We are 31 years away from civilisation collapse yet the things we argue and debate right now are so petty

30
18

New Report Suggests ‘High Likelihood of Human Civilization Coming to an End’ Starting in 2050

A harrowing scenario analysis of how human civilization might collapse in coming decades due to climate change has been endorsed by a former Australian defense chief and senior royal navy commander.

The analysis, published by the Breakthrough National Centre for Climate Restoration, a think-tank in Melbourne, Australia, describes climate change as “a near- to mid-term existential threat to human civilization” and sets out a plausible scenario of where business-as-usual could lead over the next 30 years.

The paper argues that the potentially “extremely serious outcomes” of climate-related security threats are often far more probable than conventionally assumed, but almost impossible to quantify because they “fall outside the human experience of the last thousand years.”

On our current trajectory, the report warns, “planetary and human systems [are] reaching a ‘point of no return’ by mid-century, in which the prospect of a largely uninhabitable Earth leads to the breakdown of nations and the international order.”

The only way to avoid the risks of this scenario is what the report describes as “akin in scale to the World War II emergency mobilization”—but this time focused on rapidly building out a zero-emissions industrial system to set in train the restoration of a safe climate.

The scenario warns that our current trajectory will likely lock in at least 3 degrees Celsius (C) of global heating, which in turn could trigger further amplifying feedbacks unleashing further warming. This would drive the accelerating collapse of key ecosystems “including coral reef systems, the Amazon rainforest and in the Arctic.”

The results would be devastating. Some one billion people would be forced to attempt to relocate from unlivable conditions, and two billion would face scarcity of water supplies. Agriculture would collapse in the sub-tropics, and food production would suffer dramatically worldwide. The internal cohesion of nation-states like the US and China would unravel.

“Even for 2°C of warming, more than a billion people may need to be relocated and in high-end scenarios, the scale of destruction is beyond our capacity to model with a high likelihood of human civilization coming to an end,” the report notes.

…right wing climate deniers will snarl this is just another report from delusional lefties, however, that’s not true…

The new policy briefing is written by David Spratt, Breakthrough’s research director and Ian Dunlop, a former senior executive of Royal Dutch Shell who previously chaired the Australian Coal Association.

In the briefing’s foreword, retired Admiral Chris Barrie—Chief of the Australian Defence Force from 1998 to 2002 and former Deputy Chief of the Australian Navy—commends the paper for laying “bare the unvarnished truth about the desperate situation humans, and our planet, are in, painting a disturbing picture of the real possibility that human life on Earth may be on the way to extinction, in the most horrible way.”

…hardly card carrying members of the Left.

We are 31 years away from civilisation collapse yet the things we argue and debate right now are so fucking petty. If your call out pile on activism doesn’t have the climate crisis at its heart, then you are part of the problem.

To survive climate change we must embark upon Fortress Aotearoa…

TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com
  • Move away from intensive farming and look to become domestically self sustainable in terms of food.
  • Immediately ban all water exports
  • 5 year Parliamentary term.
  • Upper and Lower House (Upper House 50-50 split between Māori & Pakeha that can hold up legislation if unhappy about Treaty issues)
  • Massive investment into R&D from Government with the understanding research is to benefit NZ first before sold offshore.
  • Large scale increase in Navy, Army & Airforce.
  • Mass limiting of tourism numbers with increased tourist taxes.
  • Only citizens can vote.
  • Sustainable immigration and an end to exploitative international student workers.
  • Resettlement Programms for all pacific island neighbours.
  • Increase refugee in take to 5000 per year
  • Fully funded public services.
  • Mass Green housing rebuild.
  • 100% renewable energy for entire country.
  • Massive tree planting across previous farming land.
  • Wholesale re-write of state services act to end commercial values.
  • Investment into basic pharmaceutical production.
  • Financial transaction tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Multinational tax
  • Inheritance tax

 

A climate changing world will descend into chaos, NZ will be one of the few lifeboats available, we need to rapidly adapt with foresight before we are forced to blindly adapt because of necessity. This change is coming whether we believe in it or not. The time to act is now.

We have 31 years.

30 COMMENTS

  1. First I want to say that climate change just doesn’t scare me. As long as I have a knife and a beating heart I think I’ll be okay. What scares me isn’t terrorists immigrating to New Zealand. What scares me is right wing populists like Brain Tamaki, Simon Bridges and the deny, deny, deny, they are the real threat if they ever come to power.

    We shouldn’t care to much about the number of refugee immigrants coming to New Zealand. We should worry about having clear rules with a proper hierarchy that is held to account if the rules are not followed correctly.

    The same goes for natural resources. As long as there are clear rules, clear reporting and management the quoter limits on natural resources should just manage themselves in a regime of transparency and accountability.

    There must also be a minimum notion of western kiwi values that sit above universal rights. I think the solution to this is to emphasise the clash between right wing denialists and non denialists (lefties) not by saying let’s put diary problems over there and so on but by bringing all of the problems together. The lesson is we should be able to talk openly about our problems and not try and white wash them.

    Now what about Australia. New Zealand is pulling its weight accepting how every many refugees that we do. Australia is not. Nations that accept refugees like Germany and Lebanon are pulling there weight internationally. So the bulk of the immigration crises must now fall on them. Qatar and Saudi Arabia are some of the richest places on earth so must begin accepting refugees. Now the Richest Nations must start accepting their part of the climate crises.

    • ” What scares me is right wing populists like Brain Tamaki, Simon Bridges and the deny, deny, deny, they are the real threat if they ever come to power” Ditto.

      ‘Rapturist Doctrine calls for scrapping environmental protection of all kinds because there will be no need for this planet once the Rapture occurs.’

      ‘End times theology has many variants but they all boil down to the idea that history is scripted by God…will soon come to an end. Your only hope is to accept Jesus as your personal saviour’ . This sounds like the message which Tamaki’s boys were shouting at the bereft survivors of the Riccarton Mosque , making a special trip down to ChCh to do so.

      Jesus-embracing end-timers believe God will rapture them up as he inflicts ‘seven years of horror and death on the earth.’

      ‘Fundamentalist Christians look around at AIDS, warfare across the globe, crime, the rise of narco states and ecological collapse and they see confirmation of God’s plan’.

      One of the reasons I’m not keen on Ngaro’s Zionist cabal in Parliament is,’Israel is the key to everything… the messiah can return to earth only after an apocalypse in Israel called Armageddon which a minority of influential fundamentalists are promoting with all their power so that The End can take place.’

      The first requirement was establishing the state of Israel. Done. The next is Israel’s occupation of the Middle East as a return of it’s “Biblical Lands.” More wars.

      ‘Radical Christian conservatives believe that peace cannot ever lead to Christ’s return…impedes the thousand-year reign of Christ, and that anyone promoting peace is a tool of Satan.’

      ‘The United Nations is a tool of the anti-Christ, America alone must spread the gospel around the world.’

      From: Joe Bageant “Deer Hunting With Jesus” Scribe 2011

      These are the people who carried George W Bush to victory and are heartland Republicans. They are white and poor and uneducated and exploited by the callous rich and it is not hard to see why ‘Jesus Saves’
      is an attractive message – perhaps the only attractive message.

      There’s a lot recorded about Reconstructionism and other strains of fundamentalism which are now permeating mainstream religion in the USA, and which echo here.

  2. In other words.. Green New Deal.

    Unfortunately our Politicians would rather chew off their own arm rather than be in any way associated with a progressive, civilisation saving “economic stimulus package” as proposed by Bernie Sanders and co.

    Though I notice having Ocasio-Cortez as the new ‘face’ is helping to make the concept more ‘interesting’ among the left leaning dudes.

  3. Again, no mention of population control, which is ONLY way to sustainably address Anthropogenic Climate Change and Pollution. Any positive population growth whatsoever, will inevitably lead to the same current trajectory at some stage since the the planet is finite in size, therefore is finite in resources, and thus can only support a finite number of people and their associated emissions.
    If what the climate doomers say is true, surely we need to immediately enact a one child policy (or less), stimulated by cutting benefits and significantly increasing taxes for those who choose to have more than one child. I hear only crickets.

    • Yes. Not just “Sustainable immigration and an end to exploitative international student workers”, but severe restriction (or is that what is meant by ‘sustainable?’), and no international student workers, exploited or not.

      And not “Increase — are you kidding?! — refugee intake to 5000 per year”, but much reduce refugee intake.

      Otherwise all the good stuff proposed may prove futile. The more people, the more CO2. The old Values Party of the 70s may need a revisit, with their zero population growth policy.

  4. I have taken the liberty to modify the initial listing (unsorted) of suggestions toward transformational change.

    It would be great if TDB could show capacity to go into a more detailed reflection of perhaps 30 key points that could serve as basic platform for envisioning a radical position for climate resilience in AONZ.

    • Move away from intensive and mono-culture farming, fisheries, forestry and look to become domestically self-sustainable in terms of food, nutrition and production.
    • Immediately ban all water exports and regulate domestic use of local water in terms of quality and quantity and access; local integrated water resources management.
    • 5-years parliamentary terms, and another working mechanism that assures and maintains consistency and strategic orientation in emergency situations.
    • Upper and Lower House (Upper House 50-50 split between Māori & Pakeha that can hold up legislation if unhappy about Treaty issues.
    • Massive investment into R&D, especially related to zero-carbon transportation, construction and production.
    • Large scale increase in disaster management, safety and security measures, including navy, army & air force, police, medical support organizations, other voluntary and civilian groups
    • Limiting of tourism numbers with increased tourist taxes.
    • Only citizens can vote.
    • Sustainable immigration and an end to exploitative international student workers.
    • Disaster management and settlement programmes for pacific island neighbours.
    • Increase refugee in take to 5000 per year
    • Manage a sustainable ratio of number of humans per sqkm (population density, ecological footprint)
    • Fully funded core public services.
    • Mass green housing and infrastructure rebuild.
    • 100% renewable energy for entire country.
    • Massive tree planting across previous farming land and in other suitable locations.
    • Wholesale re-write of state services act towards good governance by state institutions.
    • Investment into basic pharmaceutical production and common health care.
    • Internalization of environmental damages, waste management into the costing and pricing of a product.
    • Financial transaction tax, Wealth tax, Multinational tax, Inheritance tax, CO2 tax
    • Rural development programmes for farming system diversification and agriculture adaptation.
    • Protection measures for the South Pacific ocean and for Antarctica

  5. I don’t see increasing expenditure on the military doing much to reduce emissions; Or most of the other of Bommer’s proposals.
    Either climate change itself or the current US administration’s ” foreign policy” are likely to deal with Nitrium’s concern with population control.
    But scepticism as to the role of our emissions in warming are a mater of how one assesses the information in all it’s complexity and controversy, It isn’t a left ? right issue.
    D J S

    • Of all the comments here, a much as I enjoy them, this is the only one with truth at its heart.

  6. IN most Western countries the population is already below replacement because women have ‘equal’ rights to education , employment, and mostly control over their fertility due to contraception , abortion etc
    ….these rights have been hard fought for by women

    ….so attention should switch to patriarchal societies with rampant population growth… and very few female rights and in addition girls are aborted creating a male overpopulation balance:

    ‘Too many men: China and India battle with the consequences of gender imbalance -In the world’s most populous nations, men outnumber women by 70 million. Both countries are trying to come to grips with the policies that created this generation of gender imbalance’

    https://www.scmp.com/magazines/post-magazine/long-reads/article/2142658/too-many-men-china-and-india-battle-consequences

    If we want a fast solution to global warming we must focus on the countries contributing the most global warming:

    ‘China’s Greenhouse Gas Emissions’

    https://skepticalscience.com/China-GHG-emissions.html

    “China is the world’s largest emitter of greenhouse gasses so we should be particularly interested in the level of its emissions, as well as the success of the practices and policies it pursues to reduce them. After all, China’s emissions are likely to have the greatest influence on future global warming and our ability to keep average global temperature rise to less than 2°C above those of the pre-industrial era.

    However, CO2 emissions in 2017 for China are not known with any accuracy, even by the Chinese government. Some estimates suggest 9.8 gigatonnes (Gt.), while others claim it to be 11.7 Gt. Clearly both can not be right and it is possible that both estimates could be wrong…

    CFC-11 Emissions

    Apart from being an ozone destroyer, CFC-11 is also a very potent greenhouse gas with Global Warming Potential 4,750 times that of CO2. Measurement of CFC-11 concentration in the atmosphere show that around 67,000 tonnes of CFC-11, or 0.3 Gt CO2eq. are reaching the atmosphere each year from these sources. The Chinese Government has not previously been ‘officially’ aware of these and possibly other emissions when compiling statistics on greenhouse gas emissions.

    In 2017 a London based organisation, the Environmental Investigation Agency (EIA) determined that China was the source of these emissions. In 2018 the EIA published its report ‘Blowing It’ which concluded that at least 18 Chemical Companies in 10 Provinces are actively engaged in the production of CFC-11 and that it is used throughout China as a blowing agent for production of insulating foam products used in the building and other industries. The reason for its on-going use? It was easier to use and more profitable than use of alternative gasses.

    The production and use of CFC-11 in China could be more widespread than reported by EIA. Even if this is not the case, it is difficult to understand how such widespread production and use of CFC-11 could have gone undetected by the Chinese National and ten Provincial Governments for so many years. How could the EIA investigate and compile a detailed report on the matter in less than a year while the UN agency responsible for ensuring international compliance with the Montreal Protocol has yet to offer comment or action?

    Promoting Coal

    In a well researched article, Tiboku Hirochi points to the dichotomy of huge investment made by China in renewable energy (prompted by the need for breathable air in megacities) and the building of large numbers of coal fired power stations, many of them overseas. She reports findings from the Urgewald data base which concludes that companies specialising in design and construction of coal-fired power stations are engaged in or propose building 1,600 new power stations in 62 countries. Eleven of the 20 largest companies involved in their construction are either owned or financed by the Chinese Government.

    It is estimated that if all of these coal-fired power stations were built, they would have the capacity to increase global coal-fired electricity generation by 43%, significantly increasing greenhouse gas emissions at a time when the IPCC is calling for their rapid reduction. Chinese companies are engaged in designing, building and in some cases owning and operating coal fired power stations in developing countries. Many of these investments are part of the One Belt – One Road expansionist initiative of the Chinese Government. Further, over the last 15 years some $50 billion has been invested by China in the production, transport and use of coal.

    It appears to be State Policy to promote increased use of coal both within China and by investment overseas. Some of the countries where coal-fired power stations are being built by Chinese companies (eg Malawi, Egypt, Pakistan, Iran and others) will be using coal-fired electricity generation for the first time. Rather than speeding-up transition to a decarbonised economy, those building additional coal fired generating capacity are collectively slowing the process and, in so doing, committing the world to average global warming well in excess of 2°C by 2100 and a climate which will be both unpredictable and dangerous…

  7. As always, the children will suffer at our expense.
    Surely with all our collective intelligence (?) the human race can come up with decent plan.
    I wonder.

  8. All the evidence indicates the rate of ‘charging off the cliff’ is increasing, (deforestation of the Amazon, pollution of the oceans with plastic, species loss, you name it) so the indicative year 2050 is probably overly optimistic.

    All it will take is a positive feedback or two, such as the triggering methane release from the Arctic causing more melting, causing more methane release…

    The official numbers get worse and worse, of course:

    ‘The early years at Mauna Loa saw annual increases averaging about 0.7 ppm per year, increasing to about 1.6 ppm per year in the 1980s and 1.5 ppm per year in the 1990s. The growth rate rose to 2.2 ppm per year during the last decade. There is abundant and conclusive evidence that the acceleration is caused by increased emissions, Tans said.’

    https://www.noaa.gov/news/carbon-dioxide-levels-in-atmosphere-hit-record-high-in-may?fbclid=IwAR3curL0rHLRCduX2TwnlnbPjeSGuXy4U9KJqeZp-Dql_FKKgE_ithbA9v8

    • Afewknowthetruth, You might be able to point me to a reference to a simple experiment that must have been done, but I haven’t found a reference to one so far.
      Has anyone taken a bowel of seawater, Placed it in the bottom of an air filled chamber , sealed, and then progressively tested the CO2 content of the air in the chamber as the seawater is heated degree by degree? To actually measure how much CO2 comes out of the seawater and into the air as the water warms?
      Until I know the answer to this simple question I will have to be unconvinced as to what is cause and what is effect.
      D J S

      • David, your focus on irrelevant experiments is bizarre.

        Not long ago I provided a reference to ocean acidification, which is due to CO2 leaving the atmosphere and entering the waters of the oceans.

        Did you read it? Did you understand it?

        As well as overheating the Earth, the increasing CO2 burden is causing profound changes in the oceans that are affecting organisms now.

        The chemistry has been known about theoretically for well over a century and actually studied in the real world for decades!

        Below is another link, just in case you missed the previous one.

        ‘Oceanographers in our group have been studying how CO2 emissions affect the ocean system for more than three decades and continue to monitor ocean acidification in all the world’s oceans from coral reef ecosystems to deep North Pacific waters. Our group collects several types of carbon measurements throughout the world’s oceans. We participate in large-scale research cruises across ocean basins and along coastlines at regular intervals to study how ocean chemistry is changing through time.

        We also make measurements of the partial pressure of CO2 (pCO2) in the surface water of the world’s oceans using automated analytical systems on moorings and underway platforms.’

        https://www.pmel.noaa.gov/co2/story/Ocean+Acidification

        The increased concentration of bicarbonate ion in sea water is already detected and is affecting organisms in the oceans, and the effect will get worse and worse as humans cause the atmosphere to become increasingly overloaded with CO2 by burning fossil fuels!

        The Wiki page on the topic provides well over 100 scientific references.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ocean_acidification

        • Thanks for the fulsome response AFKTT. I have been reading quite a lot.
          Avoiding the simple relevant question was what I expected .
          When I google “Temperature increase effect on ph of seawater” I find a similar absence of reports of a simple lab experiment to measure, and contradictory reports of the theoretical effect.
          Everything on the subject that might help with understanding is biased one way or the other. Every article refers to man made climate change rather than just report on the simple chemistry. It is all too partisan to ever feel like you can get a straight answer. But thanks.
          D J S

      • As the seawater is heated it would lose that heat to the sealed room’s atmosphere maintaining the systems balance. Except the room’s atmosphere temperature is greater than the seawater. In nature seawater heats only to balance heating in the atmosphere by absorbing it. Seawater does not heat of its own accord except in absorption of solar energy towards the equator. The assumptions of your experiment are unreal.generation of CO2 is primarily atmospheric the ocean acts as a balancing medium giving off or absorbing CO2,to maintain Earth’s,again,balance.
        https://sos.noaa.gov/datasets/ocean-atmosphere-co2-exchange/ Compared to the room’s atmosphere the amount of co2 in the bowl of seawater would be irrelevant and would make no measurable difference. Current atmospheric co2 levels are 415 ppm. Unless you’re talking of the room’s atmosphere being artificially free of any co2 at all. https://www.khanacademy.org/partner-content/exploratorium-ddp/exploratorium-chemistry/ocean-acidification/a/ocean-acidification-in-a-cu

        • The Oceans further north right up to the Arctic do absorb heat as well, but nothing like the waters closer to the equator. Once we have an ice free Arctic in the summer those cold waters will absorb solar heating energy, also warm waters are migrating into the Arctic from the Atlantic and Pacific. Further warming ocean water is melting back the seaward edges of glaciers in the Antarctic leading to destabilisation of the West antarctic ice sheet. that heat entered the ocean from our heating atmosphere due to Primarily CO2 emissions fron us.

        • Jay 11
          There is about 50 or 60 times as much CO2 in seawater as there is in the atmosphere depending on what article you are reading. Some of it stays in simple solution, most is converted to carbonic acid and some then to other compounds all in solution together. Presumably with they proportions varying depending on other salts in solution and temperature. The CO2 comes out of seawater and into the air as the sea is warmed. That is not disputed by any science. More gas will dissolve in cooler water than in warmer water. My question is simply “how much”? for a given increase in temperature.
          The CO2 is in constant interchange between the sea and the air. Most articles I read calculate a turnover every 3 4 or 5 years, calculated from the time it has taken for extra C14 added to the atmosphere during atomic bomb testing to reduce to normal. Though as the selection of which molecule is absorbed by the sea is obviously random ,so a smaller and smaller proportion will remain in the atmosphere almost indefinitely which seems to allow some people to assert that CO2 may stay in the atmosphere for hundreds or thousands of years. One to two molecules will of corse.
          So the CO2 we are producing is going into a pool that includes the ocean and the biosphere, quite quickly circulating. The sea can’t possibly be identifying which molecules we have put into the air and which were already there , or were breathed out by a whale. So it is going with the flow into a pool of carbon 50 or 60 times the atmospheric content.
          Other factors have to come into operation to prevent it from increasing the sea and the air content proportionally to the existing ratio, and sea temperature must be a very important one if not the overwhelmingly relevant one.
          So knowing how much the CO2 content of the air would be if the sea heated up by the 1.3 degrees that is talked about, without any contribution from man is not irrelevant .
          D J S

  9. The scenario warns that our current trajectory will likely lock in at least 3 degrees Celsius (C) of global heating, which in turn could trigger further amplifying feedbacks unleashing further warming. This would drive the accelerating collapse of key ecosystems “including coral reef systems, the Amazon rainforest and in the Arctic.”

    Already happening. 2009 259 years after the baseline of 1750 when the Industrial revolution began we reached .85c above the 1750 global average temperature. Now in 2019 a mere 10 years later we’re at 1.9c above baseline an additional 1.05c! Climate Change is now exponential we will effortlessly sail past the 2c and then 3c mark
    There are over 60 amplifying feedbacks already well kicked in. Perhaps the worst the Planet’s air conditioner the Arctic will completely lose its sea ice cover in summer in the next few years. This will further kick the global average temperature upwards dramatically.
    The Great barrier reef is dying. 93% of the excess heat trapped in the atmosphere has been trapped by the Oceans otherwise we’d have fried or drowned. This can’t go on and when the Oceans start emitting this heat big time we are dead! The amazon rainforest is also threatened.

  10. No point being a lifeboat if as a consequence you are inundated by refugees you can’t (quite rightly) refuse or worse, simply overun by a more powerful resource-hungry state.
    No matter where you are in the world, there’s no escape.
    It’s way way WAY too late, when even the most conservative viewpoints such as the IPCC’s are painting such a dark future.

    So I’m afraid you can either put down your iPhones and join the schoolkids on their pointless marches, or maybe https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rblt2EtFfC4

    • Of course New Zealand can not overwhelm itself when immigration has already exceeded infrastructure. What we can do is leverage every suburb in the nation with rail, roads, buses, ports and airports so that each block can fit seamlessly with every other block in Oceania.

      Operating with in Oceania is American and Chinese interests. New Zealand with a population of 5 million couldn’t possibly compete on a dollar for dollar bases. Just because larger economic powers seek to draw geopolitical lines in our area does not mean that New Zealand interests have to obey; Even in a boxing match if your arms are longer than mine does automatically guarantee victory.

      Because the Nations that make up Oceania have a shared colonial background gives us shared sporting interests and talents that China or America could possibly compete on a skills level with New Zealand’s All Blacks and Silber Ferns or Australia’s Kangaroo League and Netball teams. Internationally the All Blacks have the most victories by several hundred and in Secound place for most succeful international sports team is the Australian Netball team. As far as branding goes it may say made in China but no amount of money can replicate the All Blacks success because there isn’t a machine that can teach some one when to pass it, how to pass it or most importantly why to pass it.

      Once we have a shared common ground we can develop more intimately military cooperation. The Likes of Fiji or Tonga, Samoa and so on lack the resources to secure there own natural resources. When people like me call for an expansion of NZDF this is where I desired NZDF expand into with tier 2 maritime patrol aircraft, Search and Rescue Helicopters, Patrol and logestics vessels. With each block integrated into South Pacifics military exchanges with multi-national crews training and operating basic security technologies then we get to draw the geopolitical lines.

  11. No one seems to be doing the arithmetic. Reduction of population is the only solution and it cant happen voluntarily in the space of of one generation (approx). You wont even achieve population stability in that time. Population will need to fall by perhaps a third to be sustainable, working on the assumption that most countries are consuming 1.6 times world capacity. So thats the dilemma. Who wants to offer a solution?

  12. Why particularly 31? That’d make me an octogenarian. So pretty satisfied, if I turned off the news. And all that has delivered me is Cyclone Bola. Except just reality runs ahead of the forecasts in some terrible multiplying way. Otherwise, if you cared about the next generation.

  13. That’s a good start at an approach, Martyn. Laying out an idea of a tack. I don’t have much imagination myself. First of this I’ve seen on the Left blogs.

  14. It is surreal, Martyn. It has been surreal for decades.

    The fundamental science was worked out over a century ago (Tyndall, Arrhenius).

    Warnings (publicly and loudly starting with Hansen) have been ignored.

    Protest is crushed.

    The political-economic system won’t move to sustainability or be moved to sustainability, and would rather crash and burn -with horrific consequences- than move to sustainability.

  15. Humanity is Stressing Vital Life-Support Systems to the Breaking Point:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c14gOWMuC9c

    Alex A.
    Alex A.
    2 hours ago
    Hi Paul, I’m afraid we are now farther from mounting an adequate global emergency response than ever. Nationalist populists are now leading many of the largest countries and multilateral institutions are weakened. Masses of people are mislead by sophisticated disinformation campaigns. As important as it is to push for action, we also must begin to reckon with collapse.

  16. All it takes is a fat tail event to occur which proves the Melbourne based think tank wrong…. kapish

  17. I will die laughing at none, absolutely NONE, of the Republican members of the US Leglislature believing in climate change. The optimum way for H.s.s. to go out.

    Don’t know where I heard that. It was always about sophisticated fun.

Comments are closed.