# Humans, Do We Have a Future?



## Huntn

​

We are smart, damn we are smart, by our accomplishments the smartest the planet we named Earth has to offer. But in my opinion we are not so advanced, not from a species survival standpoint. In fact some people think we are well established on the way to destroying ourselves. Why are we not talking about the following?

*Humanity*_ has a 95% probability of being _*extinct*_ in 7,800,000 years, according to J. Richard Gott's formulation of the controversial Doomsday argument, which argues that we have probably already lived through half the duration of _*human*_ history._








						Human extinction - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				




_Each day, the extra heat that is trapped near our planet is equivalent to __400,000__ Hiroshima bombs. There are no known technologies that can be deployed at world scale to reverse the warming, and many climate scientists feel that the window for doing so is already closed, that we have passed the __tipping point__ and the heat is on runaway no matter what we do._








						Are We Heading Toward Extinction?
					

The Earth's species — plants, animals and humans, alike — are facing imminent demise. How we got here, and how to cope.




					www.huffpost.com
				




Yesterday I watched a show that touched me. Sure some will laugh, it is called the Queen’s Gambit, a fictional story with a basis in competitive chess from the 1960s about a girl who I would describe as not normal, ends up in an orphanage after her mother tries to kill them both and discovers chess.

Although I won’t insist that everyone love this , what a great story, that illustrates a spectrum of human cultural and emotional challenges, social cliques, differences between people, some who have basically zero social skills, but are geniuses while commenting that there can be a thin line between genius and madness. It also dealt with how people deal with failure, how they could personally fail, recognize their limitations, but find it in themselves to assist others still in the game so to speak (of competitive chess), to be champions.

Then this morning I woke up and during my drive to the gym was captivated by Led Zepplin’s _All of my Love_ on the radio, and although I’ve known it, I was struck by the tremendous abilities of creativity and expression some humans possess. We can do some good things!

But as a group, how can we be so F***** UP? Maybe we possess both genius and madness.  Can we simultaneously be “so advanced” yet so screwed up?? Is it a matter of what intelligence we have is overruled by our ID, our emotions and prejudices, and really we are not quite as smart as we think we are, or maybe it’s not some of us as much as it is the dumb shit masses around us? I’m going to resist posting examples as I think most of us have identified the political problem, at least in the US. And the US is not the only troubled spot in the world, but I digress.

I’ve often said that the problem is that individualism is great, but that we desperately need to be more like the ants and the bees or encapsulated by a simple phrase, we need much more of We>Me thinking and what we have today is an avalanche of Me (greed)> We. Capitalism is based on individual greed and grab as much as you can, yet some number of us tout that Capitalism is the best. I suppose if you are comfortable with your status, then Capitalism is good, but not all of those who are comfortable think that, at least not Wild West Captalism. Another discussion for a different post, can Capitalism serve the masses? Maybe if it's heavily regulated. It does not seem to be serving the masses today, although some minority are doing quite well under it.

Are we wired to be greedy or is it just a matter of faulty development?

This applies on a spectrum from smaller social groups, to society where we see well off (wealthy) continuing to grab more of the pie, while the economics of average citizens has been sliding since the 1960s.  On a world wide scale, those countries with plenty, arguably are too tribal and are not as generous as they need to be when it involves the survival of our species, and even the world as we know it. Look at the Paris accords, our hearts are in the right place, but it's unlikely we'll ever have it in us to make the needed sacrifices until we see _DOOM_ written on the wall and it's too frick'n late.

So what do you think, do we stand a chance?






						Homo sapiens
					






					humanorigins.si.edu
				





*Note: *This post is a personal milestone, because it’s the first philosophical post I’ve placed on TalkedAbout that I have no plans to stick in MacRumors PRSI. As far as I’m concerned, MacRumors can suffer the drought for the lack of my intellect.  Most of the lower primates over there would scream, swing madly on their bars, and try to piss on me, along with a certain weasel who’d be scheming with his hammer. Lol.


----------



## Gutwrench

Huntn said:


> *Humanity*_ has a 95% probability of being _*extinct*_ in 7,800,000 years..._​




“If God is coming He ought to make it by then...”


----------



## thekev

Huntn said:


> ​
> *Humanity*_ has a 95% probability of being _*extinct*_ in 7,800,000 years, according to J. Richard Gott's formulation of the controversial Doomsday argument, which argues that we have probably already lived through half the duration of _*human*_ history._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Human extinction - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org




I wouldn't read too much into such conjecture. It's more of a thought experiment than anything. The argument is actually dynamic in the sense that recomputing the result in 100 years may give you a different result. Overall though, extinction events sometimes occur. It's hard to say exactly when one will happen. 














						Doomsday argument - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## Huntn

Gutwrench said:


> “If God is coming He ought to make it by then...”



Is that a que sera answer?  If we don’t care about taking care of the planet so be it, maybe we were not  meant or developed  to be survivors.


thekev said:


> I wouldn't read too much into such conjecture. It's more of a thought experiment than anything. The argument is actually dynamic in the sense that recomputing the result in 100 years may give you a different result. Overall though, extinction events sometimes occur. It's hard to say exactly when one will happen.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Doomsday argument - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org



Just as important to examine why the smartest species on the planet is too self absorbed or in denial, or thinks it just too hard to stop contributing to the global warming event, that’s if we don’t blow ourselves up first.

We, at least a large number of us are demonstrating an inability to deal with facts when they adversely effect us. The Trump phenomena and support for a smooth talking   Liar who shouts sweet humongous lies in their ears, choosing their jobs over the environment is a splendid example, choosing a fantasy where they come out ahead while simultaneously being robbed.


----------



## Gutwrench

Huntn said:


> Is that a que sera answer?




Yep


----------



## iMi

The level of optimism in this poll... We're a bright, cheery bunch of assholes, huh?   

We have a lot going against us. First, there is the baseline risk of our species being wiped out by either an astroid impact or an unusually high volcanic activity. Even a strong enough solar flare could strip away our atmosphere making it a shitty place to inhabit. We focus on these types of disasters because they are terrifyingly sudden and catastrophic. That's what a human brain is conditioned to ponder and work to prevent. Just look at the billions of dollars invested in tracking astroids. 

Second, there is a much more subtle risk. We're in the middle of the next mass extinction event right now. Thousands of species are disappearing every year because of human activity. We make the mistake of separating humans from the rest of the ecosystem, as if we were not interconnected, but that is simply not how evolution works. Plankton, for example, produces the majority of the oxygen we breathe. Bees pollenate the vast majority of our crops and they are disappearing. Our food-chain is a real thing and it's being dismantled. The midwest, here in the States, is responsible for growing the vast majority of corn, which in turn feeds our livestock and much more. The entire region relies on non-renewable, underground aquifer to operate. Water is running out. Rain in the region would be insufficient and pumping water out of the Great Lakes would create other challenges. These are just a couple of examples. There is a pattern all over the planet. These are bright, flashing warning lights. Very few pay attention to them and when they speak up, they are labeled as alarmist extremists. 

So, yeah... we're fucked.


----------



## Huntn

iMi said:


> The level of optimism in this poll... We're a bright, cheery bunch of assholes, huh?
> 
> We have a lot going against us. First, there is the baseline risk of our species being wiped out by either an astroid impact or an unusually high volcanic activity. Even a strong enough solar flare could strip away our atmosphere making it a shitty place to inhabit. We focus on these types of disasters because they are terrifyingly sudden and catastrophic. That's what a human brain is conditioned to ponder and work to prevent. Just look at the billions of dollars invested in tracking astroids.
> 
> Second, there is a much more subtle risk. We're in the middle of the next mass extinction event right now. Thousands of species are disappearing every year because of human activity. We make the mistake of separating humans from the rest of the ecosystem, as if we were not interconnected, but that is simply not how evolution works. Plankton, for example, produces the majority of the oxygen we breathe. Bees pollenate the vast majority of our crops and they are disappearing. Our food-chain is a real thing and it's being dismantled. The midwest, here in the States, is responsible for growing the vast majority of corn, which in turn feeds our livestock and much more. The entire region relies on non-renewable, underground aquifer to operate. Water is running out. Rain in the region would be insufficient and pumping water out of the Great Lakes would create other challenges. These are just a couple of examples. There is a pattern all over the planet. These are bright, flashing warning lights. Very few pay attention to them and when they speak up, they are labeled as alarmist extremists.
> 
> So, yeah... we're fucked.



There are some bright ones among us, but as a rule we’re just worried mostly about a spectrum of things along the lines of our individual comfort depending on our economic situation. The people who are struggling for their next meal or where to sleep, I really don’t blame them, but those I’d classify as comfortable I do blame because this seems to be the extent of our existence while unable for whatever the reason to digest threats that are not immediately threatening or hard to analyze.

Sure our scientists analyze them, warm us about them, but a substantial group of average people would rather listen to professional scam artists who  just want control over their lives, by whispering sweet little lies to them. Note the scam artists are not smarter, they are just focused on controlling the sheep and  oblivious to the threat consumed with their personal wealth even as the system collapses.

Dire warnings based on global,warming, a mass extinction, you are right we just wipe our hands of it, if it can’t be seen or felt, hell even when it is felt, denial. For the situation to hit home, something drastic like more hurricanes, super storms.   Ok, something more, like the icecaps melting and oceans rising.  Ok, it’s going to have to be something that not only touches us but really hurts us, like the food supply collapse, something that destabilizes society. Of course at that point we're just along for the ride, at this point as far as global warming we probably all ready are.

The bottom line here even with Paris accords being a bandaid, is that the world made up of nations who based on their economic systems, could not address this threat, because it would be too uncomfortable to stop it. This is the culmination of hundreds of thousands of years of development, we are just not up to the task of acting in a manner where we can survive as a species. That is my projection.

If short of a total wipeout, we likely will remain the top species on the planet, but I can only lean on one of my science fiction movies to imagine what future we will face, something like Interstellar where the Earth has been trashed beyond being livable for billions.






						Is it too late to prevent climate change? – Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet
					

Vital Signs of the Planet: Global Climate Change and Global Warming. Current news and data streams about global warming and climate change from NASA.




					climate.nasa.gov


----------



## Gutwrench

We didn’t come along on our own, you know.  If it hadn’t been for the K-Pg mass extinction we wouldn’t be here now.

Humans being extinct within _8 million years_ is now what’s keeping the enlightened up at night? Lol, since borrowing trouble from the future is the new fad lets keep in mind the sun will become a red giant in 5 billion years. Solve that too.


----------



## Huntn

Gutwrench said:


> We didn’t come along on our own, you know.  If it hadn’t been for the K-Pg mass extinction we wouldn’t be here now.
> 
> Humans being extinct within _8 million years_ is now what’s keeping the enlightened up at night? Lol, since borrowing trouble from the future is the new fad lets keep in mind the sun will become a red giant in 5 billion years. Solve that too.



Yes, sure, maybe we were not destined to survive, not wired for it, and the *Fermi paradox* is right on. Not meant as an insult, but you appear to be thinking these things are out of our control. We are not animals roaming the plains accepting what nature dishes out.

By virtue of our intelligence we can make a difference. Global warming is the perfect example, we could of made changes in the 80s, there was no excuse except it would adversely effect our economy, and we did not want to change our behavior because it would be too expensive, and the mantra from the Right was this is an exaggeration or a hoax.  So be it, we reap what we sew, just don’t rationalize it because it will likely be our grandkids paying.









						Climate Change History
					

Climate change is the long-term alteration in Earth’s climate and weather patterns. It took nearly a century of research and data to convince the vast majority




					www.history.com
				



_In the 1800s, experiments suggesting that human-produced carbon dioxide (CO2) and other gases could collect in the atmosphere and insulate Earth were met with more curiosity than concern. By the late 1950s, CO2 readings would offer some of the first data to corroborate the global warming theory. Eventually an abundance of data, along with climate modeling would show not only that global warming was real, but that it also presented a host of dire consequences._


----------



## LIVEFRMNYC

Without Teleportation, we have no long term future.


----------



## Huntn

LIVEFRMNYC said:


> Without Teleportation, we have no long term future.


----------



## Chew Toy McCoy

This topic is a little too heady for me at the moment, but I thought I'd post a semi related thought I had recently.  Why did one evolutionary path lead to dinosaurs which as far as I know was nowhere pointing to the brain power and skill of humans, and then with one extinction event we end up with humans at the top of the evolutionary chain?  It seems on one path size was the advantage and the second path brain power was.


----------



## Gutwrench

Huntn said:


> Not meant as an insult, but you appear to be thinking these things are out of our control.



Yes, the sun becoming a red giant is out of our control.



Huntn said:


> We are not animals roaming the plains accepting what nature dishes out.




Wtf, we certainly are animals who are part of nature.


----------



## Scepticalscribe

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> This topic is a little too heady for me at the moment, but I thought I'd post a semi related thought I had recently.  Why did one evolutionary path lead to dinosaurs which as far as I know was nowhere pointing to the brain power and skill of humans, and then with one extinction event we end up with humans at the top of the evolutionary chain?  It seems on one path size was the advantage and the second path brain power was.




Dinosaurs existed for around 165 million years; even though I am an intellectual snob (and I was an academic in a previous life), I really doubt that the "brain power" argument is valid in this context.

This was a version of life that positively *thrived* until some sort of deux ex machina (an asteroid) did for them.

For all of our intellectual capabilities, mental capacity (and I have paid a visit to the stunning museum in Nairobi that has a section devoted to Lucy and one of the other early hominids - absolutely fascinating, my mother would have loved it), we have only been around for the best part of 100,000 years.


----------



## Thomas Veil

Forty years ago I'd have bet our brains and common sense could help us think our way out of almost any problem. Judging by what I've see lately, I have to retract that view. It's not that there aren't still people who are smart and have good judgment, it's just that they just seem to be a dwindling minority.


----------



## Huntn

Gutwrench said:


> Yes, the sun becoming a red giant is out of our control.
> 
> 
> 
> Wtf, we certainly are animals who are part of nature.



Well when the Sun turns into a red giant we’d better be interstellar. And the second point also seems to allude you, we are not like every other mammal, we are aware of what we are doing, have the  knowledge of what effect we have on the environment, and can actually alter our behavior that makes a difference if we want to, unlike the rest of the animals who are basically oblivious and who btw seem naturally in tune with their environment unlike us. That is the burden of knowledge...


----------



## Huntn

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> This topic is a little too heady for me at the moment, but I thought I'd post a semi related thought I had recently.  Why did one evolutionary path lead to dinosaurs which as far as I know was nowhere pointing to the brain power and skill of humans, and then with one extinction event we end up with humans at the top of the evolutionary chain?  It seems on one path size was the advantage and the second path brain power was.



My understanding is the dinos were swatted by an asteroid, opening the door to accelerate mammal development. And while extinction level events like a big rock hitting the Earth, have and could happen again, we actually do have the technology to deal with that if we want to spread the money on it. But plan on listening  to the cries about how that costs too much. Not quite in line with the Fermi Paradox, but along the lines of having knowledge and refusing to act on it, such as Global Warming which  might be the Fermi Paradox in action,


----------



## Apple fanboy

Huntn said:


> View attachment 1787​
> 
> We are smart, damn we are smart, by our accomplishments the smartest the planet we named Earth has to offer. But in my opinion we are not so advanced, not from a species survival standpoint. In fact some people think we are well established on the way to destroying ourselves. Why are we not talking about the following?
> 
> *Humanity*_ has a 95% probability of being _*extinct*_ in 7,800,000 years, according to J. Richard Gott's formulation of the controversial Doomsday argument, which argues that we have probably already lived through half the duration of _*human*_ history._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Human extinction - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Each day, the extra heat that is trapped near our planet is equivalent to __400,000__ Hiroshima bombs. There are no known technologies that can be deployed at world scale to reverse the warming, and many climate scientists feel that the window for doing so is already closed, that we have passed the __tipping point__ and the heat is on runaway no matter what we do._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are We Heading Toward Extinction?
> 
> 
> The Earth's species — plants, animals and humans, alike — are facing imminent demise. How we got here, and how to cope.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yesterday I watched a show that touched me. Sure some will laugh, it is called the Queen’s Gambit, a fictional story with a basis in competitive chess from the 1960s about a girl who I would describe as not normal, ends up in an orphanage after her mother tries to kill them both and discovers chess.
> 
> Although I won’t insist that everyone love this , what a great story, that illustrates a spectrum of human cultural and emotional challenges, social cliques, differences between people, some who have basically zero social skills, but are geniuses while commenting that there can be a thin line between genius and madness. It also dealt with how people deal with failure, how they could personally fail, recognize their limitations, but find it in themselves to assist others still in the game so to speak (of competitive chess), to be champions.
> 
> Then this morning I woke up and during my drive to the gym was captivated by Led Zepplin’s _All of my Love_ on the radio, and although I’ve known it, I was struck by the tremendous abilities of creativity and expression some humans possess. We can do some good things!
> 
> But as a group, how can we be so F***** UP? Maybe we possess both genius and madness.  Can we simultaneously be “so advanced” yet so screwed up?? Is it a matter of what intelligence we have is overruled by our ID, our emotions and prejudices, and really we are not quite as smart as we think we are, or maybe it’s not some of us as much as it is the dumb shit masses around us? I’m going to resist posting examples as I think most of us have identified the political problem, at least in the US. And the US is not the only troubled spot in the world, but I digress.
> 
> I’ve often said that the problem is that individualism is great, but that we desperately need to be more like the ants and the bees or encapsulated by a simple phrase, we need much more of We>Me thinking and what we have today is an avalanche of Me (greed)> We. Capitalism is based on individual greed and grab as much as you can, yet some number of us tout that Capitalism is the best. I suppose if you are comfortable with your status, then Capitalism is good, but not all of those who are comfortable think that, at least not Wild West Captalism. Another discussion for a different post, can Capitalism serve the masses? Maybe if it's heavily regulated. It does not seem to be serving the masses today, although some minority are doing quite well under it.
> 
> Are we wired to be greedy or is it just a matter of faulty development?
> 
> This applies on a spectrum from smaller social groups, to society where we see well off (wealthy) continuing to grab more of the pie, while the economics of average citizens has been sliding since the 1960s.  On a world wide scale, those countries with plenty, arguably are too tribal and are not as generous as they need to be when it involves the survival of our species, and even the world as we know it. Look at the Paris accords, our hearts are in the right place, but it's unlikely we'll ever have it in us to make the needed sacrifices until we see _DOOM_ written on the wall and it's too frick'n late.
> 
> So what do you think, do we stand a chance?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Homo sapiens
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> humanorigins.si.edu
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Note: *This post is a personal milestone, because it’s the first philosophical post I’ve placed on TalkedAbout that I have no plans to stick in MacRumors PRSI. As far as I’m concerned, MacRumors can suffer the drought for the lack of my intellect.  Most of the lower primates over there would scream, swing madly on their bars, and try to piss on me, along with a certain weasel who’d be scheming with his hammer. Lol.



Here's the problem as I see it. Any attempt to reverse things will have a huge financial cost. Those in charge of the world who are looking to balance the books so to speak don't see this as a priority. Why? Because the massive global impact of our actions doesn't impact their lifespan. They are in their 60's and older. They know they will be worm food long before the world becomes uninhabitable. 

I think there has never been a bigger push towards green policies, but it is too little too late.


----------



## Eraserhead

The problem that we are struggling to solve is that many businesses are too obsessed with profits and that government is too obsessed with process.

The biggest flaw with business is that it increasingly only works well for the better off and screws over the poor - especially as employees. 

The biggest flaw with government is that very little thought has been put into handling any edge cases at all - if all goes well it’s fine but as soon as there is a problem it can be very challenging to resolve successfully. The other issue is that government culture doesn’t allow people to be wrong about stuff but not lose their jobs and mostly treat it as something to learn and do better about - which is how mistakes should be best handled.

In terms of climate change any solution that requires government intervention is going to upset many people far more than it should because the general experience is poor.


----------



## Eraserhead

Apple fanboy said:


> Here's the problem as I see it. Any attempt to reverse things will have a huge financial cost. Those in charge of the world who are looking to balance the books so to speak don't see this as a priority. Why? Because the massive global impact of our actions doesn't impact their lifespan. They are in their 60's and older. They know they will be worm food long before the world becomes uninhabitable.
> 
> I think there has never been a bigger push towards green policies, but it is too little too late.



I think we can do more than we think with a pretty low budget and/or with private money.


----------



## Gutwrench

Huntn said:


> Well when the Sun turns into a red giant we’d better be interstellar. And the second point also seems to allude you, we are not like every other mammal, we are aware of what we are doing, have the  knowledge of what effect we have on the environment, and can actually alter our behavior that makes a difference if we want to, unlike the rest of the animals who are basically oblivious and who btw seem naturally in tune with their environment unlike us. That is the burden of knowledge...




Then it seems humans could just as well be interstellar in 8 million years rather than being extinct. But wait, what really needs focused on is the suffocating big freeze.


----------



## Eraserhead

Gutwrench said:


> Then it seems humans could just as well be interstellar in 8 million years rather than being extinct. But wait, what really needs focused on is the suffocating big freeze.




Im not sure a big freeze would be a big issue. For a start we’ve had technology to handle low temperatures (fire) since the Stone Age.

Plus there aren’t many of us who live about the glaciation line. It’s basically the British who would be difficult (and not for the first time).

Rising sea leaves could affect billions as a lot of people live close to the sea. And maybe we can solve it with technology but it’s not as easy.


----------



## Gutwrench

Eraserhead said:


> Im not sure a big freeze would be a big issue. For a start we’ve had technology to handle low temperatures (fire) since the Stone Age.











						What is the Big Freeze?
					

[/caption]The Big Freeze, which is also known as the Heat Death, is one of the possible scenarios predicted by scientists in which the Universe may end. It is a direct consequence of an ever expanding universe. The most telling evidences, such as those that indicate an increasing rate of...




					www.universetoday.com


----------



## Huntn

Gutwrench said:


> Then it seems humans could just as well be interstellar in 8 million years rather than being extinct. But wait, what really needs focused on is the suffocating big freeze.



We know we are causing, at a minimum adding to an increase of global temperatures. The warnings have been given, we could of actually done something about it, and really the majority of the world has adopted your view, que serra, so be it. The point is we have knowledge and we either act for the good of the species/the planet or we really don’t deserve to survive and I don’t want to hear any crying about it. 

Our species may not become extinct, but we might be knocked back significantly, and maybe this is what needs to happen for us to evolve while apologizing to the millions of species we knocked off as caretakers of the planet.


----------



## Apple fanboy

Eraserhead said:


> I think we can do more than we think with a pretty low budget and/or with private money.



Yes I’m sure we can and we do. However we could do more.


----------



## Gutwrench

Huntn said:


> We know we are causing, at a minimum adding to an increase of global temperatures. The warnings have been given, we could of actually done something about it, and really the majority of the world has adopted your view, que serra, so be it. The point is we have knowledge and we either act for the good of the species/the planet or we really don’t deserve to survive and I don’t want to hear any crying about it.
> 
> Our species may not become extinct, but we might be knocked back significantly, and maybe this is what needs to happen for us to evolve while apologizing to the millions of species we knocked off as caretakers of the planet.




The original post was a rambling disjointed tirade about climate change. There’s differing opinions on addressing it just as there’s differing opinions on economic and political systems.


----------



## lizkat

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> This topic is a little too heady for me at the moment, but I thought I'd post a semi related thought I had recently.  Why did one evolutionary path lead to dinosaurs which as far as I know was nowhere pointing to the brain power and skill of humans, and then with one extinction event we end up with humans at the top of the evolutionary chain?  It seems on one path size was the advantage and the second path brain power was.




Whatever was left, and saw what happened to the dinosaurs, said WTF we were on a wrong path there for sure.


----------



## Huntn

Gutwrench said:


> The original post was a rambling disjointed tirade about climate change. There’s differing opinions on addressing it just as there’s differing opinions on economic and political systems.



It was only seemed disjointed..  And it definitely was not a tirade, at least not an unworthy one. I suppose you’d calling yelling_ Fire!_ for a real fire would be a tirade.   

For your benefit, the  summary of post 1, is that we are marvelous creatures, with a high degree of intelligence, creativity, and perception, yet we are too self centered and selfish, truly not smart enough or worse,  in denial, that with the knowledge of what needs to be done, due to our established economic systems that may cause us discomfort if we rock that boat,  we refuse to act, take the necessary steps, instead many are in varying degrees of denial, because _I don’t want economic discomfort now, and I won’t have to face potentially dire consequences in the future, let the grandkids do that.  _


----------



## Gutwrench

Huntn said:


> It was only seemed disjointed..  And it definitely was not a tirade, at least not an unworthy one. I suppose you’d calling yelling_ Fire!_ for a real fire would be a tirade.
> 
> For your benefit, the  summary of post 1, is that we are marvelous creatures, with a high degree of intelligence, creativity, and perception, yet we are too self centered and selfish, truly not smart enough or worse,  in denial, that with the knowledge of what needs to be done, due to our established economic systems that may cause us discomfort if we rock that boat,  we refuse to act, take the necessary steps, instead many are in varying degrees of denial, because _I don’t want economic discomfort now, and I won’t have to face potentially dire consequences in the future, let the grandkids do that.  _




As I mentioned before there are varying opinions on how to address climate change just as there are on economic and political systems.

Perhaps drop the smartest man in the room approach and just articulate a few specific steps you think ought to be taken rather making broad sweeping  commentary about mankind. It’s so banal and pointlessly white knightish.

And while periods do have magical healing powers they can’t perform miracles without properly formed sentences expressing logically organized thoughts.

I humbly suggest organizing your thoughts then write a sentence fragment introducing each of them separately followed with a few supporting bulletin points.

One long random unorganized list leaves the reader having to unravel what the writer is trying to say...or worse yet questioning if the writer even knows what they’re trying to say.


----------



## Eraserhead

Huntn said:


> It was only seemed disjointed..  And it definitely was not a tirade, at least not an unworthy one. I suppose you’d calling yelling_ Fire!_ for a real fire would be a tirade.
> 
> For your benefit, the  summary of post 1, is that we are marvelous creatures, with a high degree of intelligence, creativity, and perception, yet we are too self centered and selfish, truly not smart enough or worse,  in denial, that with the knowledge of what needs to be done, due to our established economic systems that may cause us discomfort if we rock that boat,  we refuse to act, take the necessary steps, instead many are in varying degrees of denial, because _I don’t want economic discomfort now, and I won’t have to face potentially dire consequences in the future, let the grandkids do that.  _



I think the problem is more that we don’t have the right leaders especially in government.


----------



## iMi

Gutwrench said:


> We didn’t come along on our own, you know.  If it hadn’t been for the K-Pg mass extinction we wouldn’t be here now.
> 
> Humans being extinct within _8 million years_ is now what’s keeping the enlightened up at night? Lol, since borrowing trouble from the future is the new fad lets keep in mind the sun will become a red giant in 5 billion years. Solve that too.




We should be concerned with the world we leave behind for our children and their children. 

Of course, we will eventually be gone. Yes, the sun will swallow up earth before collapsing into a supernova. That’s not long-term in my book. I’d say let’s think about the next few hundred years. We will likely become a multi planetary species in that timespan. Perhaps even an intergalactic or inter dimensional one. Plus, there is also evolution. We may not become extinct at all. We may evolve into something else entirely. One could easily argue that dinosaurs did not go extinct. They evolved into birds, but we don’t call them dinosaurs anymore.


----------



## iMi

Chew Toy McCoy said:


> This topic is a little too heady for me at the moment, but I thought I'd post a semi related thought I had recently.  Why did one evolutionary path lead to dinosaurs which as far as I know was nowhere pointing to the brain power and skill of humans, and then with one extinction event we end up with humans at the top of the evolutionary chain?  It seems on one path size was the advantage and the second path brain power was.




It’s a lot more complicated than this. Earth back then was richer in oxygen, which not only allowed dinosaurs to grow very large in size, but likely made their smaller brains (relative to body size) work more efficiently. There is some evidence that certain dinosaurs were quite intelligent.

The mammals that survived were small, underground species that were far removed from humans. It took millions of years of evolution for life to evolve into more branches, including primates. 

We are not the only highly intelligent beings on earth. Dolphins, for example, have a complex social structure, language and ability to solve complex problems.

Also, one could argue that how we define intelligence isn’t necessarily the only way. Ants, for example, use hormones to communicate, show remarkable abilities to warn each other and even use mental maps. That’s pretty amazing.


----------



## iMi

Gutwrench said:


> What is the Big Freeze?
> 
> 
> [/caption]The Big Freeze, which is also known as the Heat Death, is one of the possible scenarios predicted by scientists in which the Universe may end. It is a direct consequence of an ever expanding universe. The most telling evidences, such as those that indicate an increasing rate of...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.universetoday.com



Interesting. Didn’t scientists also discover that the universe is expending at a faster and faster rate? It suggest that it’s still expending from Big Bang. In a few trillions years, it may start slowing down before starting to collapse again, doing so progressively faster, until it once again collapses into an infinitely dense matter and goes bang again.


----------



## lizkat

Huntn said:


> Are we wired to be greedy or is it just a matter of faulty development?
> 
> This applies on a spectrum from smaller social groups, to society where we see well off (wealthy) continuing to grab more of the pie, while the economics of average citizens has been sliding since the 1960s. On a world wide scale, those countries with plenty, arguably are too tribal and are not as generous as they need to be when it involves the survival of our species, and even the world as we know it. Look at the Paris accords, our hearts are in the right place, but it's unlikely we'll ever have it in us to make the needed sacrifices until we see _DOOM_ written on the wall and it's too frick'n late.
> 
> So what do you think, do we stand a chance?




Sure we do, if we insist that our leaders make more of a point about the benefits of working together to invent and distribute more eco-friendly and healthier ways of operating even at the most basic level of preparing food for families, obtaining heating fuel etc.

We probably don't widely enough yet learn about value to ourselves in helping impoverished nations join in climate change mitigation.  We are starting to reallocate some of our public and private sector investments as a wealthy nation towards that end though.  There are individuals and groups and companies who do invent, model and help propagate use of more eco-friendly ways of meeting basic needs, e.g. cookstoves and more renewable fuel acquisition or manufacture.

This site has very detailed filtering options for looking up suitable cookstoves for assorted situations and locations.  And yes, the catalog is a feature of Clean Cooking Alliance.






						Clean Cooking Catalog
					

Clean Cooking Catalog - Functional Demo




					catalog.cleancookstoves.org
				




And yes it's associated w/ The United Nations Foundation, and yes many of the partnerships involved are spinoffs of or actually part of multinational or USA megacorporate efforts to get on the bandwagon.  Seems like that's what we have been asking them to do for decades though, no?  "Help us or get out of the way?"    Hold their feet to the fire if discovering they're in it for the feel-good and if their cookstove offerings don't yet offset the damage they still do in other aspects of their existence. It's a start.  It's real.

In my book, a real start counts more than just dismissing "Green" efforts...  including by default anyone's effort to make cooking more eco-supportive and healthy and fuel acquisition less burdensome for the women of the less developed world who usually have to perform those tasks.


----------



## Gutwrench

iMi said:


> We should be concerned with the world we leave behind for our children and their children.




Indeed. The question is how to address it.  



iMi said:


> Of course, we will eventually be gone. Yes, the sun will swallow up earth before collapsing into a supernova. That’s not long-term in my book. I’d say let’s think about the next few hundred years. We will likely become a multi planetary species in that timespan. Perhaps even an intergalactic or inter dimensional one. Plus, there is also evolution. We may not become extinct at all. We may evolve into something else entirely. One could easily argue that dinosaurs did not go extinct. They evolved into birds, but we don’t call them dinosaurs anymore.





The sun doesn’t have the mass to become a supernova. It will only become a red giant then cool to a white dwarf.

Terrestrial (non avian) dinosaurs went extinct. Avian dinosaur exist today as birds.


----------



## Gutwrench

iMi said:


> Interesting. Didn’t scientists also discover that the universe is expending at a faster and faster rate? It suggest that it’s still expending from Big Bang. In a few trillions years, it may start slowing down before starting to collapse again, doing so progressively faster, until it once again collapses into an infinitely dense matter and goes bang again.




Yes, that’s Hubble’s Law. 

To my knowledge the best accepted theory today is the Big Freeze as the current data indicates there is insufficient mass to reach critical mass to reverse back to the Big Crunch.


----------



## lizkat

Gutwrench said:


> Yes, that’s Hubble’s Law.
> 
> To my knowledge the best accepted theory today is the Big Freeze as the current data indicates there is insufficient mass to reach critical mass to reverse back to the Big Crunch.




Just the rubble being left behind by the self-destructing Republican Party should help solve that problem.  They're putting so much energy into breaking all sorts rules, norms, laws...  that maybe they can attack laws of physics next before they collapse entirely.

And yeah I'm abusing the less tightly administered guidelines around here, most likely.    Should wander over to the other place and try this and find out what would happen.  Been stalling on meeting up with a Big Crunch over there.

As you all were.  Going back to the late lunch construction problem which is locating just a little Big Crunch to make it tasty,


----------



## Gutwrench

lizkat said:


> Just the rubble being left behind by the self-destructing Republican Party should help solve that problem.  They're putting so much energy into breaking all sorts rules, norms, laws...  that maybe they can attack laws of physics next before they collapse entirely.
> 
> And yeah I'm abusing the less tightly administered guidelines around here, most likely.    Should wander over to the other place and try this and find out what would happen.  Been stalling on meeting up with a Big Crunch over there.
> 
> As you all were.  Going back to the late lunch construction problem which is locating just a little Big Crunch to make it tasty,




Speaking of white dwarfs......


----------



## iMi

Gutwrench said:


> Speaking of white dwarfs......



They prefer to be caller white little people. Some liberal you are, miss. What’s next, orange fat bastard?


----------



## lizkat

Around here only little white critters right now are snowflakes.   Comical this morning watching the utility company's contracted tree trimmer crews trying to deal with the belated realization that yeah even if it's a La Nina forecast for winter,  the season is not only here but may contain random snowdumps.... even this week!   --with potential to bring overhanging limbs onto wires. 

Wondered where these guys were in September since it's been about three years since they came through the county road on the prowl for arboreal candidates for a haircut.    If ya don't want yer trees developing unnatural shapes, then then don't put them where they'll threaten the juice supply.    And the power company only does what it deems necessary right now,  so if you want a lower limb of a conifer cut back to improve road visibility from your driveway, get some gloves, tough workclothes and a pruning saw, darling.


----------



## lizkat

Thomas Veil said:


> Forty years ago I'd have bet our brains and common sense could help us think our way out of almost any problem. Judging by what I've see lately, I have to retract that view. It's not that there aren't still people who are smart and have good judgment, it's just that they just seem to be a dwindling minority.




Probably not a dwindling minority but one striving harder to become part of a majority.  More and younger citizens of the world are climbing on board, pressuring their elders to help make enough difference in time to keep the earth human-habitable longer.   Their efforts are individual but often part of organized endeavors, sometimes national (or regional and multinational).

There's no reason except human effort that some fairly small countries have done more to mitigate ill effects of climate change by law, example and individual effort to extend the effort and persuade others to join.

*Costa Rica *is a good example. Who'd have thought it? Half the world's population likely never heard of Costa Rica much less would figure them high on the actions-taken list for ecology-protective and climate change mitigating behavior. Yet they continue on track with intention to be carbon-neutral by 2050 and they have some of the most innovative incentives to help even their impoverished citizens make that into a reality.​​Or who would have pegged *Lebanon* as a 2020 winner on the list of the UN's action awards in the sustainable development goals challenge (they won because of an all female team working in the energy sector on amping up solar power options).​
The reason we don't hear more about all this in the USA , short of the Trump administration in particular --and our own energy sector in general--  not being fully on board with green initiatives,  is largely that this stuff hasn't yet been widely made into lucrative enough clickbait.  It's still more profitable to print stuff about film celebrities or the royalty of other countries or the future plans and prospects of a certain Western head of state.


----------



## Gutwrench

lizkat said:


> Probably not a dwindling minority but one striving harder to become part of a majority.  More and younger citizens of the world are climbing on board, pressuring their elders to help make enough difference in time to keep the earth human-habitable longer.   Their efforts are individual but often part of organized endeavors, sometimes national (or regional and multinational).
> 
> There's no reason except human effort that some fairly small countries have done more to mitigate ill effects of climate change by law, example and individual effort to extend the effort and persuade others to join.
> 
> *Costa Rica *is a good example. Who'd have thought it? Half the world's population likely never heard of Costa Rica much less would figure them high on the actions-taken list for ecology-protective and climate change mitigating behavior. Yet they continue on track with intention to be carbon-neutral by 2050 and they have some of the most innovative incentives to help even their impoverished citizens make that into a reality.​​Or who would have pegged *Lebanon* as a 2020 winner on the list of the UN's action awards in the sustainable development goals challenge (they won because of an all female team working in the energy sector on amping up solar power options).​
> The reason we don't hear more about all this in the USA , short of the Trump administration in particular --and our own energy sector in general--  not being fully on board with green initiatives,  is largely that this stuff hasn't yet been widely made into lucrative enough clickbait.  It's still more profitable to print stuff about film celebrities or the royalty of other countries or the future plans and prospects of a certain Western head of state.



The thought has crossed my mind to move to Costa Rica after retiring...at least until I reach an age where I need medical.

CR has literacy rate in the high 90’s, no military, wonderful nature, and extremely safe. There’s signs in the airport asking tourist NOT to give money to kids if approached and to report them.  CR wants their kids in school. Please stop talking about CR post haste.


----------



## Huntn

Gutwrench said:


> As I mentioned before there are varying opinions on how to address climate change just as there are on economic and political systems.
> 
> Perhaps drop the smartest man in the room approach and just articulate a few specific steps you think ought to be taken rather making broad sweeping  commentary about mankind. It’s so banal and pointlessly white knightish.
> 
> And while periods do have magical healing powers they can’t perform miracles without properly formed sentences expressing logically organized thoughts.
> 
> I humbly suggest organizing your thoughts then write a sentence fragment introducing each of them separately followed with a few supporting bulletin points.
> 
> One long random unorganized list leaves the reader having to unravel what the writer is trying to say...or worse yet questioning if the writer even knows what they’re trying to say.



I was not writing a thesis on how to fix global warming, I was simply saying we have a lot of intelligence yet are unable to address this issue, an issue we created. Please don’t make more of it then I intended, and then maybe express a little interest other than defacto denial and disinterest.


----------



## Gutwrench

Huntn said:


> I was not writing a thesis on how to fix global warming, I was simply saying we have a lot of intelligence yet are unable to address this issue, an issue we created. Please don’t make more of it then I intended, and then maybe express a little interest other than defacto denial and disinterest.


----------



## SuperMatt

Huntn said:


> I was not writing a thesis on how to fix global warming, I was simply saying we have a lot of intelligence yet are unable to address this issue, an issue we created. Please don’t make more of it then I intended, and then maybe express a little interest other than defacto denial and disinterest.



This looks like an interesting innovation:









						Tiny Nuclear Reactors Yield a Huge Amount of Clean Hydrogen
					

They're another welcome weapon in the fight against fossil fuels.




					www.popularmechanics.com


----------



## Huntn

I’ve wondered if Thorium Reactors could be an answer. China just got one started.



			https://min.news/en/science/28ee0f79aafe4d7a2deb675f4f1b1620.html
		


_Nature" magazine said that China may test the world's first thorium nuclear reactor at the end of this month in Wuwei City, Gansu Province. Although the nuclear reactor has a power of only 2 megawatts, it can provide electricity for about 1,000 households. If the test results are satisfactory, China will build a 373-megawatt reactor of the same type that will provide electricity for 100,000 residents by 2030. This shows that China is the first country to try to commercialize this technology and will also become an exporter of this technology.








						16 Big Thorium Reactor Pros and Cons
					

A thorium reactor is a form of nuclear energy, proposed for use as a molten




					vittana.org
				



_


----------



## Huntn

Apple fanboy said:


> Here's the problem as I see it. Any attempt to reverse things will have a huge financial cost. Those in charge of the world who are looking to balance the books so to speak don't see this as a priority. Why? Because the massive global impact of our actions doesn't impact their lifespan. They are in their 60's and older. They know they will be worm food long before the world becomes uninhabitable.
> 
> I think there has never been a bigger push towards green policies, but it is too little too late.






Eraserhead said:


> The problem that we are struggling to solve is that many businesses are too obsessed with profits and that government is too obsessed with process.
> 
> The biggest flaw with business is that it increasingly only works well for the better off and screws over the poor - especially as employees.
> 
> The biggest flaw with government is that very little thought has been put into handling any edge cases at all - if all goes well it’s fine but as soon as there is a problem it can be very challenging to resolve successfully. The other issue is that government culture doesn’t allow people to be wrong about stuff but not lose their jobs and mostly treat it as something to learn and do better about - which is how mistakes should be best handled.
> 
> In terms of climate change any solution that requires government intervention is going to upset many people far more than it should because the general experience is poor.



So basically our economy today and tomorrow trumps any long term concern about our survival until the Earth degrades to a point where we see extinction over the next hill, even if then,  and by then the die is cast. Try to ride it out and survive.

This supports the indirect contention of Fermi Paradox, that proposes the reason we see no evidence of other civilizations, that besides the vast distances, an inference that civilizations tend to destroy themselves before shaking the shackles of the planet they live on.


----------

