Why the demise of civilization may be inevitable!

[Bozo Erectus]

I don't really believe that people "don't want to change". I believe they do. They just don't know how. They're afraid of looking crazy, they've been led to believe that it's best not to rock the boat, that "experts" know best and that they're too small & weak to stand up to the forces that run the world. Perhaps, in some ways, they're right. But look at all the people who have managed to make a dent, despite humble origins. Gandhi springs to mind, even his Civilization (I & II anyway) opposite Genghis Khan barely made it thru children alive and went on to carve a great empire.

Im pretty sure we more or less agree on what the problems are (except for milk, youre on your own with that one, pal). We part company on what will be done to solve them. I dont think much of anything will be done. I mean, look around, does it look like the world is serious about finding a sensible alternative to oil? Its too late in the game now for that. If a serious global commitment had been made 30-40 years ago, we wouldnt be having this conversation right now. Our inability as a species to work together to head off a looming global crisis, one that could be averted by just changing our behavior, shows our animal limits. We're the monkey with his hand stuck in the jar, who as clever as he might be, when push comes to shove, is just too dumb an animal to open his hand so he can get it out. Cant bring himself to let go of that cookie

 

[Narz]

Im pretty sure we more or less agree on what the problems are (except for milk, youre on your own with that one, pal).

I like milk (though I'm allergic to cow's milk ) I just think you're average dairy factory (can hardly call many of them farms) is inhumane. And also that dairy is perhaps not ideal human food considering our evolutionary history but I certainly am not against people eating it anyway. I eat goat's cheese time to time.

We part company on what will be done to solve them. I dont think much of anything will be done. I mean, look around, does it look like the world is serious about finding a sensible alternative to oil? Its too late in the game now for that. If a serious global commitment had been made 30-40 years ago, we wouldnt be having this conversation right now.

I agree. Some tried. Like Jimmy Carter. But as soon as gas got cheap again everyone scraped their small cars & started guzzling oil like never before, Regan ripped the solar panels off the White House and cute hippie girls grew up into frumpy soccer moms. You probably know more about it than me being a bit older and all.

I could be very pessistic however then I'm probably get really bitter and discouraged (I'm not really good at the whole "who cares" thing). So I try to keep hope alive and do what I can to make a difference or at least feel better.

Our inability as a species to work together to head off a looming global crisis, one that could be averted by just changing our behavior, shows our animal limits. We're the monkey with his hand stuck in the jar, who as clever as he might be, when push comes to shove, is just too dumb an animal to open his hand so he can get it out. Cant bring himself to let go of that cookie

Some people can change. Some can even forsee the hand stuck in the jar situation before it happens.

Some people will survive. I do not believe humanity is going to die it. contemporary civilization /= (or is it =/) humanity.

 

[Bozo Erectus]

Oh yeah, for sure, there'll still be people around 150 years from now. After all the smoke clears, 200 years from now a canoe will sail up the Hudson, and a Spearman will take Manhattan.

 

[JerichoHill]

Maxing out at 7.5 billion isn't exactly catastrophic though is it. And tbh I reckon we'll max out far sooner than that, if we have more years like this year... (food shortages n all)

Sigh

Population growth is declining because were getting richer, and richer households/countries tend to have lower birthrates

(based on differing opportunity costs of time).

 

[GenMarshall]

Want to bet on that? The Earth won't be able to support us forever, if we don't destroy ourselves first.

This is where space colonization comes into play .

 

[Mise]

Sigh

Population growth is declining because were getting richer, and richer households/countries tend to have lower birthrates

(based on differing opportunity costs of time).

No . .. .. .. . sherlock

 

[Narz]

Sigh

Population growth is declining because were getting richer, and richer households/countries tend to have lower birthrates

(based on differing opportunity costs of time).

Another simplistic post by JerichoHill masquerading as a universal truth.

How about Russia? It's population is in decline largely due to lower birth rates (people too poor to afford kids), lower life expectancy (due largely to drug use, alcoholism, poverty, depression and sexually transmitted diseases), also 15% of Russian couples are supposedly infertile.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/988723.stm

Life isn't a bunch of easy to memorize (and repeat) formulas, you know.

This is where space colonization comes into play .

Uh-huh.

 

[Narz]

Oh yeah, for sure, there'll still be people around 150 years from now. After all the smoke clears, 200 years from now a canoe will sail up the Hudson, and a Spearman will take Manhattan.

It would certainly be interesting to be "God" over the next few hundred years. Or a man in a spaceship going near the speed of light (speeding up time). I'd be really curious to watch a 2208 movie (or cave wall powerpoint presentation, haha, you're even doomier than me BE ) about the last 200 years of Manhattan isle.

 

[mrt144]

narz, do you ever get tired of formulating arguments based on "jericho is wrong or misunderstanding me" planks?

 

[Mise]

narz, do you ever get tired of formulating arguments based on "jericho is wrong or misunderstanding me" planks?

Jericho described one reason why population growth rates are currently falling in the West. It's not the only reason why population growth rates might fall in the West, and certainly isn't applicable to developing countries, where infant mortality (due in part to malnutrition and disease) is a far greater driver.

In other words, Narz's argument is based on the same facts that made Jericho's statement a narrow perspective. That's hardly Narz's fault.

 

[mrt144]

Jericho described one reason why population growth rates are currently falling in the West. It's not the only reason why population growth rates might fall in the West, and certainly isn't applicable to developing countries, where infant mortality (due in part to malnutrition and disease) is a far greater driver.

In other words, Narz's argument is based on the same facts that made Jericho's statement a narrow perspective. That's hardly Narz's fault.

Narz time and time again disagrees with whatever jericho says, with seemingly no rhyme or reason to it.

 

[nihilistic]

Of course it is inevitable. Heat death of the universe will begin in about 10^14 years with stellar hydrogen depletion. No civilization can survive that. There may of course be better bounds than heat death, but 10^14 is sufficient enough to debunk "forever".

 

[Narz]

narz, do you ever get tired of formulating arguments based on "jericho is wrong or misunderstanding me" planks?

Narz time and time again disagrees with whatever jericho says, with seemingly no rhyme or reason to it.

I agree with Jericho when... well, I agree with him, which is often (especially in regards to wasteful government spending, on subsidies, stuff like that); as much as I bag on pure-freemarketism I do think that most government programs are misguided and am for much smaller government.

What we mostly disagree on is the potential severity of the converging catastrophes which are peak oil & climate change.

If you've nothing to contribute to the thread perhaps you should move on to another.

 

[Narz]

Great Video on the Thread Topic (though not related to the New Scientist article)

It's amazing how civil and decent the PBS anchor is (even though you can tell he's got his skeptical opinions) compared to say, that Hannity embarrassment), good to see.