As usual, Dr Doom is full of doom for our Halloween amusement. At least this time, he has one paragraph dedicated to some proposed solutions, rather than just a scary lament.Having said this, his essay betrays a dangerous, lingering misunderstanding of our predicament which still appears to drive "Global Elites", assuming that these elites are more sincere than Donald J Trump and actually mean what they say.To wit:1. We are not facing a "climate crisis". We are facing a climate that has modestly warmed since 1970-ies for reasons that are mostly unknown to science. Could have something to do with the sun, most likely with gentle fluctuations in natural cycles of oceanic currents. It sure as hell has very little to do with the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. It is very likely that the overall climate is no warmer today than it had been in 1930-ies and certainly cooler than it had been earlier in the current interglacial. By the way, current interglacial is getting a little long in the tooth ...2. We are facing consequences of exponential population growth in the XXth Century which is abating but has not yet reached it's peak. 3. Because of (2) above we are facing a crisis of scarcity of resources which are essential to the functioning of the construct that we call "industrial civilization". To repeat: if one wanted to extend North American use of oil per capita to 8 billion people, world oil production would have to increase by 600%. To the EU level, by 300%. It will do neither and this is just one scarce resource. There is no industrial civilization without a steady supply of energy. You could even say is that this civilization is a temporary pattern on the flow of energy. Stop the flow and it all ends in some real ugliness from our human perspective. Not that "Nature" would care one way or another. Oil is just one scarce resource, there are many other.4. Because of (2) above, the human toll of natural climate fluctuations is increasing which can create an impression of "climate crisis". It is roughly the same climate as the one 100 years ago, but more people are directly affected by any unpleasantness as their societies live in a precarious state, with very limited ability to respond. 5. We are also facing generational amnesia which makes Fascism popular all over again. I am 64 years old and I grew up in the shadow of WW2, in a coutry horribly mauled by that war, so I still retain some partial immunity to Fascism. I have no doubt what am I looking at when I see a Trump Rally or Fox News daily poison and this is visceral for me. I am in a minority now, though, and people who personally experienced WW2 and set up the post WW2 world order are pretty much gone. For this reason we may indeed be in 1930-ies all over again. During the interwar period Fascism was very popular, fashionable even, particularly in Europe but also in the US. So, what to do? (understanding that there are no guarantees of positive outcome):1. get off the global warming and climate crisis bandwagon. Now, please.2. Admit that scarcity is the problem. This will have two simultaneous benefits: 2a. It will make remedial actions more logical and effective, driven more by sound engineering than misguided hysterics. 2b. People may actually respond better to the truth, however unpleasant, rather than twisted explanations why we are inflicting some pain on them while their standards of living are dropping.3. So called "green transition" is actually a necessary response to scarcity. Presented in this way it may be more acceptable to the majority. At the same time we need to maintain current energy systems. Walk and chew gum. If the society collapses nothing matters any more and it will collapse without steady energy supplies.Fascism is a problem. There are no easy answers here. The question of free speech needs to be carefully considered in advanced societies. Precedents are clear: Julius Streicher was tried and convicted in Nuremberg for crimes against humanity (he was hung). His crime? Being the editor of the anti-semitic newspaper Der Sturmer. There is a clear lesson in that. Whether it is too late to stop the Fascist wave before it plunges us into the nuclear war? I don't know. Anybody's suggestions are welcome.One final comment about the "weaponization of the dollar". In my view, this is a misguided notion. Speaking about "sanctions" against Russia is misguided. We should be speaking about decoupling for at least 30 years which is a cycle of generational turnover. The same applies to China. As in the Cold War and WW2 we are facing an existential threat of Fascism that is attacking us from without and within. We have to respond accordingly, particularly in all technological areas that are of potential military use. This is not the weaponization of the Dollar. Dollar can remain dominant in the Western World while it becomes the store of value in the Fascist world, similar to the Cold War.Sorry for the long read, thank you if you are still here.
you see, your actual intent is properly expressed at or about the last sentence of your reply. You want to end the Capitalism and "global warming" is just a vehicle. Meritoriously, the Earth is not becoming thermodynamically unstable just because you say so. I encourage readers to watch both videos and make up their own mind: =6Tz1MiX1p5IKoonin =lX1z_6pvM-Q&t=3175sMooreI particularly recommend Koonin as his discussion is based predominantly on IPCC reports.Just to be sure, there are many others who argue against the global warming proposition. Most of them are retired climate scientists who do need to apply for grants any longer. Their opinions vary. Some think that there is a little bit of warming due to carbon dioxide, some believe there is none. There are arguments in either direction, particularly given that current concentrations of CO2 are very close to saturating the CO2 absorption band. Be it as it may, they all agree that there is no existential crisis. As it turns out, IPCC agrees as well if you actually read their reports, rather than news articles. This is why I recommend Koonin, he should be least controversial as he is using mostly IPCC material.Do also remember that CO2 is food for plants. Optimum CO2 concentration for terrestial plants that we depend on is 1000ppm, factor of 2.5 above present concentrations. Do further remember that CO2 concentration were likely much higher, 10 times or more, in the geologic past without any runaway greenhouse effect. Think about this next time you hear anyone calling CO2 a "dangerous pollutant".No point in continuing here. Have a good day.
Armageddon Oil And The Middle East Crisis Pdf Download
2ff7e9595c
Comments