Jump to content

Global Warming. Is the hype coming to an end?


Guest Steven1963

Recommended Posts

I think it's time to draw a distinction between climate catastrophe and environmental destruction.  Personally I doubt humans can do much about massive global trends, whether we are exacerbating them or not.  Destroying our environment through pollution and wasteful practices however is not a good idea not only for other life on earth but ultimately also our own.  Both of these subjects are weaving through this thread.

Now that is blatantly obvious.

Too bad they don't get it. Or,

do they?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists, and will persist."

 

One might say that the group composing the military-industrial complex contains a high proportion of bandits with overtones of intelligence.  Their ascendance has resulted in an unshackling of the power of the stupid to negatively influence our trajectory, and here we are.  (Are you starting to appreciate that Cippola piece yet?)  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can you imagine the total cooperation that the approach of even a small asteroid capable of doing significant damage but not a global danger would bring about? There is NOTHING about this entire issue that conforms to one's expectations of reaction to a significant emergency

 

Mark's point about business interests not immediately being threatened come to mind here.  Therefore there is no emergency.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There was an argument once upon a time, that market forces were bad for civilization, and that the better answer was "central planning" by the best and brightest minds. Markets won that argument, and now we must live with the results.

 

Mark,

 

I agree to a point.    

 

Neither pure market nor pure central planning works.  While I resist a "Nanny State," history has shown that individuals often make poor choices and society pays the price. Cigarettes and cycle helmets are cases in point.  The trick is striking the appropriate balance.

 

A pure market system would not require worker safety or air bags.  Without government involvement, workers were "free" (the threat of starvation makes almost any risk seem reasonable by comparison) to take outrageous risks.  Similarly, the free market would not make air bags, or even seat belts, the norm.  Individuals haven't shown the wisdom or willingness to pay to protect themselves.   Nonetheless, the cost to society for the "free," but unwise, choices of individuals is enormous.  Imagine the deaths, injuries and medical expenses that would have occurred without seat belts and air bags.

 

At the onset of air bags, I viewed them as unnecesary for those sensible enough to use seat belts.  Therefore, I viewed them as a "Tax" on the sensible to protect those who refuse to protect themselves.  I have changed my position.  I would be appalled if air bags were not mandatory.  Neveretheless, I always use seat belts.  As burdensome as OSHA regulations are, the callousness of the free market made them necessary.  Too many lunch buckets (not to mention falling iron workers) struck the innocents below during the Depression Era construction of the Empire State Building.

 

Who among us wants to fly without FAA regulation of aircraft, pilots and air traffic controllers?  I certainly don't.  Dealing with the government is a PITA.  Burying loved ones is not a good alternative.

 

Many have "lived" with the results, while "we must live with the results."

 

As always, just my opinion.  Others disagree.

post-6832-0-05920000-1423586077_thumb.jp

Edited by DizRotus
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Environmental destruction, in the sense of anything like the planet of even 50 years ago and certainly of a 100 or more, is complete.  I can drive the 915 miles from Texarkana to El Paso in Texas and see maybe a few hundred acres not completely ruined by human agency.  I can drive from Texarkana to Memphis and not see more than a few acres of even secondary forest and, to my knowledge, there hasn't been any primary forest in Arkansas in nearly a hundred years.  The entire south is basically a big pine tree farm where it was once a magnificent balance of hardwood and pine ecosystem. 

 

The American west I so loved to travel in past decades now features hazy sunsets and the overwhelming canopy of stars so dense it was hard to find any black between them...now you can hardly pick out the Milky Way.  The Asia and Southeast Asia I traveled 40 years ago also devastated.  The train from Bangkok to Chaing Rai used to travel through hours and hours of marvelous jungle and teak forest, teaming with life and the occasional, but hardly rare, elephant.  Now, mostly just a tangle of stumps and ripped up brush for miles and miles.  The elephants either gone or on preserves. 

 

The catastrophe has happened already.  

 

What is left?  Where can I see it? 

 

There is no hope for my generation, and but little for my son.  As mentioned, earth will heal itself and when explorers arrive here in the distant future they'll find a paradise and won't even know we were here until they poke around a bit.  But for the foreseeable future any improvement in the lives of those billions who remain earthbound until we develop the large scale ability to move out to the planets requires more that the Sierra Club objecting to a dam here or there, or those carrying on vigorous campaigns to stamp out plastic trash bags. 

 

And, if there is even partial truth to the predictions we are hearing stridently from our leadership and scientists we need something other than another EPA plan. 

 

Well...sure you'll be glad to hear I think I am about done here having aggravated both sides thoroughly.  :D

 

Dave

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Something funny in a bizarre way: I saw the destruction of war to Vietnam from agent Orange, B52s, and massive shelling and napalm.  Horrific.

 

Pales compared to what the Thais...and Texans... and others did to their own countries in the name of business.

 

Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mark, as you know, I've developed the belief that it is a form of communism that will be the next phase as machines take over and become the means of production.  You may ask why the ruling 1% would let this happen.  The answer is delicious:  They have NO choice but to drink from this cup and are already drinking up.  Robotic and automated production decreases costs and so to compete, more must be automated.  When the machines are not only building product but machines are building the machines that build the product and the descendants of the 3D printer are in the home making most anything on demand the 1% will shrink to the .1%, then .01% and so on.  Further, the rest of us will care less and less as we may not have castles in Tuscany but we'll have all the food and other comforts we want. 

 

The space in between may not be pretty, as systems die hard and the time between their being too few jobs to sustain the population and when the machines can handle all is likely to be pretty rough.  But life on the other side will be pretty sweet and money a relic of the past. In Looking Backward: 2000-1887 Edward Bellamy described such a society in which every citizen received the same amount of credits for the "work" they performed.  BTW, that book was third after "Uncle Tom's Cabin" and "Ben Hur" on the best seller list for the century, so it is not obscure and it's a great read. 

 

The mechanisms for the above have been being put in place now for decades and the pace is accelerating.  Hold on...it's gonna be a bumpy ride.

 

Dave

 

Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But life on the other side will be pretty sweet and money a relic of the past. In Looking Backward: 2000-1887 Edward Bellamy described such a society in which every citizen received the same amount of credits for the "work" they performed.  BTW, that book was third after "Uncle Tom's Cabin" and "Ben Hur" on the best seller list for the century, so it is not obscure and it's a great read. 

 

It's sort of ironic to speak of communism in that manner while talking about books on that subject being best sellers.  I wonder if your world will bring an end to best sellers. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It kind of has.  The old west was close.  Native Americans before the euro migration pretty much had it.  Not that they didn't have their societal mores but they were basically free.  The few hunter gatherer societies left have basically true freedom.  A recent National Geographic mag has a great write up about them.  I think it may have been last Septembers edition.  Check it out.

Edited by oldtimer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Steven1963

Freedom to live is part of my needs......my kind of freedom is where as long as I do no one damage I do as I please.

 

Your Rights end where my begin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm thinking if I was a dirt farmer on my own land, growing my crops minding my own biz, that's pretty free. Then along comes a big government, rustlers, outlaws and the freedom funs over. I understand true freedom is not possible, too many crooks spoil all the good things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Freedom to live is part of my needs......my kind of freedom is where as long as I do no one damage I do as I please.

 

Your Rights end where my begin.

Really, if I'm free to live at my property and enjoy my life that causes someone harm. I guess that's how we got where we are....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Freedom to live is part of my needs......my kind of freedom is where as long as I do no one damage I do as I please.

That means rules have to be in place to describe what "damage" will mean. Usually, there is always a dispute over the rules.

If you live alone in the woods, it's easy. But if you live next door to a guy who doesn't like loud music, well you see the trouble.

That would be right except I don't want to live next door to that guy. I want my own property big enough to do as I please. If I like to live next door to others I would live by the excepted behavior in that setting, because I like them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...