GliderGuider’s Recent Comments

• Click here to view comment in original post

  Bali has finally crushed my spirit.

  I was holding onto a slim thread of hope that the multi-factorial global crisis was finally immediate enough to overcome our psychological discount function and prompt some action.  Alas, it appears that my suspicions about the ability of our evolved psychology to shield us from the empathic acceptance of any threat to those outside our familial/tribal boundaries were correct.

  The mutually reinforcing social structures we have built up over the centuries to support the hierarchic and acquisitive aspects of our psychology - our economic, political, education and communication systems - appear to be in full self-reinforcing, self-preservation feedback mode.

  As evidenced in Bali those forces are much, much stronger than most of us suspected.   They are willing to see the the rest of us walk off a cliff, in the sure and certain knowledge that they and their familiars will be protected.  In the face of the destruction of the planet's life they are fully prepared to sign our death warrants.

  If this is what we can expect, there's no point wasting any more adrenaline baying at the moon. They have decided that we should die rather than live, and there is little we can do about it now. Like a rabbit in the jaws of a wolf, I have come to terms with my fate. I may kick feebly once or twice more - give another TEOTWAWKI talk, change one last light bulb for old time's sake - but really, what's the point?

  We are finished.
  On Countries strike climate deal in Bali posted 1 year, 10 months ago 20 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  The problem is a little bigger than this

  As energy supplies begin to shrink over the next decade or so due to the depletion of oil and natural gas, national GDPs will decline around the globe.  The impact will be especially severe in regions that are already under threat from Climate Chaos and population growth.

  This will preclude the expenditure of the amounts required to deal with the wide variety of problems we'll be facing in a couple of decades: energy shortfalls, Climate Chaos and food shortages.  While different regions of the world will face different mixes of problems as a result, it's safe to say that no region will be spared some form of extreme difficulty.

  The reference to Naomi Klein's "Shock Doctrine" is especially apropos.  The reactions of the corporatist powers-that-be to the prospect of this looming multi-dimensional global crisis was the first thing I thought of when I read the book.  They'll be like kids in a candy store.  To make matters worse, citizens around the world will be clamouring for a "strong hand" to guide them through the troubled seas.  I am sure there will be no shortage of willing volunteers for the role of (ahem) benevolent dictator.

  It's not at all clear to me that there is anything effective to be done except prepare for the most likely hardships within your own global region.  Adaptation to the effects of this combinatorial crisis seems to be the approach with the highest probability of success.  Basically, it's, "All hands to the lifeboats, women and children first."

  For a close look at how energy depletion is going to affect national economies, read this analysis:

  World Energy to 2050 and
  Energy Intensity and GDP in 2050: To Have or Have Not
  On It's too late to stop climate change, argues Ross Gelbspan -- so what do we do now? posted 1 year, 11 months ago 45 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  One other thing to keep in mind

  I don't think anyone in this debate is using the word "collapse" in the sense of "falls over and stays down forever".  The lesson of adaptive cycles is that this is precisely what doesn't happen.  The system always reorganizes and starts to re-grow following the release phase.  Whether you call what appears on the next loop "the same" system as was there the first time around depends on the degree of similarity, which will depend on both the nature of the resources available for the subsequent loop and the quasi-random formative influences that act on the re-growing system.

  Civilizations have collapsed in the past, in the sense that they have undergone disruption, release and decline.  Of course civilization has usually  reappeared subsequently in the same geographic area with genetically similar people.  Does that mean it's the same civilization as before?  Or that the original civilization didn't collapse?  I claim the answer to both those questions is "No."

  Paul ChefurkaOn A review posted 2 years, 3 months ago 70 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  I certainly expect some thing fairly dramatic.

  As I said, I can't predict its exact shape, but I do expect us to enter the release phase of our adaptive loop with some degree of abruptness.  When that happens I expect to see these general effects:

  • Disruptions of significant human structures and institutions, possibly including the global economy.
    
  • An unevenly distributed decline in human numbers that accelerates over time due to rising mortality.

  I've chosen to talk about significant social disruptions and significant population declines because of the Precautionary Principle, but I have no idea how moderate or severe such events might become.  We might experience nothing worse than a world-wide depression and the stabilization of our population at 6 billion people.  I haven't found any convincing evidence to support such an optimistic outcome, though, so I'll stick with my scenario for now.

  I'm glad you disagree with my position, because we need people working this one from all points of the compass.On A review posted 2 years, 3 months ago 70 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  "Best" collapse? Is there such a thing?

  I have simply chosen to write about what I think is a high probability triggering mechanism for a general class of event I consider to have a non-zero probability.  Given the chaotic nature of real life, it's virtually guaranteed that my scenario will not come to pass.  Nor by the same logic will anyone else's - reality will inevitably be different from our predictions.

  I talk about collapse because the Precautionary Principle hints that somebody should be talking about it.  I think the possibility is being given short shrift in public discourse.  Since the consequences could be so severe, the idea that some sort of larger-than-expected disruption to civilization (no matter what the mechanism) ought to at least be considered.

  One difference between your reaction and mine is that you see fears of collapse as irrational, while I see them as being supported both by evidence and reasonable theories.  You may see the inductive argument as weak, but as I said before, the Precautionary Principle urges that we pay at least some attention to it.On A review posted 2 years, 3 months ago 70 Responses