Debunking Near Term Human Extinction

gc2Off the keyboard of RE

Follow us on Twitter @doomstead666
Friend us on Facebook

Published on the Doomstead Diner on September 27, 2015

pope-francis-on-bible-and-climate-change

Discuss this article at the Environment Table inside the Diner

Besides the ongoing collapse of the monetary system which fill the Newz headlines every day with a plethora of stories of bankrupt countries and mass layoffs, ever more people on Food Stamps and living out of their cars even if they have a full time job, probably the hottest topic in the collapse blogosphere is the question of Near Term Human Extinction.  I've covered it in rants and I've done surveys to see what the readers think on this topic also, but it's the collapse gift that keeps on giving.

The most well known person throuh the collapse blogosphere hawking this concept is Guy McPherson who runs the blog Nature Bats Last, but by no means is he the only one these days.  In his Encyclical, even the POPE insinuated this as a possibility in his Encyclical on Climate.

Before beginning here on debunking this idea, let me state for the record that NTHE is possible, and the longer you go out on the timeline the more possible it becomes.  Go out far enough on the timeline, it's inevitable and always has been. As the tagline goes on Zero Hedge, "On a long enough timeline, the survival of everyone drops to Zero". The issue is about the likelihood this can occur on short timelines.  In Guy's case, he has the timeline down to as soon as 2030 now.  That means every last Homo Sap on the planet is DEAD in 15 years.

http://izquotes.com/quotes-pictures/quote-on-a-long-enough-timeline-the-survival-rate-for-everyone-drops-to-zero-chuck-palahniuk-285421.jpg

For our purposes in this examination though, we'll consider "Near Term" to be anything under a Century.

The second caveat to this examination is that it is looking strictly at the Climate Change problem, not at the possibility we are on a collision course with Planet X or that the numbskulls with their Fingers on the Nuke Buttons will push them and set off Global Thermonuclear War.  Either of those as well as a few other scenarious could vastly accelerate the extinction of Homo Sap.

The question we are looking at here is:

Will a rise in Average Global Temperature (AGT) by 4C exterminate all Homo Saps inside the Next Century due to loss of Habitat and die off of many species we currently depend on?

Let's begin with what the current Average Global Temperature (AGT) actually IS at the moment.

Climatologists prefer to combine short-term weather records into long-term periods (typically 30 years) when they analyze climate, including global averages. Between 1961 and 1990, the annual average temperature for the globe was around 57.2°F (14.0°C), according to the World Meteorological Organization.

Now, according to the NOAA, as of August 2015, the current Average Global Temperature is 1.14C over the 20th Century Average.

The average global land surface temperature for August 2015 was 1.14°C (2.05°F) above the 20th century average

So let us be generous on the warming side and say the current AGT is up to 16 C now.  Let us warm this up further by another 4C over the next 15 years to 20 C.

Now, Guy's hypothesis states that no Homo Saps have ever been alive when the AGT was that warm, and that is true.  However, can you draw the conclusion from that it is IMPOSSIBLE for Homo Sap to survive at such an AGT?  Other mammals (our ancestors) survived an even warmer time period, the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum (PETM) when the AGT went up to about 25 C or so.  If other mammals could do it back then, why in principle can we not do it again this time?

The Paleocene–Eocene Thermal Maximum (PETM), alternatively "Eocene thermal maximum 1" (ETM1), and formerly known as the "Initial Eocene" or "Late Paleocene Thermal Maximum" refers to a climate event that began at the temporal boundary between the Paleocene and Eocene epochs. The absolute age and duration of the event remain uncertain, but are thought to be close to 55.8 million years ago and about 170,000 years of duration[1][2][3] The PETM has become a focal point of considerable geoscience research because it probably provides our best past analog by which to understand impacts of global warming and massive carbon input to the ocean and atmosphere, including ocean acidification.[4]

The onset of the PETM has been linked to an initial 5 °C temperature rise and extreme changes in Earth’s carbon cycle.[5] The PETM is marked by a prominent negative excursion in carbon stable isotope (δ13C) records from around the globe; more specifically, there was a large decrease in 13C/12C ratio of marine and terrestrial carbonates and organic carbon.[5][6][7]

Numerous other changes can be observed in stratigraphic sections containing the PETM.[5] Fossil records for many organisms show major turnovers. For example, in the marine realm, a mass extinction of benthic foraminifera, a global expansion of subtropical dinoflagellates, and an appearance of excursion, planktic foraminifera and calcareous nanofossils all occurred during the beginning stages of PETM. On land, there was a sudden appearance of modern mammal orders (including primates) in Europe and North America. Sediment deposition changed significantly at many outcrops and in many drill cores spanning this time interval.

Although it is now widely accepted that the PETM represents a “case study” for global warming and massive carbon input to Earth’s surface, the cause, details and overall significance of the event remain perplexing.

Guy's case is that Habitat will be so destroyed globally by such a rise in AGT, that there simply will be NOWHERE Homo Sap can survive on the planet.  Is that necessarily true?

Well, first off you have to remember this is an AVERAGE taken over the whole globe, it is not the average for a given region in any given time period.  Right now, TODAY, many people live in neighborhoods which have yearly average temperatures quite a bit warmer than this. Lagos in Nigeria is one such place, but there are many in the equatorial regions of the Earth.

February is the hottest month in Lagos with an average temperature of 29°C (84°F) and the coldest is July at 25°C (77°F)

There are a LOT of people currently living in Lagos, like around 20M of them and that's just one Big Shity in Nigeria too!  They don't all have HVAC either, in fact most of them live in slums with no electricity at all!  So clearly, Homo Sap can survive at these temperatures.

Granted though, this is rather sweaty and uncomfortable weather overall, but if the AGT is 20C, does that mean every neighbohood is 20 C?  Of course not, because the average temperature for any given location depends on its Latitude and its Altitude.

Starting with Altitude, you drop almost 2C for every 1000' in altitude you gain

Although the actual atmospheric lapse rate varies, under normal atmospheric conditions the average atmospheric lapse rate results in a temperature decrease of 6.4 °C/km (3.5 °F or 1.95 °C/1,000 ft) of altitude above ground level.

So, all you need to do in any given latitude is situate yourself 2000' above sea level and you have already knocked off 4 C tempeature rise on a global average.

The situation is similar with Latitude:

Temperature also decreases as latitude becomes more northward in the Northern Hemisphere and more southerly in the Southern Hemisphere. Latitude in this sense simply refers to a measurement of movement north or south across the surface of the earth. The general rule is that temperature changes three (3) degrees Fahrenheit for every 300 mile change in latitude at an elevation of sea level. If you are in the Northern Hemisphere, you can expect temperatures to be 3 degrees cooler 300 miles north, 6 degrees cooler 600 miles north, and so on, until you reach the North Pole. The same is true for the Southern Hemisphere, except that temperatures cool the further you travel from the equator toward the South Pole.

So, depending where you are in the Northern or Southern Hemisphere, you can knock off aroun 1.5C for every 300 Miles you move from your current location.  Can you stand the heat where you currently live without HVAC?  If you can, each time the AGT goes up by 1.5C, you just need to move another 300 miles north or south and you are back to where you started, and that is WITHOUT gaining altitude!

So clearly even with a projected 4 C rise in AGT, there are still going to be zones on the earth with still livable climate for Homo Sap.  It is also by no means clear that we will get 4 C inside of 15 years either.  So it has no good basis in scientific reasoning to suggest that Homo Sap will go extinct in such a short period of time, simply due to a 4 C rise in AGT.

Can Homo Sap experience an extreme Knockdown event in such a short time?  That is much more possible, and perhaps even probable at this point.  The number of neighborhoods that would have both good temperatures and enough water would be vastly reduced from what is available today.  However, a Knockdown event is not an Extinction, and Homo Sap has experienced Knockdowns before and rebounded from them.

Although the cause is disputed, somewhere between 75-200K years ago Homo Sap DNA evidence shows that the population of Homo Sap around at the time experienced a severe bottleneck, which may have been quick or it may have gone on for some time, but the bottleneck is still there:

The Toba catastrophe theory as presented in the late 1990s to early 2000s suggested that a bottleneck of the human population occurred c. 70,000 years ago, proposing that the human population was reduced to perhaps 10,000-30,000 individuals[3] when the Toba supervolcano in Indonesia erupted and triggered a major environmental change. The theory is based on geological evidence of sudden climate change and on coalescence evidence of some genes (including mitochondrial DNA, Y-chromosome and some nuclear genes)[4] and the relatively low level of genetic variation in humans.[3]

However, coalescence times for Y-chromosomal and mitochondrial DNA have been revised to well above 100,000 years since 2011. In addition, such coalescence would not, in itself, indicate a population bottleneck, because mitochondrial DNA and Y-chromosome DNA are only a small part of the entire genome, and are atypical in that they are inherited exclusively through the mother or through the father, respectively. Genetic material inherited exclusively from either father or mother can be traced back in time via either matrilineal or patrilineal ancestry.[5]

In 2000, a Molecular Biology and Evolution paper suggested a transplanting model or a 'long bottleneck' to account for the limited genetic variation, rather than a catastrophic environmental change.[6] This would be consistent with suggestions that in sub-Saharan Africa numbers could have dropped at times as low as 2,000, for perhaps as long as 100,000 years, before numbers began to expand again in the Late Stone Age.[7]

So whether this bottleneck was fast or slow, whether the Toba Supervolcano caused it or not, whether the numbers dropped to 30,000, 10,000 or 2000, it's pretty clear the population of Homo Sap can rebound from a very small number to quite a large one, as today there are over 7B who reproduced up from that number.

So not a whole lot of people need to make it through this Zero Point to avoid an Extinction Level Event for Homo Sap.

So we have established now 2 things:

1- The climate in all places on earth is unlikely to become unfit for human habitation

2- The number of people who need to survive in order to avoid extinction is quite small

The next question to address is that of Positive Feedback Loops, which some folks suggest will send the planet into a Venusian style Global Cooking Event, with runaway heating that exceeds even the PETM.  If that were to occur, most certainly Homo Sap and most other living things besides Extremophiles like the Tardigrades would not be able to make it through such an event.  However, does the scientific record of Global Atmospheric Carbon content and Average Global Temperature suggest that is likely?  No it does not.

http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/PageMill_Images/image277.gif

As you can see, basically regardless of how much of the Global Carbon Reservoir gets dumped into the atmosphere for whatever reason, the AGT always plateaus out around 25C.  So for all the Positive Feedback Loops that are out there, at 25C some Negative Feedback Loops must start to kick in.  Unidentified as of yet what they are, but they must be there, otherwise we should have turned into Venus 170M years ago when global atmospheric CO2 was at around 2300 ppm.  We got a lot of carbon to burn to get there in any event, and lots of clathrates have to melt too!  That is not going to happen in 15 years.

The other issue here is what happens to the oceans and all the fishies during this period?  Well, the Ocean is going to continue to acidify, and many current species are going to die off.  Phytoplankton are of particular concern here, since they are in large part responsible for dropping molecular oxygen back into the atmosphere for the animals on the planet to breathe, including you and me.  Can the atmosphere go Anoxic inside 15 years?  No, not even if every last phytoplankton died could that occur, because the atmosphere is a very large sink.  As more animals die off, less oxygen is consumed.  So it takes some time to deplete the atmosphere of oxygen down to say 10% where it would be real difficult to survive.  Although, well acclimated people such as the Sherpas can do OK at 8%.  Obviously, as oxygen levels in the atmosphere decline, only people who can survive with such low concentrations would be selected for.  In any event it takes some time for this to occur, a lot longer than 15 years. There are at least 3 currently living communities of people who can survive these low oxygen concentrations.

Prehistoric and contemporary human populations living at altitudes of at least 8,000 feet (2,500 meters) above sea level may provide unique insights into human evolution, reports an interdisciplinary group of scientists. Indigenous highlanders living in the Andean Altiplano in South America, in the Tibetan Plateau in Asia, and at the highest elevations of the Ethiopian Highlands in east Africa have evolved three distinctly different biological adaptations for surviving in the oxygen-thin air found at high altitude.

Above 25,000', fuhgettabboudit, not even Sherpas can last long up there.  It's the DEATH ZONE.  However, below 8000' or so, even with steady atmospheric oxygen concentrations depleting, it will take a good deal longer than 15 years for that one to occur.

http://listverse.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/bigger.jpg

The Death Zone on Everest

However, the likelihood that all the phytoplankton die off within 15 years itself is quite small.  Remember, they all did not Buy their Ticket to the Great Beyond TM in the PETM, 5-10% of ocean species survived that event.  Phytoplankton are single cell and they reproduce and adapt to changing environmental conditions rapidly.  There has been a dieoff of around 50% of them over the last 40 years or so, but it is unlikely they ALL will die off inside even another 40 years, because this is asymptotic.

Land based ecosystems have their own set of parameters, and some will collapse quickly, others will persist for quite some time to come.  As the population of Homo Sap dwindles, it will migrate to those zones that still have functional ecosystems.  Then in addition, Homo Sap being Sentient can further augment what is available in the local ecosystem, through techniques like Hydroponics and Aquaculture.

This Greenhouse is on the North Slope of Alaska:

http://www.agratech.com/cms/upload/menu/gallery/14/Continental_TagawaWestCoastGrowers4.JPG

So you clearly can feed SOME number of people this way, it's a Non-Zero number, which by definition means you don't have Extinction.  How big that number is remains open to question, but it is certainly more than 100,000, which is more than enough to provide genetic diversity for the species to recover over time.

Now, despite the fact the evidence above shows that Guy's 15 year timeline to Near Term Human Extinction is quite preposterous, does this mean we are not in BIG TROUBLE? 

HELL NO!  WE ARE IN THE DEEP DOO-DOO HERE!

We are going to have a LOT of DEAD PEOPLE!

https://cicisrant.files.wordpress.com/2015/07/dead-people.gif

What is important given this incontravertable fact of life is that the sooner we get started on addressing this problem realistically, the better we can make it possible for not only more people to survive this crash, but more of the rest of the ecosystem too!

For right now, making any changes on the gross geopolitical level is impossible.  The Chinese are going to keep burning coal to keep their electric power plants running as long as they can.  Happy Motorists in the FSoA will keep driving around willy nilly as long as they can too.  The carbon will be burned, the climate will continue to become more inhospitable, for at least the next 40 years no matter what due to the lag time for many effects to show themselves.

However, individuals can begin the process of learning how to survive in a drastically changed environment, and communities can begin to form to handle it as well.  It is up to each person to begin this process inside your own small sphere of influence.  My small sphere is the Doomstead Diner , collapse.global & Sun4Living websites.  That's my effort, that is all an old cripple can do.

If you have talent, knowledge and/or experience, you too can make a difference, and this is no time to be a QUITTER.  Resigning yourself to an inevitable fate of EXTINCTION in the Near Term is QUITTING.  Accepting this situation as HOPELESS is QUITTING.

This is a battle that can be fought, and it is a battle that can be WON!  Not without a lot of pain and a lot of loss, to be sure, but giving up is not an option, unless you really WANT to die, or you want our whole species to die because you think we are so awful and bad to have around on the planet.  If you want to LIVE, you look for means and methods to SURVIVE.

This battle has been waged before by the ancestors of Homo Sap in the PETM, and they won it.

DONE ONCE, IT CAN BE DONE AGAIN.

57 Responses to Debunking Near Term Human Extinction

  • James says:

    I was just considering your greenhouse and aquaponics possibilities. The components of these come from complex specialized technological factories that will no longer exist post-collapse. If they can be found in an undamaged state in the collapsed environment they may last another generation and then another mini-collapse will occur. As modern medicine and antibiotics will be unavailable, large epidemics amongst relatively small populations squeezed into habitable areas, could cause extinction, especially if immunity is weakened by radiation and/or other toxicity. Human civilization is a cancer and will always use it's technological advantage (growing in a manner that weakens the overall system) until it overshoots and collapses and takes a good part of whatever ecosystem it inhabits with it. Humans are the RNA that inhabit technological cells and I'm typing away now with a technological device in my domicile cell and sending information across a vast neural network to many other domicile cells. Civilization is a giant complex cancer that runs on limbic “feelings” and can't control its own growth. I agree with Guy McPherson that extinction is a possibility, after all, not only do we have to worry about environmental degradation and resource exhaustion, but we must also consider that technological humans have quasi-speciated based upon geographic isolation and language divergence and that they are engaged in technological competition, often to the death or at least total capitulation. This can't last either.

    More explanation at http://www.megacancer.com, but don't bother if you value comfortable feelings over knowledge. See especially the August archive Dual Systems Theory.

    • RE says:

      Well, Glass lasts a very long time.  Many centuries and there is a lot of it around as flotsam & jetsam from the Age of Oil.  I have a design for a hydroponics system using Bamboo tubes and wind powered pumps.  You can extend this well out past the 100 year timeline.

      RE

  • Gerald Spezio says:

    You haven't convinced me.

    I think that Guy McPherson's predictive claims are far more strongly eveidenced than yours.

    As the gruesome evidence accumulates, Guy's claims will be more & more confirmed.

    • RE says:

      I disagree.  My evidence is much better than Guy's.  I will be proved right and he will be proved wrong.

      Sadly of course, none of us will be around at that time on this side of the Great Divide, but I will collect on my bet with you in the Great Beyond.

      RE
       

      • Ron Schermacher says:

        You won't be around in 2025? I will make a bet with you for that year. Global avg temps are above 3C and CO2 ppm is above 500. I bet I will still believe in abrupt climate change, and will you still be a denier??? What are you willing to bet? (That's only 8 years from now, seems like good odds for someone of your position).

        • RE says:

          I have crappy health, so my personal timeline may have me extinct by 2025.  I’d give myself less than 50-50 odds to make it that far.

          It doesn’t matter what the AGT is in 2025, if there are Homo Saps still walking the earth, then Dr. McSerpent was wrong.  The only way you could win the bet I make is if we are both dead, in which case nobody collects.

          RE

  • K-Dog says:

    With escaping methane now known to be blowing craters in the Siberian permafrost which people can confirm on my web page http://chasingthesquirrel.com.  ( I have linked and featured an article, click the crater picture.)

    We will not be seeing only a four or six degree C rise in global temperature.  We are going to experience extreme temperature rises and the earths biosphere can not adapt fast enough to keep people fed.  Mass starvation and a total collapse of social order on an international scale will occur.  At that point NTHE will become a roll of the dice, possibly nuclear dice, and these dice could be loaded with extinction odds. 

    Mainline global warming concerns have never paid enough attention to Siberian methane releases but when they are added to rising CO2 level predictions the combination gives us a doomsday scenario.  When contemplating NTHE we look over all the pain and chaos to logical conclusions but the intervening chaos will determine the outcome and we can not predict what that will be with logic.  Logically it is a slippery slope far ahead and it is as slick as melting permafrost on a methane crater rim.

     

  • BillT says:

    More hopey, feely for the masses. I would bet my months SS income that there will be few, if any homo sapiens wandering the habitable areas of the planet by 2100.  IF there are any habitable ones left.  I doubt it. 

    And glass may last for centuries, in pieces, but not in a structure exposed to hail, etc.  If it is covered by snow and ice, it may last but not be usable.  Too many do not look at the whole picture or they would see the fallacies in their ideas.

    I would prefer to bet with Guy and prepare for the pain to come, than to trust techie dreams.  I don't beleive in any god or place after so I don't worry about it.  I'm 71 and may even live long enough see the last days of our species. We shall see.

    • K-Dog says:

      But to some the fact that in a 100 years there could be a dozen people still alive walking the earth makes all the difference. To the rest of us a die off that gets 99.999999 % of the current population is close enough to EXTINCTION that we call it the same thing. Guy McPherson admits a small number could servive in underground shelters and such but he simply does not consider that surviving and I agree with his point of view. Civilization as we know it will be extinct never to return. All we are doing here is cogigating about a rounding error. Civilization as we know it depends upon resources all of which we are using up. Homo Technicalus will soon walk with wooly mammoths and dinosaurs. Life will become bitter and short with any remnant of humanity with its limited genetic diversity soon evolving into a creature that will not resemble us.

      • RE says:

        No, I pitched this at Guy in one argument and his reply was "I KNOW what extinction means".  Extinction is 100% DEAD.  Not 99.9999999%, 100%.

        If you want to argue that our current form of civilization is going extinct, this is unequivocally true and if Guy made that argument, I would be 100% behind him.  That is not his argument.  His argument is every last Homo Sap on the planet will be dead in 15 years.

        As to what the survivors might turn out to be like, that is open for a nice science fiction story, but you can't know for sure what they will be like.  Personally due to the S=G/E*2 equation, I believe the survivors will become Infinitely Spiritual and capable of inter-dimensional travel across many universes.

        RE

        • K Dog says:

          But what if the only people left are lizard people.  Would that count as extinction?  The Lizard Illuminati will find  a warmer changed earth agrees with them; which is of course why they allowed uncontrolled growth in the first place.  Some of them will make it through no doubt.  That has been the plan all along.  At some point they will come out of the closet and while pork has been an acceptable substitute thus far; they will at some point switch to their preferred food.  Humans.  Personally I think a world inhabited only by lizard people counts as extinction.

          Guys point which you have not dealt with in your rebuttal is that the biosphere will collapse and we will not be able to grow food.  Plants can't adapt fast enough and while some tropical plants could be moved north and south away from the equator the time when this can and should be done will coincide with the exact time when humanity will experience a maximum fighting amongst themselves.  No resources will be available to undertake the gigantic effort of moving plant species around the world as climate changes around them.  At that time all significant resources will be dedicated to war and free movement will be impossible. 

          Simply moving north will not be a solution because everywhere one goes they will find an environment in total collapse.  Chaos will prevent farming which the vast majority of people will not know how to do anyway.  Starvation not heat will be the big killer.  Far more often than not any crops planted will fail because the climate they expected to grow in won't exist.  Problems on top of problems is what will cause extinction.

          Where did you get S=G/E*2 ?  It could be used to describe population going forward for as problems mount the rate of death will go up by an exponential power and population could decline by an inverse square or something approximating it.  If that equation were a true physical law, extinction would be guaranteed.  As it can only describe what is going to go on and is not a law it may be invalid when population gets small.  That would be a fortunate thing.

          • RE says:

            It does not take a "gigantic effort" for large populations to migrate, they do it naturally.  Happening right now out of Syria actually.  Nor does it take a large effort to move seeds 300 miles north or south either.

            You are most likely to get a fairly rapid die of of a large percentage of the current population, particularly those already living in marginal areas.  Populations will continue to migrate to still habitable zones, of which there are liekly to still be quite a few in 2030.  There will be plenty of wars and dead people, to be sure, but 100% DEAD in 15 years?  That is preposterous.

            The question for the individual is "Do you want to LIVE, or do you want to DIE"?  Guy paints this as irrelevant because it is all "Hopeless".  Guy advocates for GIVING UP HOPE.  There is still hope.  He is quite wrong in this regard, and besides that it is an unhealthy type of outlook.  It's really depressing.

            RE

          • K Dog says:

            I'm a rank amateur regarding gardening but I have been trying to develop some gardening skills in the last couple of years.  One thing I have been having trouble with is veggies 'bolting' to seed.  Seeds may be easy to move but the environment seeds are programmed to grow in is seed specific. Plants select for their local environment over several generations by natural selection.  I suspect my bolting veggies were intended for a different climate than what I live in.  Rapid climate change will leave plants too confused to produce reliable yields and that will manifest as starvation.

            I think migrating refugees could disagree with 'It does not take a "gigantic effort" for large populations to migrate'.  Especially when they are stopped at borders, are unwelcome, and herded into refugee camps.

            I quite agree that GIVING UP HOPE is not something to advocate.  It might not even be a good idea to take that position in hopeless situations because then any situation that is not actually hopeless can be misinterpereted as being hopeless.  Hopelessness is cornicopianism in reverse; both positions exagerate reality and a true perception of reality should be what we seek.

          • RE says:

            Well, the fact is that Guy DOES advocate for giving up Hope, in fact he has whole blogs written on this subject. So HTF can you support someone who has this outlook?

            RE

  • Michelle M. says:

    In very carefully reading Guy’s evidence, I’ve never been convinced that NTE is all that likely. I think that NTNE (Near Term Near Extinction) is pretty likely, but I’m fairly sure that enough human beings are going to make it through in order for the species to survive for a while longer. Even with the nuclear meltdowns he suggests are part of collapse, there still are plenty of places in the world that will escape a lot of radiation.

    That said, it’s really a stupid argument. Life as we have known it is just about over. I’m not sure whether it’s going to be a slow decline over a hundred years or so, or a fast one, but for all intents and purposes, this round of civilization is done, and whether or not our species ends with it is kind of academic (in all likelihood, none of us will be around to talk about it.)

    • RE says:

      I don't agree with that, because you have the rest of your own life to think about, plus the lifespan of children and grandchildren already born if you have those.

      In some generation at some point, Homo Sap will certainly go extinct.  At some point at some age you will certainly die.  You attempt to stay ALIVE as long as you can though, do you not?

      Guy McPherson is an ideologue pitching Death as Inevitable in the very near term. It is not.  15 years is outrageously short and even a century would be an incredibly rapid exit.  He's an idiot.

      RE

      • Yorchichan says:

        Correct RE, Guy McPherson is an idiot (and a liar). He barely understands simple mathematics and logic, let alone the complexities of climate science. Given his past predictions of the collapse of industrial civilization by 2012 and the uninhabitability of large continents in the northern hemisphere by 2017, it is beyond me why anyone would take anything he says seriously.

        • K Dog says:

          Mama always said if you don't have anything nice to say keep it to yourself.  Having met Guy I can tell you he is no idiot.  He is a man of the beautiful mind catagory as am I perhaps, but I'm not seeing your climate science credentials anywhere at all here.  I'm not aware that Guy predicted the collapse of industrial civilization by 2012 and since your the first to mention it, obviously neither has anyone else. Sort of make you a liar doesn’t it.

          Does no one get we need a devils advocate of methane doom because otherwise the problem is going to be totally and absolutely ignored.  I'll grant you king of the day status for scurrilous comments.  Guy may go overboard on feedback loops but calling him an idiot shows you don't even know what they are.

          You working for the government or industry? Are you a G-man or a low factotum for the Department of Homeland security.  The difference being sort of like the difference between a real police officer and a security guard.  Which is it?

          • Yorchichan says:

            Pity the commentators on NBL never listened to Mama then.

            Check your facts pal. On NBL McPherson was predicting the collapse of industrial civilization by the end of 2012 right up until the end of that year. One of a long list of failed apocalyptic predictions. After that he learned his lesson somewhat and increased his time frame with the ridiculous humans extinct by 2030 forecast.

            Did I ever claim to be a climate scientist? I don't think so. Unlike McPherson who has claimed to be a climate scientist on NBL. When challenged, he failed to come up with any credentials of course. So tell me what makes him a climate scientist and why should we listen to him given his dismal record of failure?

          • K Dog says:

            He claims to be a teacher and educator.  You need to post a link if you are claiming he predicted the collapse of industrial civilization by 2012 which is now three years ago.  On the internet three year old 'facts' are difficult to check and it is not up to me to check your 'facts' anyway.  Claim something and it is up to you to show it to be true pal.  So bring it.  For a hater you seem to have spent a lot of time on NBL and you haven't denied my claim about you.  C'est la vie.

          • K Dog says:

            I was asked a question and I should answer.

            "So tell me what makes him a climate scientist and why should we listen to him given his dismal record of failure?"

            Anybody who studies climate with an open mind is a climate scientist.  Nothing 'makes' a scientist other than the methodology one uses to study something.  To claim that to be a scientist one must have credentials is actually quite unscientific.  Considering that released methane is now blowing craters into the Siberian tundra Guy's dismal record of failure isn't so dismal.  You have a different agenda and don't agree, I understand.  You don't claim to be a climate scientist and since you don't do so you are free to claim anything you want, be it true or false.

          • Yorchichan says:

            McPherson: Humans have never lived on Earth with average temperatures 3 degrees above baseline. The earth is set to rise by an average 3 degrees above baseline. Therefore humans will go extinct.

            K-Dog: Yorchichan says McPherson predicted industrial collapse by the end of 2012. I have never heard McPherson say this. Therefore Yorchichan is a liar.

            Did you ever attend classes in logic given by McPherson?

            Do your own research.

          • K Dog says:

            No soup for the GT Yorchichan.  To bed, no supper.

  • MrNoItAll says:

    The early Eocene Epoch (50 million years ago) was about as warm as the Earth has been over the past 65 million years, since the extinction of the dinosaurs.

    During that period, the average temperature worldwide was about 86 degrees Fahrenheit, and about 80 degrees along most coastlines.  Hotter at and near the equator, as usual.  Definitely NOT a temperature that would preclude humans from surviving.  They call it the "greenhouse" effect, and with the abundance of CO2 plant life takes off, and along with it all the bugs and critters that eat the plants, and also all the larger critters that eat those plant-eaters, on up the chain to the very top, which is where human survivors of the coming collapse will still be.

    Any methane that might have been trapped under Siberian ice during the Eocene would most certainly have been released during that period, but that did not result in a climate in which humans could not live.

    There will no doubt be many extinctions.  There always are during Earth's cyclical history of transforming to a colder planet then back to a "greenhouse planet" and back to cold again, something that has happened several times at least on a major planetary scale.

    Humans are the ultimate evolution of life on planet earth.  Shave off the least intelligent or otherwise least fit (or least lucky) seven billion or so humans on planet earth, and you'll have some hardcore, fit and very smart people determined to survive.  The climate won't kill them.  Toxic wastes and nuclear radiation might, but not everywhere.

    My bet is on humanity surviving far into the future.  I just don't see how climate change will kill off humans, especially in the upcoming "greenhouse effect planet" where plant life will be doing just fine.

     

    • RE says:

      My bet is the same as yours.  There will be SURVIVORS.

      They will be the DINERS.

      SAVE AS MANY AS YOU CAN.

      RE

    • K Dog says:

      MrNoItAll,

      Your beautiful greenhouse took millennia to develop.  The earth is like a logic switch on which computers are based.  Whenever a logic switch changes state it does not do so in zero time.  Old logic circuits took 20nS (nano Seconds) to change state.  The earth’s logic switch will take a bit over a dozen years to change state.  Logic switching always consumes energy.  The earth’s logic switch requires methane and CO2 to generate a transition which captures sun energy.  That is the earth’s logic switch.  The result of a logic switch changing states produces heat, all logic switches do, be they big or small. The earth’s logic switch is the result of biological processes but ironically when the earth changes state extinctions happen.  Mass extinctions.  After which over millennia the earth becomes a paradise.  NTHE means we won't see the next garden.

  • I know there's a caveat excluding nuclear war on this discussion, but I don't see how you can have that exclusion. Climate change is certain to increase conflict, and nuclear armed nations are bound to use what weapons they have in response to catastrophic events. Humankind will not live in harmony with one another as climate change causes food and water shortage. All wars are ultimately over resources.  Climate change and global warming are going to put us into catastrophic resource depletion

     

    • RE says:

      This is strictly an argument about climate change, not other factors that can cause an extinction.

      One thing about wars is that they are engaged in by the elite to make a profit.  There isn't a profit in nuclear war.  That is the main reason it hasn't happened already.  I think a few tactical ones might be pitched out, but I don't see the whole bloody armada being launched.

      RE

      • K Dog says:

        Perhaps wars in the last few hundreds years yes.  Before that some wars happened just because some strangers rode in and stole from the locals who had shit they did not.  It was not an elite then. It was everybody.  Wave upon wave of desperate people wanting what they need and can't have unless they take it.  Desperate people leaving not a blade of grass in their passing.

        Barbarian Hordes

        • RE says:

          Well sure. But obviously, some barbarians and some peaceful farmers who got invaded survived it, elsewise we would not be here.

          100% Death is tough to achieve for top of the food chain species.Do you play Plague?

          RE

  • Mark Austin says:

    Hello RE, I've read you on NBL. I have a moment since I am waiting for a Death Certificate delivery involving a family funeral matter. For 15 years a portion of my Federal Contract work has been with DARPA research projects.

    One aspect of H+ in co-development between CERN, Fermi Labs, S. Korean Gen-test & Epi-gen / Dr. Benner Applied Molecular Evolution = virtual guarentee that an aspect of humanity will transcend carbon based lifeform extinction.

    HOWEVER, it is no secret that all of our radiation reducing & Seivert absorbing Genetically modified bionomes are linked to an urgent need to resolve issues with 446 Nuclear reactors. (62 more in stages of construction – vs – 5 in decomissioning process)

    Please check our Pentagon web site or the military info in over 37 other countries. The reason that Climate change displacements are a near extinction factor is because we are already understaffed with qualified nuclear physicisits and other consequence management experts at 82% of our nuclear plant sites.

    We welcome innovations, education and applications to manage future plants. However, currently a number of climate, Pandemic or EMP threats could cause a chain reaction of reactors going critical in unison. Understaffing and overheating are a serious threat to the world wide nuclear grid. Although you may not have looked at the nuclear reactor issue I assure you MIT and many other top labs often run computer models on fallout patterns and loss of human management during chain meltdown events, which involve further loss of control to most plants in a casscade effect. Subsequent radiation from reactors, not warfare, has more intense and longer term half-life than conventional nuclear weapons.    

     

    • Mark Austin says:

      Sorry for not using spell check on my first comment here. I got a call. I'm not yet used to the comment tools provided here. A better edited version of my explanation to RE is on NBL. All my best. This web site looks interesting overall. 

  • Linda says:

    I don't think climate change in itself will cause our near term extinction and to be honest I find no real scientific proof for that, only circumstantial evidence that has to do with the complexity of the Earth system as a whole (feedback mechanisms in the climate system). Lets be modest here, we dont properly understand how the Earth system functions because it is so complex, we don't have any complete model of Earth, so we can only speculate about this issues. What worries me is rather that we during collapse, now underway, destroy so much of the remaining biomass on Earth (we have already used up at least 50%) that survival for most species becomes difficult due to complete lack of energy (from stored sunlight in plants). This would probably take some time however. Also we know that the human species is very adaptable, more so than most other species, so I think we will survive but it doesnt mean that we will have a good life, perhaps at best that we can live as gather-hunters or small time garderners. 

    • RE says:

      The reason you don't find "scientific proof" for it is because there is none.  It's a Religion.

      RE

    •  no one can 'scientifically prove' the future—that's the problem. 19th Century mathematicians 'proved' that heavier than air machines couldn't fly.

      we can only make an inspired guess based on known factors. my best guess is destruction of what we have by being in a state of denial and fighting over the ever diminishing pile of what we have left. Others have an entirely different outlook on it all. But as a case in point Syria was a nice enough country to live in, now it's wrecked because of intolerance and resource shortage. It seems to me that that is where our ultimate danger lies, whichever continent you are on. Few will accept that they've run out of resources, and  force will be used to to prove it

      every species strives to survive, and it isn't just animals. plants will kill off other plants in order to gain access to thier territory if they are strong enough. We are no different. Extracting energy from sources that rightfully belongs to others takes energy. The process has to show benefit or it is a waste of effort (Energy return on energy invested again)

      humans are adaptable only insofar as we have tools and the inclination towards collective action and behaviour for mutual benefit .If collective action is seen to be not for mutual benefit, then that too will cease.

  • Etyerepetyere says:

    Arent you and us happy  that you have finally debunked this ?! It was some pestering idea lingering for way to long around .. But eventually Mr Diner Of the Doomstead had to finish it of .. Congratulations we are all so relieved . And we can move on with the rest of our lifes thank you 

  • SomeoneInAsia says:

    Whatever might happen, just PLEASE don't put any of the blame on us Asians. Thank you.

    We didn't start this whole Industrial Revolution thing (and compel everyone else to embark on the same sorry path). Some other bunch of jokers did.

    Not ALL of Homo Sap deserves the same blame.

    • RE says:

      I put the blame on the folks who got rich sending us down this route, who ran the wars, who ran the monetary system, from whatever country they came from.  There are plenty of Greedballs sprinkled around the whole planet.

      RE

  • Davy says:

    Don’t really feel this has been denukned at all. I wish it had. You casually assert that because we can survive Lagos temperatures that we can survive global averages 4 degrees higher than baseline, without addressing the obvious hugely significant issue of resources and food chains. If there is no food or clean water, it doesn’t matter if it is only a little bit sweaty or if we move 500metres higher up the mountain. You also failed to address the nuclear issue – that of an impending industrial collapse inevitably leading to meltdown of all the world’s nuclear reactors, or the vast methane deposits now burping itself at an increasing rate into the atmosphere, or the fact hat while historical records are worthy of comparison, this period of atmospheric change is unprecedented in its lightning speed. It took 80000 years for the Siberian Traps volcanoes to change the amount of carbon in the atmosphere which led to the permian mass extinction, to the extent that we have done in 250 years. This is unprecedented. And we’re not slowing down our pollution. You also didn’t address global dimming – that we have no choice but to KEEP polluting because the moment the haze from out planes, cars and power plants clears, a dramatic further rise in temperature will take place too. Catch 22. Unprecedented numbers of feedback loops all converging and amplifying each other. Any hope of small numbers of animals surviving killed by such rapid change – the rate of climate change exceeds the average rate of evolution for mammals by a factor of 1000 – 10000. In addition to methane fireballs and worldwide nuclear meltdown. I’m glad having clicked on this link that you aren’t claiming anthropogenic global warming is a conspiracy, but I am irritated by proud claims of debunking something without coming close to address the myriad of causes underlying the hypothesis of near term human extinction

    • RE says:

      Obviously numbers will decrease, but there certainly will be clean water somewhere, since it comes down in the form of rainfall after evaporation.

      I'm not debunking a population knockdown, that is just about baked in the cake  What I am debunking is Guy McPherson's preposterous suggestion that Homo Sap will be Extinct by now the latest NEW date he claims of around 2020 for 100% Dead People. This is nonsense.

      RE

  • Pjeter G. says:

    The concept that will be gone in the not so distant future is not religious. Why? Simply because it's based on an array of scientific arguments. We're only making this association because we're culturally wont to link the notion of death with religion and since as we're dealing with scientific issues here (regardless of how ''truly'' scientific we will each of course claim to be) for us the distinction between religion and science is a given. Therefore, in the polemic between rivaling scientific viewpoints over an issue it's common to accuse our opponents of religious thinking.  But I wish to remind that biological expiration is a natural process. Misfortune, disaster and horror-inspiring phenomena on both individual and collective levels, are part of the natural world. As such, there's nothing unscientific about predicting mass death or extinction and inculding it in your modeling. I also wish to remind this: in the interwar period the consensus among cosmologists was for an eternal universe and contemporary research that argued for a beginning seemed in their eyes to be infomed by religious bias. But that ignored the existence of religious/metaphysical systems based on the notion of a universe that didn't have a beginning as was the case with (neo)platonism.

    You write that McPherson ''condones'' abandoning hope. Well, he certainly thinks that widespread hopes for modern civilization itself fixing the problems it has spawned are false. So it follows that believing it won't make it true. That's a statement of fact. I am sure McPherson (as do all of us who hold the same view) doesn't really object to hope existing in people but he wouldn't try to push it or ''condone'' giving it up. But the reality remains. Hope will practically amount to nothing. McPherson would indeed ''condone'' dismantling modern civilization. Not because it will save us but in order to give other species a better chance. Of course he knows as well as the next guy that this won't happen. We will never come together and decide to dismantle civilization. It will be destroyed not because but in spite of our will. And as it falls it will take us down with it. And here we see exactly why NTHE is not a religion, a cult or an ideology. It is precisely such worldviews that most aggressively push hope and its twin sister fear and speak of collapse unless you do as they say and promise rewards in heaven and whatnot for doing their bidding. The only thing NTHE can guarantee you is your death and the death of everybody you love. What you do until that time comes is entirely up to you. As a matter of fact, you are allowed to keep indulging false hopes, considering it's psychologically easier to handle.

    So NTHE doesn't require belief in a deity or belief in some of kind of prophecy that is about to be fulfilled. Just like all science, it takes place within a completely atheistic worldview. Our extinction will simply be the unexpected result of the collective actions of humankind. It was nobody's ''fault'' and nobody's intention. But such are things with macro-historical developments. There's a principle that's called ''heterogony of ends'' and so far it has always applied in history. It states that the actions individual and collective human subjects undertake in pursuit of near-term goals will in the long run produce results different than all of the active agents had initially intended for. That's what will happen with modern civilization. When the Soviet Union fell, Fukuyama naively made haste to proclaim that the ''end of history'' had come, as if America was to preside over a ''free world'' in saecula saeculorum after a tragic period of totalitarian oppression had finally come to pass. Indeed at that point history was a tragedy come full circle. As the tragedy ended, the farce began. Soon the joke will end, and the punchline will be a killer.

    As a remarkable historian once said:

    Hoffnung und Angst versperren den Einblick in die menschlichen Dinge; dabei lässt sich die Hoffnung viel schwieriger als die Angst überwinden.

     

    • RE says:

      You write that McPherson ''condones'' abandoning hope.

      He doesn't just condone it, he ridicules anyone who has any hope.  The syncophants in his commentariat will jump all over you if you even SUGGEST there might be means and method to survive a NTHE.  If you buy the Guy McPherson spin, you might as well just roll over and die right now, since a few trees might be saved if we all die before burning what is left of them down.

      You simply can't get more nihilistic than Guy, and besides that his timeline is absurd.  Last I checked he had every last Homo Sap DEAD by 2020.  Even a full on Nuke exchange with the Ruskies and Chinese won;t pull that stunt off.

      RE

      • Ron Schermacher says:

        Why do you think his message is "roll over and die". GM's message is wake up and live for today. Are you also a nuclear tactician?

        • RE says:

          No, his message is moan & groan about how we’re all going to be dead in 9 years and let’s have a big Pity Party for all the creatures we are taking with us to the Great Beyond, but we all deserve to die because we were such poor stewards of the environment.

          RE

  • Pjeter G. says:

    Well, I am aware there's been some heated exchange between Scott K. Johnson/Michael Tobis and McPherson. Even discourse between scientifically educated people on scientific issues may deviate from savoir vivre standards. A few years ago, when biologists were debating whether observations of a pack of chimps raiding and killing other chimps was natural behavior or the result of human enchroachment on their territory, there were people screaming at each other while the typical polemic point ''they're not being scientific in their thinking, more like religion'' was utilized on both sides. I am not a McPherson fan (neither a basher) and I don't necessarily take what he (or anyone else) says at face value but I do think allegations of his being a loon or ''leader of a death cult'' is just going too far. He's arguably been the target of ridicule too both by other scientists/researchers and commentators and unsurprisingly by the conservative climate change denier sphere who seize upon such extreme cases to argue that this is a ''leftist'' nutter who streches his ''alarmist ideology'' to its ultimate (il)logical conclusions just as they did when Frank Fenner a couple of years earlier foresaw extinction within a century. This whole affair reminds me of the practice of thelogians throughout the span of the early modern era who pointed fingers at certain people who flirted with nihilism, i.a. Machiavelli, Hobbes, La Mettrie and De Sade and then claimed that atheism was now showing its true moral colors. But such thinkers were also combatted with at least equal pugnaciousness by numerous rationalistic hope-peddlers who felt their worldview was being compromised by extremist positions.

    I'm not aware of the 2020 prediction, or the other claim that he predicted the collapse of civilization in the year 2012 or by 2012. I looked for it but didn't any reference. Perhaps you could post a link. To my knowledge his claim is that until about 2011 he was hopeful the situation could change but the evidence ''overwhelmed'' him. Today, in so far as he has something to say beyond pointing out why in his view humanity is doomed and why we can't engineer a solution, he urges people to ''pursue a life of excellence'', not in the hedonistic and ''partying'' sense which is anyhow what contemporary mass consumerist culture is all about, but in the sense of ''love about all living things including non-human creatures'' or ''doing what you love'', reflecting on our imminent demise or something along those lines.

    McPherson has not many followers, while he has gained some attention, he can't compare to Klein, Lynas and Hansen among others in popularity in communicating to the public the case of climate change. Everybody else urges immediate action, while he simply says it makes no difference because the purported solutions, if scientific are flawed and fantasy-inspired and if political far-fetched and equally fantasy-inspired, and furthermore that it's modern civilization which is the problem and that solutions within the framework of modern civilization can't do the trick. To that he adds, that now it's late even for that. Even the thought experiment of dismantling it right away can't save humans.

    Is he doing harm because he says there's no hope? I don't think so. His followers are not many and for good reason. People need hope and because they want to survive they can be expected do all it takes. If there really is good reason for hope then people will survive climate change regardless of Guy. But based on what is proposed right now he just doesn't see how a way out is realistic. And I can't see either. I agree that Nuclear and GMF could definitely help a little though but it won't make the decisive difference needed.

    Does he wildly distort the date on climate change? He does claim that ''he's just connecting the dots'' and draws the final conclusion and in that sense admits to ''cherry-picking''. In my view he certainly does not ''wildly'' distort the evidence even if 2030 sounds preposterous. The data does look very, very worrisome. And let's not forget that human extinction doesn't simply have to do with climate science. A prediction there has to take note of the data presented by other scientific fields as well, including ecology and natural resources as well as the force of social parameters.

    Personally, I think extinction within a century is (by far) the most likely scenario, nevertheless I don't want this to happen because I want to live so if a magic bullet can be found to save it all, I'm a huge fan. Yet, I can't confuse my hopes with reality and pretend that thinking positively will have positive effects. Perhaps it could even be argued, that scaring people with the prospect of NTHE would potentially be more effective at getting them to do something. Yet what government would want to scare its own people like that? And what scientist would risk his wage and his carrer by saying such as a loony thing that we might go extinct if we don't take climate change seriously?

  • Pjeter G. says:

    And as regards your allusion to suicide as being the consequent thing to do for a NTHEer I can only say that even if I do it, at this stage it won't make the decisive difference. We NTHErs while certainly living in areas where we have the luxury to contemplate such scenarios, are just too few for our deaths to loosen humanity's grip on the earth's capacities and thus to prevent (or postpone) the time where inevitably humans will have to come to terms with the consequences of their collective actions. A number of people die every year as a result of homicide, suicide, disease, ''old age'', or accident. So far this has not stopped the global population from rising because at this point the counter factors that promote increase of life weigh heavier on the scales. This increase of life thrives on a steady amount of energy and the most energy-dense material source known is no other than fossil fuel. Nuclear power is reliable but to make our electricity run fully on nuclear mode will require some 8,000 nuclear power plants. I don't see that happening soon. If we were serious about a plan of reducing emissions we should be doing that but then it wouldn't be possible to prevent anyone from developing nuclear weapons unless they were denied electricity altogether. And that doesn't factor in that it doesn't fare too well in the markets or that there's concerns about safety. In case of failure, the death toll might well be low but possible displacement of hundreds of thousands of people is a very serious concern in a mass society. And they can't be expected based on current known uranium reserves to last very long if there was so much demand for it.

    Nations can't waste time investing very much into such uncertain paths. Perhaps a few stagnant well-off nations in Europe like France and England feel they have more space to think this way. But the most important nations and all the small and large rising players need cheap energy and they need it as fast as possible. It's the only way they can compete in a century where resource scarcity is projected to make global competition very intense. The global community will not check its growth because growth is what makes it fit for political survival. Instead of worrying about the fate of the whole world by reducing its own emissions, it will look to survive individually. And when you have energy, you have an edge against someone who has less of it. The inevitable development of this century will be that all hell will break loose and things will come to the ''war of all against all''. Seas of human masses will cross the borders and cannibalism will kick off like it's zombie apocalypse. Unlike rats and cats, humans have relatively complex nutritional needs and in an environment where temperature increases cause loss of habitat and where frenzied masses are locked in mortal combat against nature, against other humans and against time itself, I just can't see how homo sapiens can survive for very long. I don't think it will just die back to the point where it is sustainable or that a few hundred millions will croak and then the world will come together, repent for its sins and change its ways. This kind of thinking is based less on human social and historical reality and more on the moral teachings society imparts us with a view to resolving minor conflicts. People cannot live in a video game ''survivalist'' mode in Alaska and Siberia. They must find something large to hunt, something to grow and they need shelter. A world of 4 or 5 degrees bears no prospects for long-term human survival. If there is really hope to prevent this developing into the most horrific era humankind has experienced we should be acting now. Under the pressure of more immediate and more individual concerns that might appear in the future, the global community will become unable to concert its actions. Unfortunately we're not doing much. We're not taking climate change seriously. Some mistakes are not always forgivable. Medical care and therapy doesn't always come in time. If you don't act quickly to defend yourself before you are stabbed by a knife attack you will be too weak to defend against more attacks. I think this is the reality of the situation and talking about NTHE is not lunacy or religion but a very possible scenario. Even if doesn't materialize that will still not mean that NTHE couldn't have happened or that it was not the most likely thing to happen. Sometimes less likely things are realized.

  • AC says:

    Really, we are engaged within the experiment; the reagents have been added to the system and we are well positioned to determine the state of the system as we run it, and our hypotheses will be compared to the results, and we shall determine, within 3 standard deviations of the norm (whoever that guy is) whether we die. Place your bets here. OH! We already did!!!

  • Jon Aretakis says:

    Humans crack me up. They are so funny, they are pathetic. We pave our roads black. We cut down the trees so we can eat meat. We burn fossil fuels that took millions of years to form in 150 years. We treat our only home with complete contempt. We pollute our oceans, lakes and rivers. We build nuclear reactors and nuclear bombs yet we know of no safe way of disposing of the waste. We set off nuclear bombs just to see what will happen. We rape and murder each other. We still have not learned how to simply get along. Women and men are at war when they should be working together. We have declared war against the environment. We lie. We cheat. We steal. Many say they believe in God but few act like they do. Many don't believe in God or morality at all.  It has become clear that we have failed as stewards of earth. Wether an extinction event happens by 2030 or 2100, it is coming. Hell our own governments or shadow government want to reduce the population dramatically. And they will. So what is there is discuss. Nobody can agree on what is happening because we are lost in a sea of little egos, ignorance, fear, greed, depression and materialism. Yeah….we are dead. Maybe some will survive. Maybe even some will live in dumbs (deep underground military bases) built with stolen money. Maybe they have spent trillions to live in giant slow cookers. Whatever happens, it ain't going to be good and honestly we deserve it. As for me, I am going with Jesus. This life no matter how you slice it is only temporary. Be gentle. Be wise. Nothing else matters. I am planning ahead. 

  • Roger says:

    I don't know who wrote this, but they have misunderstood the key point. It's the combination of existential threats at the same time that's the problem. You might be able to handle one, but not four. And have you even considered the "Fourth Industrial Revolution" which is heading over the hill right now? It will reduce tens of millions into serfdom, year after year. It was given at Davos last year.

    Are you seriously saying you know better than the Nobel Prize winners who are fully in agreement? The top academics? All the pre-eminent experts on the planet? What possible reason would they have for lying?

    It also doesn't help that just about everytime we have to make a decision we are choosing the wrong one, both individually and as a society.

    We're currently considering building a missile defence system that might prevent damage to the planet over the next 500,000 years, while virtually ignoring the destruction of the planet in the next 1,000 years at the very most, with the hot money being within the next 300 years – 64%.

    Get out a calculator and try and see what the effect of compound interest would be over that time – i.e. growth.

    From the moment we started farming, when the food was running out, this was always going to be the result. We are locked on this course.

    There are only two things that will prevent it happening. A miracle or it turns out Kurtzweil's singularity is correct. I do not believe in miracles, but one would be a quadrillion times more likely than Kurzweil being right.

    He's repugnant. How he lives with himself, I just don't know. It's not the false hope he offers, but the fact it diverts resources away from the problem. It's handy his singularity will "occur" when he's dead.

    In fact, he's already been proved wrong, since there is nothing coming along in the technology pipeline that will allow a seamless transition to continue at an ever increasing rate.

     

     

  • Jackson Davis says:

    Dr. Guy McPherson, is a Professor Emeritus of Natural Resources and Ecology and Evolutionary Biology at the University of Arizona, and an expert on Human Extinction; that is, he is knowledgeable about the habitat necessary for human survival. As the global average temperature rises above a certain point, it's not that human beings can't live at higher temperatures, but that the plants that we and other animals depend upon for food cannot adapt fast enough and they die out.

    Based on these facts, and the abrupt rise in global average temperatures due to the predicted 50 Gigaton bursts or “burps” of methane in the Arctic Ocean this year or within the next two years, Dr. McPherson has written an article which includes a timeline for Human Extinction within 12-36 months from now:

    https://guymcpherson.com/2017/02/faster-than-expected/

    • RE says:

      Move the plants currently growing down in Florida, Georgia, Texas and SoCal up to greenhouses in Canada for now.  When the temperature warms up enough, move them outside.  Move the Olive and Fig trees growing in Greece to greenhouses in Sweden, Norway & Finland.  Move the plants growing in Thailand and Vietnam to greenhouses in Siberia.

      RE

      • JJGrey says:

        Humans, and human culture are capable of moving faster than any climate change. That is why the guys in Canada growing banannas in their greenhouses will be poised to do exactly what you are saying RE. Mind you, weather events will still be harsh, and there will be a die off of much of the population as resources get severely restricted due to weather events caused by climate change, but being prepared to last out a couple years and replant new crops in zones that used to be well beyond the necessary temperatures for those crops isn't that hard for some distant foreward thinking communities.  And with current shipping methods it isnt hard to get heriloom seeds for useful crops from every climate zone packages to be usable for many years. Build a greenhouse to keep a breeding stock of as many varieties as possible, and plant what is appropriate when you can. With that blue print people living with agriculture can survive the climate changes that are coming. 

        Then there is also the option of ranching,  nomadic herding, hunting/gathering, etc. all of which can be done by themselves or in conjunciton with agricultural communities following the above blue print. Worst comes to worst people WILL eat the dogs, cats, rats, bugs, lichen, each other, etc. and reduce to a few thousands of breeding pairs – but our species has survived a few thousand breeding pairs before and we have increased in genetic diversity globally since then (there isnt a community on earth that doesnt know where they can find someone of another 'race' or genetic background).

        The race as a whole will be fine unless ALL other life goes through a die off worse than the Cambrian. Which is unlikely IMHO.

  • Anti Troll says:

    "Jackson Davis":   Jesus H Christ, not another McSerpent ass licker. Or maybe McSerpent himself is actually pretending to be Jackson Davis, in which case he is licking his own ass. Some points:

    You make McSerpent sound very authoritative by obsequiously mentioning his smarty professorial background. However McSerpent is NOT and has NEVER BEEN a climate scientist. Also he has long retired and is NOT actively working or publishing as a scientist anymore.

    How is it that there are many many more, thousands upon thousands, of smarter and vastly more qualified and actively publishing scientists in the world who DISAGREE with McSerpent? Could it possibly be that those thousands of MORE QUALIFIED and SMARTER scientists are RIGHT and McSerpent is NUTS?

    Example: Paul Beckwith is a proper climate scientist who McSerpent used to love to hang out with to try to gain credibility by association rather than by achievement. However recently Beckwith has repeatedly spoken out AGAINST McSerpent's views and now wishes to distance himself from McSerpent's toxic nihilism.

    A hypothesis only has credibility if it cannot be falsified. McSerpent's "Climate NTE by whatever absurdly early date" is EASILY falsifiable: Areas bathed in water cooled by melting ice will maintain temperatures conducive for livable habitats. And there will be several such locations even by 2100, even in the worst case global warming scenarios.

    McSerpent is UNABLE to make a convincing case for climate extinction by 2026 therefore conflates his argument by bringing in nuclear war or simultaneous meltdown of all nuclear reactors worldwide. And the latter will NOT occur unless there is nuclear war. That devious way of arguing is the act of a weasel.

    A proper scientist would submit his hypothesis for publication in a peer reviewed scientific journal and not try to sell his snake oil using his personal blog or sensationalist interviews or presentations which bypass scientific scrutiny. Why has McSerpent not submitted his argument for peer review by proper scientists to be published in a proper scientific journal? Why has he only tried to convince non scientists who do not know how to scientifically critique it? Is it because McSerpent's view is EASILY FALSIFIABLE by anyone with a smidgen of scientific knowledge? Is it because McSerpent is only interested in creating a cult surrounding his personality by recruiting a herd of gullible sycophants?

    Once again I urge you McSerpent sycophants to fuck off back to NBL and stop polluting the Diner with your toxic nihilism based on the delusions of your asshole false prophet.

  • Anti Troll says:

    Direct quote from Dr Paul Beckwith's website: https://paulbeckwith.net/2017/02/11/methane-clathrate-gun-pea-shooter-or-bazooka/

    "That question is examined in great detail in a new paper by the United States Geological Society (USGS), ‘Gas Hydrate Breakdown Unlikely to Cause Massive Greenhouse Gas Release‘. "

    "Guy McPherson keeps moving his expected Near-Term Human Extinction (NTHE) date closer and closer. His latest claim is 9 years from now; namely by 2026. I disagree with this premise. There is no scientific validity to these claims. No chain of logic leading to this conclusion. They are one persons “opinion”. To call them “fact” is absurd. They are opinion. We need to talk “probabilities”; not absolutes. I asked online in jest if he has “fallen off his rocker”? He called me a “jerk”. I have been called much worse. He seems to be absolutely intolerant to any ideas that oppose his own. He puts himself on a pedestal, beyond tolerance of any criticism. That is not science, it is something opposite to science. In a few months he will be saying that 7.5 billion humans will be dead by next year. Or perhaps even by last year?!"

    That proves the point I made previously that Guy McSerpent is no gentleman, he is a vicious asshole. He is also an idiot. His supporters are idiots and fools.

    • RE says:

      I don’t think PB was joking when he asked if GM had “fallen off his rocker”. lol.

      PB also got away quite light with only being called a “jerk” by GM.  He always called  me a “deluded asshole in denial”.

      RE

Knarf plays the Doomer Blues

https://image.freepik.com/free-icon/musical-notes-symbols_318-29778.jpg

Support the Diner
Search the Diner
Surveys & Podcasts

NEW SURVEY

Renewable Energy

VISIT AND FOLLOW US ON DINER SOUNDCLOUD

" As a daily reader of all of the doomsday blogs, e.g. the Diner, Nature Bats Last, Zerohedge, Scribbler, etc… I must say that I most look forward to your “off the microphone” rants. Your analysis, insights, and conclusions are always logical, well supported, and clearly articulated – a trifecta not frequently achieved."- Joe D
Archives
Global Diners

View Full Diner Stats

Global Population Stats

Enter a Country Name for full Population & Demographic Statistics

Lake Mead Watch

http://si.wsj.net/public/resources/images/NA-BX686_LakeMe_G_20130816175615.jpg

loading

Inside the Diner

Most US states now have state-wide "stay home" orders. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/us/coronavirus-stay-at-home-order.htmlA few US states don't hav...

Quote from: Eddie on Today at 10:34:05 AMSo.....going back a few years, RE and I and the other Diners who took the week-long dome building course at Monolithic domes...received a lecture from their resident indoor food ...

Worldwide coronavirus cases just reached one million, having DOUBLED in just ONE WEEK.https:...

Dr. Fauci gets death threats, requires constant security team at work and home. I guess he got trumped too. https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/01/politics/anthony-fauci-se...

I guess they were trumped.

Recent Facebook Posts

No recent Facebook posts to show

Diner Twitter feed

Diner Newz Feeds
  • Surly
  • Agelbert
  • Knarf
  • Golden Oxen
  • Frostbite Falls

Covidiot Scourge Continues To Plague CountryMissou [...]

Doomstead Diner Daily April 2The Diner Daily is av [...]

Are there no lampposts? No nylon rope? New disclos [...]

Americans are doing what they do best: buying guns [...]

Doomstead Diner Daily April 1The Diner Daily is av [...]

Quote from: UnhingedBecauseLucid on March 18, 2019 [...]

CleanTechnicaSupport CleanTechnica’s work via dona [...]

QuoteThe FACT that the current incredibly STUPID e [...]

Quote from: K-Dog on February 24, 2020, 06:23:52 P [...]

I wonder how much these coins have been debased? [...]

Precious tip of the day.....Buy silver NOW  She [...]

Scientists have unlocked the power of gold atoms b [...]

Quote from: azozeo on August 14, 2019, 10:41:33 AM [...]

Quote from: Nearingsfault on March 27, 2020, 05:03 [...]

Quote from: RE on March 27, 2020, 04:47:17 AMLast [...]

Last time I checked just a couple of days ago, the [...]

Alternate Perspectives
  • Two Ice Floes
  • Jumping Jack Flash
  • From Filmers to Farmers

Lies, Damn Lies and Coronavirus Statistics By Cognitive Dissonance     “Never believe anything in po [...]

The Decline and Fall of Civil Society Chapter One By Cognitive Dissonance     From my perspective at [...]

Missing In Action By Cognitive Dissonance     As a very young pup, whenever I was overdue and not ho [...]

Politicians’ Privilege By Cognitive Dissonance     Imagine for a moment you work for a small or medi [...]

Shaking the August Stick By Cognitive Dissonance     Sometime towards the end of the third or fourth [...]

Event Update For 2020-03-31http://jumpingjackflashhypothesis.blogspot.com/2012/02/jumping-jack-flash-hypothesis-its-gas.htmlThe [...]

Event Update For 2020-03-30http://jumpingjackflashhypothesis.blogspot.com/2012/02/jumping-jack-flash-hypothesis-its-gas.htmlThe [...]

Event Update For 2020-03-29http://jumpingjackflashhypothesis.blogspot.com/2012/02/jumping-jack-flash-hypothesis-its-gas.htmlThe [...]

Event Update For 2020-03-28http://jumpingjackflashhypothesis.blogspot.com/2012/02/jumping-jack-flash-hypothesis-its-gas.htmlThe [...]

Event Update For 2020-03-27http://jumpingjackflashhypothesis.blogspot.com/2012/02/jumping-jack-flash-hypothesis-its-gas.htmlThe [...]

With fusion energy perpetually 20 years away we now also perpetually have [fill in the blank] years [...]

My mea culpa for having inadvertently neglected FF2F for so long, and an update on the upcoming post [...]

NYC plans to undertake the swindle of the civilisation by suing the companies that have enabled it t [...]

MbS, the personification of the age-old pre-revolutionary scenario in which an expiring regime attem [...]

Daily Doom Photo

man-watching-tv

Sustainability
  • Peak Surfer
  • SUN
  • Transition Voice

The Great Pause Week One"A pod of dolphins rose and dove, then in pairs leaped high in the air, or walked on water with [...]

The Great Pause"While we can never fully go back, with enough people trying, something approaching normalcy wi [...]

We Need a Manhattan Project for the Climate"We could call the IPCC reports our modern Einstein letters. They are arriving to the Resolute [...]

Sorry, climate change is not about water"What can be effective is producing real-world changes in the short time remaining."We are [...]

Bernie Goes to Cuba: Regenerative Media"I am less disappointed in the news media these days than I am angry at it."after Raúl Cor [...]

The folks at Windward have been doing great work at living sustainably for many years now.  Part of [...]

 The Daily SUN☼ Building a Better Tomorrow by Sustaining Universal Needs April 3, 2017 Powering Down [...]

Off the keyboard of Bob Montgomery Follow us on Twitter @doomstead666 Friend us on Facebook Publishe [...]

Visit SUN on Facebook Here [...]

What extinction crisis? Believe it or not, there are still climate science deniers out there. And th [...]

My new book, Abolish Oil Now, will talk about why the climate movement has failed and what we can do [...]

A new climate protest movement out of the UK has taken Europe by storm and made governments sit down [...]

The success of Apollo 11 flipped the American public from skeptics to fans. The climate movement nee [...]

Today's movement to abolish fossil fuels can learn from two different paths that the British an [...]

Top Commentariats
  • Our Finite World
  • Economic Undertow

In reply to JMS. Thank you very much JMS! Same to you!! Everyday my kitchen is fully stocked with fo [...]

Too little, too late? https://www.cnbc.com/2020/04/02/oil-markets-saudi-arabia-russia-oil-price-war- [...]

In reply to worldofhanumanotg. Yes fire the traditional human response to disease. [...]

In reply to Ed. locking down the oil in Venezuela. [...]

US federal military deploys two aircraft carrier groups one to each side of South America. Monroe do [...]

@bb Do you think that Adam should have refused that apple? After all, it came from the devil via a w [...]

Yeah the problem is reason/knowledge in the service of un-reason, not so much reason itself. Or even [...]

["Humans are experts: our 5,000 year history is marked by follies and missed opportunities, war [...]

"No discussion of living different." Excellent observation Ellen. I believe Steve refers t [...]

Hi Steve and everyone, It is fun to hear from long-time lurkers. I am too lazy to get up and shut of [...]

RE Economics

Going Cashless

Off the keyboard of RE Follow us on Twitter @doomstead666...

Simplifying the Final Countdown

Off the keyboard of RE Follow us on Twitter @doomstead666...

Bond Market Collapse and the Banning of Cash

Off the microphone of RE Follow us on Twitter @doomstead666...

Do Central Bankers Recognize there is NO GROWTH?

Discuss this article @ the ECONOMICS TABLE inside the...

Singularity of the Dollar

Off the Keyboard of RE Follow us on Twitter @doomstead666...

Kurrency Kollapse: To Print or Not To Print?

Off the microphone of RE Follow us on Twitter @doomstead666...

SWISSIE CAPITULATION!

Off the microphone of RE Follow us on Twitter @doomstead666...

Of Heat Sinks & Debt Sinks: A Thermodynamic View of Money

Off the keyboard of RE Follow us on Twitter @doomstead666...

Merry Doomy Christmas

Off the keyboard of RE Follow us on Twitter @doomstead666...

Peak Customers: The Final Liquidation Sale

Off the keyboard of RE Follow us on Twitter @doomstead666...

Collapse Fiction
Useful Links
Technical Journals

The current linear economic system has led Europe to unsustainable development, aggravating several [...]

The Arabian Gulf is one of the regions in the world experiencing major changes due to increased econ [...]

I address 12 issues related to the study of ocean dynamics and its impact on global temperature chan [...]

This study aimed to assess the interrelationship among extreme natural events and their impacts on e [...]

Follow on our http://www.doomsteaddiner.net/forum/