion people and applying the same assumptions the world might have had an outside chance. We might then have saved some forests and some fish in the sea, and avoided the disaster of acquiring vast tracts of land in distant countries to feed our gluttonous appetites.
Its later than you think and short of a plague I don't see a way out.
Humanity is digging its own grave...and all we seem able to think about is how to make more money.
...Recently James Hackett, president and CEO of Anadarko Petroleum, said environmental challenges would be decided according to "what God wants for the world."
...though an Arizona state senator was met with widespread ridicule when she disputed the need for legislation to protect the earth saying it had survived quite nicely without interference for the six thousand years of its existence, she is, unfortunately, not alone in her ignorance.....--Ann Davidow
How o is really thinking of the future:
...The Marines want to open schools in half dozen places to add to the more than a dozen military academies injected into public school systems around the country. This is not some rightwing plot. It was a Democratic Congress that last year approved increasing the number of JROTC units around the country. As one citizen opponent to the plan says, "To pursue children like they are is criminal in my mind." And he is a vet. The scheme has the support of Education Scretary Arne Duncan, who came from the Chicago system where they have six military schools.
The stupid dems are trying to "man-up" and show they're just macho war worshippers as the repugs are.
A Greek philosopher maintained that there is only the Atoms and the Void.
But if so, then where did human stupidity come from?
To figure this out, maybe you have to think of it in paradoxical parts:
Part 1: Humans came from Atoms.
Part 2: Our stupidity IS the Void.
Not convincing...?
aw shit. back to the drawing board
Even the Elites don't want to eradicate themselves. This was a good faith report in my opionion by entities of no good anything. But they don't want to die.
So if they have to change what they sell us to drive and eat, how we live, painful as it may be, if they gotta do it or perish themselves, they will, which is what this is about.
These scum don't want all the snow in Switzerland melting. They "take," vacations there, have villas in the Alps.
And the US Army wants people alive so it can kill them personally.
some historians, especially on economics actually call
CAPITALISM as an "aberration in human history....the general trend, despite wars and conflicts , has been for human society to evolve towards more benevolence and sharing over the millenia".
GUESS what that "SELFISH ADOLESCENCE" the article might correspond to?
CAPITALISM of course.
GROW OUT OF IT -- and the human species CAN and WILL "grow" to adulthood BEYOND the SELFISH ..which was - as some historians have traced the over-all trend (again, despite the wars and conflicts) - as towards greater benevolence as humans adapt to each other and see their COMMON WELFARE .
it is CAPITALISM that ABERRANTLY serves to PROLONG the "growing pains" towards
MATURE - UNSELFISH - COOPERATIVE - WISE ADULTHOOD.
If only the U.S. government applied the same minds, resources and energy toward reducing greenhouse gases and pollution the same way they went about the Manhattan Project until it saw the completion of the Atom Bomb. If only they stopped waisting so much money sending stupid rockets into space and stupid rockets on innocent people. If only.
Wow, not sure what triggered all these comments but this board is getting weirder and weirder.
I liked it better when there were only left leaning Bush and US haters around :)
Love my USA...HATE Bush.
But then again, Obama is turning out to be more of the same, in a more attractive off-brown package.
i know what you mean chameleon................
i had a kind of revelation the other day in a supermarket. (here in europe - well it could have been anywhere i suppose) but i was in the line and just watching the people before me. and observing the salesperson ringing up the amount on the till and then the customer dipping into his/her wallet and handing over pieces of paper.
and it all seemed so insignificant. and i wondered how this bizarre exchange all began. and what happened to the pieces of paper at the end of the day. and who started it all. (romans/greeks?)
and realised that yes, money is the root of all evil................even though it's just bits of paper.
'this ain't no technological breakdown, oh no, this is the road to hell' (chris rea).............
we've got it wrong from the year dot really and can probably blame the romans (or the greeks) i am sure they didn't practice 'safe sex' or use condoms (so they are more than likely responsible for the population boom too) ................
let's start an anti 'ancient' roman and greek campaign...........it will take our minds off the 'climate change'...............
Here are a few things we can no longer afford:
Profit.
War. War is a Tax.
Corporate "personhood" that floats psychos to the top of the system.
Hydrocarbon-based life styles and cheap consumer crap.
Fake food.
Nuclear energy. (too fragile, and a major threat if a few get iced over, quaked, or flooded).
The politicians, the rich and the corporations will cling to the status quo until the bitter end. (Then count on us to save them?)
Cast your "vote$" for sustainability and readiness.
I think tectonic activity will mark the onset of the climate change cascade of forcings.
Good luck.
"...An effort on the scale of the Apollo mission that sent men to the Moon..."
I know this is a little off topic, but if we truly hope to ever start responsibly addressing the myriad host of urgently serious problems (environmental and others) facing humanity, then it's time we let go of some of the more blatant fairy tales many of us still labor under.
For one example, in the real world, fragile hollow aluminum tubes don't just melt into steel and concrete skyscrapers on impact with no discernible bending, crumpling, shearing, or deceleration -- no commercial jet airliners hit WTC1, or 2, or the Pentagon for that matter.
And for another, we've NEVER built any spacecraft that would give a human occupant any chance whatsoever of surviving the Van Allen radiation belt -- neither we, nor China, has ever put a man on the Moon.
The Moon landing (Apollo 11) was a joint Nixon White House/Stanley Kubrick/NASA production -- if you'd like an eye opening and entertaining taste of this truth, drink in this excellent presentation:
1/9: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qUOItuKm5UE&feature=related
2/9: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NpeIs5MFTYU&feature=related
3/9: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GDL1ugE7Tfw&feature=related
4/9: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mr_yNefhINw&feature=related
5/9: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7RXrKRuNvNU&feature=related
6/9: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uU5YyolUHAw&feature=related
7/9: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZfHLxWfCLQ&feature=related
8/9: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ivU7WObCFzs&feature=related
9/9: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Bhpfy-4mws&feature=related
If it was a Stanley Kubrick production, why was the picture quality so poor? (Admittedly getting better from Apollo 14 onward).
I would think for the same reasons the OBL videos that have surfaced since 9-11 have always been so grainy and indistinct -- the less detail you're able to discern in a fake, the more difficult it is to apply close scrutiny, the higher the likelihood the fake is accepted as authentic. Combine this with the monumental size of the lie here, which is just staggering, and you have a well tested recipe for a successful ruse.
"In the size of the lie there is always contained a certain factor of credibility, since the great masses of the people....will more easily fall victim to a great lie than to a small one."
- Hitler in Mein Kampf
Source: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article6528.htm
And this is only one of the many Hitler lessons which have clearly not been lost on our globalist/bankster Zio-masters -- here's the template they appear to be using:
http://www.crisispapers.org/Editorials/germany-1933.htm
Kurt
Thank You very much for the link. Some may inconveniently remember that I have repeatedly compared Germany 1933-1945 with the US 2001-????.
When I saw the first TV images on 9/11 I knew as much as I know about my own history and that of my family in Nazi-Germany, that the US was having its 'Reichtsags-Fire'. Nobody on this planet or beyond could ever convince me, that the WTC was not blown up by the shadow government under Cheney and Bush operating from the White House. You just know, because there is this energy field of deceit and the accompanying 'Big Lie'.
The sad thing though is, that the US-Fascists never had to worry much about the reactions of the American populace. They were worse than the Germans in times under Hitler with their response. Americans were not in the devastating grip of a conspiracy of unimaginable proportions, as only later on would became apparent.
It could happen here and it did happen here and will happen again. The only way out is to look back at Nazi-Germany and not only draw the right conclusions, but furthermore take the appropriate counter measures. Those are foremost but not limited to, the trial of the entire Bush-Administration under the Law Of The Nations at the International Human Rights Court in Le Hague.
The nullification of all Executive Orders that left Bush's desk. The immediate repeal of the 'Scoundrel-Act' and reinstatement of Habeus Corpus.
Immediately repeal all Presidential powers and convert the job into one of representative nature only. When one person is allowed to rule as it sees fit, war is inevitable. Wars are inevitable.
Fascism draws its power from militarists, weapons fetishists and uneducated minds.
Maybe there is nothing to worry about, as we are prepping ourselves up to witness a drastic climate change that will take care of our delusional moral 'values' that we allowed to nest in the American simple mind.
Because I know that the Germans rose out of the ashes of delusion and disgust over the last 65 years, there must be hope, that Americans wake up and change their political/electoral system to avoid to be subjected to the same doom the Germans had to go through in response to their unwillingness to stand up early and make clear: No We Won't!
May All Beings Be Blessed.
No Restrictions Or Limitations Shall Apply.
Itsjustkarma,
You're quite welcome, and thank you for your thoughtful post. I'm afraid you're quite right:
"It could happen here and it did happen here and will happen again."
It looks like some very dark times on the not too distant horizon now -- wish I had an answer.
Kurt
I acknowledge the presence of strong beliefs. None of those beliefs is based on anything else but another belief. Science is the belief in the numbers and their interpretation, causing another belief. It is all about belief. Every single subatomic particle comes into existence through Energy. It is free of value and judgement. The world is us and as such a reflection of our very beliefs.
Let me get back to those people that Believed that the Earth was flat. They were not wrong. The Earth is flat as long as You lack the virtual or practical vision of it as a sphere/globe. It is easy for us to judge the ones that believed in Flatland, we have images of the Earth from Space. But without those and not flying or climbing up high You wouldn't know it either.
It is my belief that the world is as we see it. Prison, Desaster, Pain, Suffering, Dis-Ease and the whole 'Human Drama', or Opportunities to have the AHA effect. To learn. To understand. To Choose.
Quantum Physics has brought us in reach of the abandonment of Religion as we know it now. It has no longer any meaning besides the belief that it should be perfectly fine to believe in whatever comes to Your mind. Be advised that You mau want to make sure that You belief in something that makes You feel good.
Everybody will have his/her own choice, right here, right now. Understand Energy, utilize it to lighten and brighten up. It is one thing to be compassionate and the other one to lose one's State of Happiness because there is something going on 'out there'.
There is something going on 'in here'. You better fasten Your seatbelts, because human mankind is evolving very fast. Especially now, where it is necessary. You might call Your Self 'Human', still You Are IT. As such the only limitation for a quick healing of the human race from the Ego-Disease is Your imagination. That's why John Lennon was a visionary, for at least this one song.
I envision a world in which there is no more need for competition as it is understood that there is no such thing in the first place. You want to believe in Doomsday, that's Your choice. But there is no such thing, as future Generations of Humans will look back and ask themselves:
"What Were They Thinking?"
The Future is a Future Of Feeling The Energy that has brought about You and anything else around You. You/We Are this Energy, not merely a part of it.
I use the term 'soul' in the respective sense to enable people that have a belief system that provides them with a Soul to get the idea of 'Present Beings'. Personally I consider my Self Non-Physical Energy. 'Just' Energy in form of a 6-Sense-Machine.
How Many Signatures Will It Take To Change The World?
May All Beings Be Blessed.
No Restrictions Or Limitations Shall Apply.
.
It should be evident to everyone that the proposals put forward to date fall very short of solving the population/environment/energy problem.
Time for everyone to get behind "Plan B"
If not "The Total Solution", it is one that can at least successfully address energy and environmental problems, buying time--a lot time, to figure out the best solution to the population problem.
http://vortexengine.ca Meet "Plan B".
Just bring on the suicide booths. We really aren't going to make an honest commitment to caring for those disadvantaged by climate change effects.
Since the people who make the decisions that might mitigate climate change are the same people who make money from continued pollution there will be no honest attempt to cut greenhouse gas output.
Finally, we have reality-denying idiots that refuse to acknowledge climate change at all. It's a scenario right out of the Science Fiction fable: "The Marching Morons."
Much like in so many other areas these days, the people in charge of regulating X are the same people who profit from not regulating X, and nobody who can do anything about it bats an eye.
It's been 65 million years since the last really big mass extinction, maybe this coming one will increase Gaia's collective IQ.
Jeevee
Bla, bla
Maybe more folks are likely to read your posts if you study and practice the art of condensation.
Ostensible intelligence concealing the actual blittering punditry, good for a good laugh and the sky is falling.
Towards Solutions Again
The Global Forces of climate change, current human suffering,future human suffering,basic global human need for food, fresh water and a viable sustainable economic system for all have closed in on us.
The global response is to enter into new economic arrangements that provide what we all need. That requires cooperation, NOT competition. Competition has served the rich well, because they have been at the top, leading the competition for their personal gain. Those days are rapidly fading in the face of the on-coming global crisis. Those so-called leaders have no solutions. Louis Kelso and Mortimer Adler described the values that we need to use to address these issues (google The Third Way: a brief comparison of Capitalism, Socialism and the Third Way). We must create new economic arrangements to meet our global needs, together.
The 2009 State of the Future report comes to much the same conclusion as James Lovelock, author of Gaia. But we must do what we can. I think the operative word is SUSTAINABILITY.
I just read a very appropriate article in the Guardian.CO.UK
HINT: Climate change is NOT the main cause of our dysfunctional society.
The very fabric of society is breaking down around us. What the hell is there left to believe in?
Charlie Brooker The Guardian, Monday 13 July 2009
It's all gone wrong. Our belief in everything has been shattered by a series of shock revelations that have shaken our core to its core. You can't move for toppling institutions. Television, the economy, the police, the House of Commons, and, most recently, the press ... all revealed to be jam-packed with liars and bastards and graspers and bullies and turds.
And we knew. We knew. But we were deep in denial, like a cuckolded partner who knows the sorry truth but tries their best to ignore it. Over the last 18 months the spotlight of truth has swung this way and that, and one institution after another was suddenly exposed as being precisely as rotten as we always thought it was. What's that? Phone-in TV quizzes might a bit of con? The economic boom is an unsustainable fantasy? Riot police can be a little "handy"? MPs are greedy? The News of the World might have used underhand tactics to get a story? What next? Oxygen is flavourless? Cows stink at water polo? Children are overrated? We knew all this stuff. We just didn't have the details.
I read that the Flanders region was the leading economy of the 12th and 13th centuries and climate changes caused the crash of their economy. Banks also failed because of over-lending. Personal wealth was lost.
The recovery came after the black death that wiped out 1/2 of the population.
If climate change can occur in a society that was not dependent on fossil fuels for their economy-what difference does cutting back matter to us?
It looks like the swine flu will take care of the problem.
The vaccine will be manufactered in other countries and we will be last on the list to receive it.
Everyone I know also has lyme disease and no health care.
Big deal about the next generation-the ww2 generation did not drop dead to help us out.
Toward Solutions
We have reached the "For Christ Sake line".
Christ told us what the solution is: "Love each other as I have loved you."
So, how do we do that practically?
I suggest you get a book,titled
THE TRINITY CONSTELLATION. It shows a pathway to the future that is doable. It does require that a handful of very rich people see the path and use their wealth to advance a practical solution.
I wish. Meanwhile, very rich people like Bill Gates talk about helping Africa and medical research to aid the poor. Do you believe that? I'll tell you what I believe. Bill Gates and Warren Buffet are using medical research alright, but for a VERY different purpose. Their "scientist nazis" are using the poorest nations on earth in Africa to experiment on humans to learn how to achieve greater longevity for the elite.
Altruism and riches don't mix. The rich would rather destroy the world than live in an egalitarian society based on mutual respect. Rich people aren't smart, just greedy. So the idea of species altruism from enlightened self interest goes right over their heads. Their idea of "enlightened" is keeping YOU in the dark. No, your best shot is a millitant middle class that forcefully limits the elite pigs. Step one is to make being rich a basis for social rejection. There is no hope at all until you can do that. The rest is new age wa wa.
Dear AGG,
Yes, you are right. One of our best strategies is to generate a strong middle class that "forcefully limits the elite pigs." But I hope the better strategy is to create an alternative set of economic arrangements that will advance the middle class while providing a way for the rich to enjoy life while advancing the lives of all others. After all, the only reason that we put up with this corrupt and inhuman economic system is because we have not defined the alternative. As soon as that alternative is clear to most, it will be the preferred economic arrangement.
Again, one alternative is clearly defined in a novel titled, THE TRINITY CONSTELLATION.
Advance the middle class? If they are middle class, why do they need advancement? What about the poor?
Toward Solutions: Great book, I did the only Amazon Review of this book by Duanne Fleming. Duanne is writing another book providing a solution for affordable housing.
All this talk about population growth. Would someone please speak to these people -- Jon and Kate Plus Eight, 14 Kids and Counting, Octomom? These programs/people are trendy now. Would someone please tell these morons that having a herd of children is really very stupid? Do OBG/Gyn doctors speak to their patients at all about population growth and keeping a lid on having a sh__load of children?????
In theory mankind could choose not to self-desrtuct, but there are far too many that profit from wars and the status quo.
There are far too many who blindly follow irrational religious leaders and corrupt self-serving political leaders.
It comes down to population control with or without a major die off of the species.
"The Malthusians need to toss their 40-year old copies of Erlich's "The Population Bomb" and update their knowlege. Due to improved public health and living standards and the Chinese family-size incentives, family size and population growth rates are shrinking almost everywhere except the poorest countries where lingering expectations of low life expectancy makes having a large family a rational choice."
If this were true then the population of the world would be decreasing or staying the same. It isn't. It is increasing.
And with so many immigrants moving into developing countries(i.e., Mexican immigrants over-running the southwestern United States), you would think their countries would be emptied, yet they are not.
Religions like Catholicism promote excess population and millions around the world do as the pope says.
It is still increasing, but at a decreasing rates, and the decrease is accelerating.
Curent UN projections using the best estimates of fertility trends predict a level-off at about 9.2 billion in 2075, declining to about 8.0 to 8.9 billion from 2075 to 2300. These are very sensitive to fertility rate, but there are no known sociiological trends that would cause increases in fertility rates, only decreases. As is being seen in Russia's collapse of fertility rate and population with economic hardship, the UN prediction of peak population may be too high.
Like I wrote, Erlich's sensationalist Population Bomb stuff is badly out of date. The UN does an enormous amount of population studies, and no one there is raising any alarms. Please use the internet for it's original intended purpose to do some research.
Personally, I see a certain anti-social streak in the population-bomb proponents. Or perhaps they desperatly see it as a solution that will allow them to stay on their gasoline and kilowatt-hour addiction a little longer...
It's tiring listening to these xenophobic racist comments like these:
"And with so many immigrants moving into developing countries(i.e., Mexican immigrants over-running the southwestern United States)"
Nationalism has an ahistorical way of forgetting that U.S. territory was stolen either through fraudulent wars, or was taken via a genocidal policy against native americans.
Regarding overpopulation, I agree with Derrick Jensen in that it's pretty clear that the carrying capacity of the earth has been overshot, primarily due to the use of oil. I have yet to see any convincing numbers that would support the *sustainable* low impact use of the land that could support 6 billion people - this means no oil use for crop production and distribution.
It also furthers an old anti-catholic stereotype too.
Assuming we stay below the physical limit of arable land (which admitedly may not be true if climate change renders more land unarable), I don't see how population figures into a post-oil food production. More population also means proportionally more human labor available to replace mechanization. More people returning to a life of toil in the fields does represent a decrease in living atandard, but if the work is assigned fairly by a system of rotation of able-bodied people for farm duty, it is doable.
Of course, a return to draft-animal use could also be considered, the Amish-settled Kishacoquillas valley in Pennsylvania is enormously productive - and it is almost entirely farmed with draft horses.
"More people returning to a life of toil in the fields does represent a decrease in living atandard"
There exists a more or less optimum "rotation of labor", as opposed to Smith's "division of labor" such that each individual achieves optimum physical health through physical exertion, e.g. 10 hrs/week in the garden/workshop, optimum mental health through mental exertion, e.g. 10 hrs/week in the study, and optimum spiritual health through the overall balance of recreation and responsibility, including civic responsibility.
We can build a society that provides for each the opportunity to optimize overall health in their occupations, and also ensure rights to low-cost and high quality education, healthcare, and the basics, and a reasonable standard of living by devoting our energy to truly benefitting the people. But we have to first slough the laissez-faire capitalist monkeys, the elites, off our backs. We do this by shifting our individual exchange/association away from elites and toward our local economies, small independent farmers, craftsmen and merchants.
" ....civilisation will collapse".
With the exception of dogs, who are shameless suckups, I'm sure that this can't come quickly enough for all the other species on the planet.
The Malthusians need to toss their 40-year old copies of Erlich's "The Population Bomb" and update their knowlege. Due to improved public health and living standards and the Chinese family-size incentives, family size and population growth rates are shrinking almost everywhere except the poorest countries where lingering expectations of low life expectancy makes having a large family a rational choice.
All the patronising westerners giving out condoms or pills won't change that. The reality is, world population is already stabilizing about as fast as it can short of killing poeple, or draconian programs that poeple won't accept.
Another fact is that the greatest increases in greenhouse gas emissions are coming from countries with stable or even shrinking populations.
Why? Under Capitalism, resourse usage is related to creation of new markets, and the creation of new markets is NOT by any necessity tied to popualtion growth. Capitalism is very, very creative in creating incresed markets and demand, and developing the technology to deliver it. If a growing population is available for cheap labor and markets, capitalism will use it, but if all those workers and consumers weren't avaialble, capitalism would still find the technology and social engineering needed to continuously increase demand and production. It is VERY important to understand this.
The implications of this are that population plays a subordinate role in economic growth and GHG emissions. It is very likely that, all other things being the same, if the world human population never exceed a few tens of millions, or was drastically reduced to a few tens of millions, this population would still consume, about the same amount of resources and produce the same amount of GHG's as a world with 7 billion.
So, population reduction is certainly a helpful step, but without fundamental change in the economic system, it will do no good by itself. And with a changed economic system, all the talent and resources now used in the expanding of markets can be used to develope non-fossil energy sources for billions to have access to a suitable living atandard.
pjd412,
"Capitalism is very, very creative in creating increased markets and demand"
Of Course. The be all, end all is profit so all other concerns like social responsibility, truth in advertising, honest annual reports, factual trend analysis, etc can be discarded or better yet, distorted with mendacity. It's the "At the end of the day, the invisible gland helps society" thing.
Capitalism is a rather convenient dodge of responsibility. So convenient that, as long as you've "got yours", you could care less about the "byproducts" of your behavior. But it definitely has its' upside. I.E. when we get there the fabulous PR agencies will convince us that eating bacterial sludge has all the vitamins and minerals plus adequate protein and carbohydrates! And a bonus is that your teeth will last longer because you won't have to chew anymore.
Very, Very creative, indeed. Do you have any idea how many fine inventions and durable products have been scrapped in the name of short term profit? Do you realize that Henry Ford was one of the first to champion planned obsolescense? Are you aware that automobile engine parts for police car models last two to three times as long as layman versions? We always get the crap and call it the market. Now in that nice private world of the top 1% that feeds us this shit they think they are getting away with something. The joke is going to be on them.
And yet, I read in "The Guardian" today that over the last decade we have spent less on family planning than in the previous 3 decades.
Furthermore, that decrease is reversing the very trends you state.
The same article pointed out studies that indicated most women, if they have the choice, will voluntarily reduce their birth rates...as your own post reveals....every nation you point out has essentially given women reproductive freedom in some sense and when they have it they use it. No serious need for draconian measures at all.
Additionally, I agree about China. They are the greenest nation on the planet becasue they have a one-child policy. This is, ultimately, going to be a needed programme for a while.
Your last paragraph is your best in my view. All the economic models employed demand growth. If your company makes a profit one year, but then merely equals that profit in the second year, your stock drops even if that profit is the same after adjustments for inflation. The reason is that there was no 'growth'. This is fundamentally unsustainable.
As for "The Population Bomb" it is actually a shame that it didn't come about sooner. The reason is that this book is thrown up in my face by every economist that I ever argue with. Economists are fundamentally politico's who are quick to point out the failures of the predictions of others, but rarely seem affected by their own failure to predict important trends. They are the stupidest smart people I have ever met. If you want a classic example read Larry Sommers' memo proposing that we dump toxic waste or build polluting factories in third-world nations and then read the President of Brazil's response at the time (I think this was around 1994.)
And let's be honest here, how seriously can you take ANY profession that demands unremitting, continuous, exponential growth as a 'normal' state of affairs? Anyone who knows anything serious about our Universe can tell you that such growth is transient. That is a certainty.
We put off "The Population Bomb" for a little while by drilling for more oil.
This is really not a good idea any more on many levels.
Cicero: "Freedom is participation in power."
"...for billions to have access to a suitable living standard." Who determines which billions and what constitutes "suitable?"
I don't give a rat's behind if ANY human beings live in opulence so long as ALL human beings have crucial necessities: Safe nutritious food, clean free water, adequate shelter, decent durable clothing, equitable access to a very good education, good mass transportation, an environmentally sustainable economy, health care treated as a right, public and private encouragement and financial support to develop talents, special skills and special studies. I've seen enough of American upper-class excess and the effects of income disparity to last 10 lifetimes.
How a suitable minimum living standard is determined is a considerable problem.
I agree with you that nutritous food and shelter, clothing, medical care, access to educational and cultural and creative activities, and the the public transportation and communities that to support it, are pretty much it.
Right now, many don't have such a living standard and it takes a certain amount of energy to provide it. This is far less than is used in the US for frivilous uses or because so many live in communities so poorly designed or the capitalists have convinced so many peoole that they need to own and drive a car stunning distances every day, from huge homes, chilled down to a ridiculous degree with their central AC, even when it is not even reaching 77F outside.
Somehow, the association of the good life with ownership of enormous amounts of physical "stuff" needs to be abolished. But capitalism requires ever increasing consumption as it's most basic requirment.
see, common dreams, in order to generate a bit of traffic on your environmental stories all you really needed to do was post an article whose title said the end is near.
but then you go and include a connection between mankind and global warming which brings out the likes of kafirtom and thomasmore-henry8.
there are reasons why we need population control. one of those reasons would be to see a reduction in ignorance.
Your post is perfect.
Population is the biggest problem.
Nothing else really matters in the long run.
We need a sea change in the way people think.
Economics cannot be based on false growth models, the hidden costs must be accounted for. In current economic models a person who walks to work has less economic impact than a person who drives 100 miles every day to work in an SUV.
Ultimately, the "growth model" needs to be replaced with a "sustainability model".
And the biggest factor in that must be contraception for all who want it, free.
This is a LOT cheaper than even one of our wars.
"Population is the biggest problem.
Nothing else really matters in the long run.
We need a sea change in the way people think."
Actually, all you needed was your third sentence.
As long as we think that we can keep living as we do, as the center of the universe instead of one specie amongst many that must live withing Nature's rules, we will not control population. Oh, population will be controlled, just not to our liking.
For those who haven't read Daniel Quinn's books, I highly recommend them. Start with Ishmael. There are other authors who have written similar works, but Quinn is very accessible.
Hah! This is nothing compared to the number of posts in articles about Obama, Nader, or guns.
P.S. The end is near...in cosmic terms.
"shift as much as possible from freshwater agriculture to saltwater agriculture; produce healthier meat without the need to grow animals; and replace gasoline cars with electric cars"
this seems right and necessary, yet so so far away from both individual and international consensus today.
the above quote implies nothing of the magnitude of adaptation planning and implementation we will need to move humanity to point "B." get ready for a grand adventure!
- a move to saltwater diets will increasingly require humans and their big cities to move to the arctic, where a wild ocean will still support life in our hotter planet...perhaps fewer fish, whales and seals, but certainly plentious seaweed, algae and mussels, if you will.
- elsewhere, the outgrowth of decentralized local and organic food production should upshift into sweatlike coastal wetland areas, even as cities downshift into safer, more strategically viable inland locations sharing interdependent capacities and liveable microclimates...the giant switcheroo, if you will.
- electric cars and an effective carbon tax will support systematic conversion of the entire motive energy infrastructure toward sustainable means such as large scale solar heat production...perhaps initially diplacing those end-of-highway cities like Houston and LA; yet imagine the excitement of moving that unwanted heat production up and outside the atmosphere into earth orbit (Space Solar Power Systems), perhaps shading to some degree the planet's atmosphere, in order to stream pure energy down near the poles where it will be most needed in the future...enhanced auroras, if you will.
- so you feel that culturing meat organs in a lab is unappetizing? watch for the day when the vast majority of petroleum is produced for direct conversion to foodstuffs, and we we bitterly rue that our ancestors burned so much of that beautiful brown crude...hydrocarbons to carbohydrates, if you will.
- perhaps the most bitter forward looking pill is through either planning or natural selection to decide which 2 billion of the ultimately 9 b. or so humans will find their bloodlines preserved, and which should be allowed to lapse into extinction...you know my vote ain't with the corporate types, if you will.
perhaps what we most need now are a crop of really good science fiction writers who can inspire a realistic and desirable near future for an alternative humanity.
Civilisation will collapse?
About time. Now, perhaps, the human race can actually start thriving instead of just surviving.
herbalist,
Good one!
I had a similar thought but it was in the interrogative:
What civilisation?
now that's good
'Amazing' article, amazing posts.
So what will it be? Perpetual denial of the obvious on behalf of lawmakers worldwide and in the US in specific, or perpetual inability to agree on an agreement that adresses the real McCoy?
As much as the headline has oozing 'Drama' from it, I really do appreciate the first time 'Global Warming' is replaced by 'Climate Change'.
That's a good start, but it may come way to late. Instead of lamenting, moaning and groaning, I would like to ponder about 'Our' options on the described nightmare.
Please consider no specific order in the following remedies, some of which are plain intuition, others are the result of use of more than 10% brain mass.
1) Governments.
Democracy is as much a failure as communism, and in its nature as totalitarian as any dictatorship, given the fact that the so called 'elections' are either rigged, or manipulated through the mass media to align the powers with the need of the corporations to make profit, by any means. The solution for that might seem utopistic, but I cannot see or think about anything else. I call it 'Parliamentary Duty' and it works like 'Jury Duty'. Through a similar process people will be required to 'maybe' serve as Parlamentarians, as there are way more people than 'politicians' we can draw from. Age, race, gender, status - all inconsequential. From entry age 'X' to exit age 'Y' people might get a letter to join the parliament for four years. The argument that people don't know about political processes doesn't matter, as that's what got us into this mess in the first place. I rather trust a randomly assembled house than the corpo-picked one we have now.
2) Military = Organized Crime
Both are intrinsically connected to each other. Both disregard moral considerations in practice and in the extraction of public 'wealth'. Both need to be addressed as viral causes for extinction. Worldwide military spending with the US at the lonely top has burned up funds we need to deal with the climate change now. To avoid further perpetuation of these policies, we need to exchange the bribed whores called representatives, politicians, leaders with people that are not infected by the lobbying disease.
The repeal of the Cannabis prohibition is a mandatory condition for improvement, both environmentally and on a societal level.
3) 'Over Population' is a Myth
Over population is a myth created by those who want to sow dissent amongst nations. It is a fact that the amount of sustainable human beings on this planet is only and entirely depending on their behaviour, not their raw numbers. In a military and law enforcement free global society is space for Billions of more people. Just not under the capitalist rule which generates 'scarcity' as means to increase profits. After all it is all only 'supply and demand', right? The reason why people have a hard time to envision a planet with even more 'souls' is because they apply the present unsustainable status quo of mindlessness, greed and egotism to a larger number of inhabitants.
4) Action instead of Reaction
It is one thing to be aware of the ensuing unfolding drama and to wait for it to have personal impact on us and another one to act in advance to be prepared for what is coming. Not so much through blind activism, but through a revised mindset that has only one goal: Interdependence. The understanding of interdependece as the sole principle of life, here and elsewhere in the Universe. It might be called Law of Attraction as well, as everything is indeed connected to everything else. Mindlessness is greatly reduced when people realize that it will all come back to them. Ask the Germans, the Russians, or any other Nation how their past influences their present.
4) Move now
Try to move now. Not when Your destination is dictated by soldiers on the side of the road. As a US citizen You are welcome in many places, if You denounce the oppressive nature of the US and offer Your knowledge and resources to people that appreciate Your mindset. The world needs those Americans who realize that there is nothing more they can do to stop the desastrous fall and subsequent end of the US empire. When moving, give only space for Your intuition, that way You make sure that You are heading in the right direction. Monetary considerations will have the result, that You will still sit here when the Fan hits the - You know what.
Tell me not to hold my breath for all this and I will ask You about how long You believe You will still be breathing.
5) The Beginning of the end
The only thing that ever 'worked' on the planet to enforce influence by the people who exclusively suffer from governments is called 'General Strike'. As long as that is not an option, we are truly doomed to die in a drama the world has never seen before. Even the notion that the planet can't be destroyed, it can be altered uninhabitable or transformed into a giant 'Roach Hotel' with enough human carcasses to nourish and fertilize the true 'Kingdom' of all life. Insects.
Most of You know my position on all of this. The only thing I believe in is not a thing. It is Energy. That seems to make me an Atheist which is more than fine, looking at the list of crimes Religion has and still is perpetrating on this planet and its creatures. Death is an illusion. To understand that one's Energy is not effected by the decay of the 6-Sense-Machine should help to relax and make the very best out of all of this. It is indeed more opportunity than anything else. The crucial point is, we have to grab this opportunity to spiritually grow as humankind, or face our extinction through our own Doing.
Life is not about Having & Doing. Life is about BEING.
Aloha Nui.
May All Beings Be Blessed.
No Restrictions Or Limitations Shall Apply.
"In a military and law enforcement free global society is space for Billions of more people." I am curious as to why someone would think that Billions more "souls" would be a good thing. Nature by itself would never allow one species to overpopulate like that. Nature by itself is a system of checks and balances. So my question is what is it that makes your POV? By using the word souls leads me to suspect that there is a religious pov in your agenda. I am not saying you are right or wrong in your point of view but it is interesting that someone would think that billions more people would be OK. Just the idea of standing in line for things and that is what would happen makes one curious.
Cicero: "Freedom is participation in power."
If you think overpopulation is a myth you need to visit Mexico City, India, China, the Philippines or any other overpopulation hotspot outside the U.S. sheltered upscale vacation destination of Hawaii. Human population quantity above a minimal genetic diversity threshold does not equal human quality of life. Even animal species sometimes overpopulate and nature neither saves nor spares them. Those who do not adapt to real world circumstances--not woulda, coulda, shoulda's--will perish. Disregarding humane ideas for reducing human overpopulation both dangerously delays and compounds the difficulties in more equitably preserving and distributing resources necessary for long-term survival of human and other speciesl.
But here's the problem:
Will YOU be the first to volunteer to be sterilized/refuse medical treatment/commit suicide?
Or do you wish to "humanely" reduce the population of "Mexico City, India, China, the Phillipines or any other overpopulation hotspot..."?
In other words, are you talking about robbing yourself of your basic animal goals of self-preservation and propagation, or are you talking about robbing them from OTHERS?
How are you going to get them to comply other than with a Totalitarian system more cruel and horrible than any previously known outside of maybe the Triple Alliance before the Spaniards arrived. Remember, this would have to be a GLOBAL system, and it would have to last until the population has reached the "proper" proportions.
This is the problem with most "humane ideas for reducing human overpopulation", the very concept sets some persons above others as if they were gods.
I'm afraid its just gonna have to happen the messy way, unless we in the "first world" reduce out ecological footprint, maximize our food and other needs efficiency, find happiness without "growth", AND convince the other 3/4 of the globe to not only do the same, but skip all of the fun wasteful bits we got upto for the 80 years or so.
We are gods you dolt and in so being we can easily overcome the biological imperative or which you call basic animal goals of self-preservation and propagation. All we need to do is to choose to do it. What do you think we are? Robots?
Did you ever try to talk a 20 year old out of having sex? How about trying to get volunteers to die so the surplus population will be decreased?
I'm 26, and I'm abstinent. Believe it or not, some horny as hell teen and early 20s guys actually choose not to have sex.
Well, I hope you are at least engaging in some fantasy and getting a good wank in now and then. Or, it will come out in all kinds of unhealthy ways.
Hey, there's no safer sex than sex with yourself. Good stress relief, too.
"How are you going to get them to comply other than with a Totalitarian system more cruel and horrible than any previously known outside of maybe the Triple Alliance before the Spaniards arrived. Remember, this would have to be a GLOBAL system, and it would have to last until the population has reached the "proper" proportions."
Surprisingly, the Chinese have yet to overtly rebel against such a disgusting system. But Chinese traditions of deference to authority and community probably have a large role in that. There are also exceptions and loopholes for much of the population.
Personally, I don't plan on having any children.
Suddenly our leaders incestuous relationship with corporations and their profit motive starts to look like a real threat to one's life and that of their children.
I am sure that those who deny this will post all kinds of opinions here about this news story. Feel free to bring your facts to light. Understand however that this is a news story ABOUT a report that is 6700 pages compiled from 2700 scientists worldwide. As a map is not the territory this is an article ABOUT the report nor does the weather you experience in the place you live represent what it will be at some future point.
What is clear is that there are too many people and that is increasing. That the resources of the earth that we now depend on are finite. That the corporate ideal of profit over and above the general welfare of the earth populations is contrary to our survival.
It is also apparent that corporations as the robotic extension of the rich have been and continue to insure their survival by buying up or controlling the earth's remaining resources at the expense of the populations of many countries ie; Iraq and af-pak to point out the most glaring.
Most surely corporations have their hands in our leaders pants and, every chance they get, squeeze out legislation that only profits them largely at our and our children expense.
It would seem then that they are as great a threat to our survival as anything written in this report.
...and I'm here sitting on all of these technological answers. It's too bad for "civilization" that my name wasn't Chrysler.
For that matter, the Rockefeller Foundation could go a long ways toward fixing the problem if they gave two toots.
Not one word about the roots of ALL our problems, overpopulation and unsustainable growth, consumerism and extreme wealth and power concentration.
"...possibly one day a single individual may be able to make and deploy a weapon of mass destruction."
I guess solving these problems will be up to him.
Eugenics, anyone?
Yes, let's just kill (or let die) those billions of useless eaters, and we'll solve the climate change threat.
As long as any of those billions aren't one of YOUR loved ones, it's OK.
Cicero: "Freedom is participation in power."
You apparently don't have any idea how many billions of human beings in the 3rd World already live in utter misery; how many starve to death every day or die from readily preventable diseases; how many procreate beyond any ability to care for their offspring out of ignorance, ancient cultural or religious bias or lack of cheap accessible birth control. Do you know that because there are well over 6 billion human beings now alive on this planet that there are more human slaves (both labor and sex slaves) now that at any other point in history? Misery stacked on misery. How many innocent civilians have already been maimed, killed, displaced or seen their families shattered and driven into homelessness, illness and starvation by America's oil/pipeline/McTerror wars just in the last 8 years? How many millions upon millions of people have been killed by "ethnic cleansing" to outright genocide by others trying to snatch away their land and resources already between 1939 and 2001?
Our decisions and our apathy here in future candidate Jeb Bush's Amurka already adversely affect billions of people around the world. Those chickens are all coming home to roost at once. Lucky you none of those billions have apparently been YOUR loved ones-yet.
Here's a running counter: 6.7billion to date. safe to say "almost 7 billion" now.
http://www.poodwaddle.com/worldclock.swf
"The stakes are high, as, without sustainable growth, "billions of people will be condemned to poverty and much of civilisation will collapse"."
To grow, or not to grow. Money says grow or be condemned to povety, the environment says otherwise. Money, and its handmaiden called interest, is out of sync with this new reality of growth limitations.
http://theformofmoney.blogharbor.com/blog/_archives/2005/9/18/1236759.html
"Money says grow or be condemned to povety, the environment says otherwise."
The economy does not need to grow. Its volume need only be constant, in repairing, replacing, recycling things as they wear out, i.e. the normal fight against entropy. The volume of economic activity remains constant, except when population or industrialization changes. Obviously there is a limit on sustainable population and there is a "point of diminishing returns" for industrialization. This replacement economy doesn't mean poverty. It means more of the same economic status. And in fact, a replacement economy can be unsustainable if its constant consumption rate outstrips the earth's ability to recycle the resources. The far-left bases its policy on these truths while the Repuks/Demoks mindlessly run their economic growth engines wide open throttle toward the destruction of at least 2/3 of all species within fifty years, living legacies of thousands to millions of years snuffed out in a relative instant.
I agree. And "sustainable growth" is an oxymoron.
So when will the UN stop protecting Monsanto and when will Ron Paul's HR 1866 be taken seriously by the electorate ? And what about funding for public transportation improvements and removing tax breaks for gas guzzlers?
Jennifer, the answer to your questions is that until these organizations(UN and the US government) are dead and buried the policies will not change. Booth of these criminal organizations are here to prolong human suffering and inequality, they are government by the elite and for the elite.
caption under the photo reads:
The report praises the web, which it singles out as 'the most powerful force for globalisation, democratisation, economic growth, and education in history'
hmmmm....i dunno about that.... there are powerful voices for sanity & certainly plenty of helpful & genuine info-sharing that at times can be life-saving, but 'incestuous amplification' (remember iraq's wmds? "SKEPTICAL ENVIRONMENTALISM"? s.hussein's 'connection' with 911? viagra gone viral? and bottled water will save the world & other advertising crap?) abounds as well.
thanks for your phrase in this thread, henry8, but, though i don't consider you a 'troll', i'm afraid you've fallen victim to it (incestuous amplification) yourself, given your attempt to debunk climate change with such an empty statement as
"most evidence seems to suggest that the theory of carbon pollution is not what it is said to be."---okay, so enlighten us with some of this evidence.... and clarify what carbon pollution 'is said to be' first.
Kafka and Orwell, Dashiell Hammett and Robert Stone correctly saw the future a long time ago. George Wanker Bush went to sleep and woke up an insect. Then he was elected president.
'elected' ???????
And yet the New Age, "progressive" and hippie parents keep having 3, 4, 5 kids and more! But, hey, they're "carbon neutral" thanks to Climate Trust and other "offsetting" programs!
Yeah, those Mormons and Catholics - damned hippies.
Them too.
Along with those damned conservative "hippies."
And meanwhile, Planned Parenthood closed all of its doors in El Paso, Texas and across the panhandle (Amarillo, too) thanks to efforts by "pro life" groups intent on shutting them down nationwide. As of July 1, 12,000 poor/uninsured women in El Paso have to find somewhere else for access to safe, reliable birth control and cancer screenings. Maybe there will be a rise in unplanned, unwanted pregnancies as a result?
This whole thing begins to look like many other "discussions" here lately. It looks to me like a military description really fits. Its called "incestuous amplification," it's a condition in warfare where one only listens to those who are already in lock-step agreement, reinforcing set beliefs and creating a situation ripe for miscalculation.
Frankly this report much like others, it says "Although the scale of the effects of climate change are unprecedented, the causes are generally known, and the consequences can largely be forecast" Where is it generally known. Putting forth theories as fact without proof is simply dishonest. This part is true,"environmental problems worsen faster than response or preventive policies are being adopted". unless as it is suggested in the report it refers to Climate Change. There is no known proof that it is man made, in fact most evidence seems to suggest that the theory of carbon pollution is not what it is said to be.
Tolerance, truthful discussions, real facts rather than "push poll's" which this report resembles would be more helpful. And I'm sure not falling into the "beliver" side makes me a troll.