Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Carrying Capacity/Human Overshoot; Pt. 2, 21st century perspecti

Carrying Capacity/Human Overshoot; Pt. 2, 21st century perspecti

Unread postby onlooker » Sat 04 Jun 2016, 09:48:34

Cog wrote:A true believer in Christ is not afraid of death. I don't know where you get your information but it is flawed.

Hell is a frightening thing. Can a Christian truly be sure they are not going there as opposed to heaven?
“For a moment they saw the nations of the dead, and, before they joined them, scraps of the untainted sky." -- E.M. Forster
User avatar
onlooker
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 6332
Joined: Sun 10 Nov 2013, 12:49:04
Location: NY, USA

Re: Carrying Capacity/Human Overshoot; 21st century perspect

Unread postby ennui2 » Sat 04 Jun 2016, 10:43:28

Make no mistake. Ibon's preaching here. However sincere it is, it's not one-size-fits-all the way he is suggesting. It just reflects HIS values. There are those who value individual life and liberty above the collective and who have no pressing need to self-sacrifice for the species or the planet. You can soapbox all you want, but in the end you can't impose values. It's subjective.

I thought the most moving piece was the Homeproject on Youtube which has all those flyovers of the planet being scarred by over-exploitation. But that's MY reaction. Show it someone else and they could very well say that this is simply the way it has to be, that if we use up the planet like burning up a candle, then so be it.

It's hard to come to grips with the idea that two people armed with exactly the same data and having absorbed all of the talking points could still come to different conclusions on right and wrong, but that's how humans work. That's politics. That's why crime and war happen. We are creatures of rationalization.
Last edited by ennui2 on Sat 04 Jun 2016, 10:48:54, edited 1 time in total.
"If the oil price crosses above the Etp maximum oil price curve within the next month, I will leave the forum." --SumYunGai (9/21/2016)
User avatar
ennui2
permanently banned
 
Posts: 3933
Joined: Tue 20 Sep 2011, 09:37:02
Location: Not on Homeworld

Re: Carrying Capacity/Human Overshoot; 21st century perspect

Unread postby Newfie » Sat 04 Jun 2016, 10:46:55

I showed that video to my congregation back when I still had some hope of changing minds. Powerful stuff. Didn't change squat but shit em up for a few seconds.
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 8109
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 03:00:00
Location: US East Coast

Re: Carrying Capacity/Human Overshoot; 21st century perspect

Unread postby Cog » Sat 04 Jun 2016, 16:54:32

onlooker wrote:
Cog wrote:A true believer in Christ is not afraid of death. I don't know where you get your information but it is flawed.

Hell is a frightening thing. Can a Christian truly be sure they are not going there as opposed to heaven?


Yes
User avatar
Cog
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 7747
Joined: Sat 17 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: Metro-East Illinois

Re: Carrying Capacity/Human Overshoot; 21st century perspect

Unread postby onlooker » Sat 04 Jun 2016, 17:26:35

"You can soapbox all you want, but in the end you can't impose values. It's subjective." Yes values people hold are from a subjective platform. However, the consequences of shared values is not. It can be ascertained in an objective manner. Throughout history societies incorporating selfish, greedy, aggressive values tended to be less pleasant to live in and certainly to live in the vicinity of. We all can think that individuals can function autonomously and independent of outside influence. That is simply wrong. We are influenced by others and influence others. We can decide if we wish to live with the timeless virtuous values of love, compassion, empathy, sharing, sacrifice etc. or not. As Ennui stated it is a subjective option. But those mentioned values I believe could have prevented us from going down this destructive road and succumbing to addictions to power and wealth. They also can help jump start a new beginning for our species way out on the other side of the bottleneck.
“For a moment they saw the nations of the dead, and, before they joined them, scraps of the untainted sky." -- E.M. Forster
User avatar
onlooker
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 6332
Joined: Sun 10 Nov 2013, 12:49:04
Location: NY, USA

Re: Carrying Capacity/Human Overshoot; 21st century perspect

Unread postby jedrider » Sat 04 Jun 2016, 17:45:21

Ibon, that was so beautiful, I want to go back to that repeatedly. It's one thing to be greedy and want everything for oneself and entirely another thing to be selfless (maybe, within limits, though). The Earth is a great gift now being squandered because of overshoot. We should feel lucky and a bit embarrassed of what we did.
Last edited by jedrider on Sat 04 Jun 2016, 19:30:57, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
jedrider
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 754
Joined: Thu 28 May 2009, 09:10:44

Re: Carrying Capacity/Human Overshoot; 21st century perspect

Unread postby ozcad » Sat 04 Jun 2016, 17:46:52

Newfie wrote:
That could be made a much more universal statement. There are many religions who's dogma offer protection from facing personal extinction. It is a fairly universal human trait to find explanations for eternal life.
.
It strikes me how a fear of death is probably 100% necessary for human viability. If we had no fear, we would be lucky to make it to teen age. Avoiding boredom, homework or fraught romantic relationships would enough to trigger suicide, were it not for fear of death and the physical discomfort that might entail.
Yet, our very design is such that we *will* die, and we won't like the idea. Murphy's law at its finest.
User avatar
ozcad
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 46
Joined: Fri 03 Jul 2015, 12:26:35
Location: Australia

Re: Carrying Capacity/Human Overshoot; 21st century perspect

Unread postby ralfy » Sat 04 Jun 2016, 18:48:46

Very good points. Also, the idea of selflessness is not only part of principles raised by some "liberal progressives" but even attempts to counter the point that most will die (especially the poor) and that oligarchs should help accelerate the process.
http://sites.google.com/site/peakoilreports/
User avatar
ralfy
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 4316
Joined: Sat 28 Mar 2009, 10:36:38
Location: The Wasteland

Re: Carrying Capacity/Human Overshoot; 21st century perspect

Unread postby Ibon » Sat 04 Jun 2016, 20:01:41

ennui2 wrote:Make no mistake. Ibon's preaching here. However sincere it is, it's not one-size-fits-all the way he is suggesting.


Correct. It is intentional that I chose a prose that has religious innuendos. I will follow up with another post in a day or two to elaborate. I am too busy at the moment. I'll get back to this though.

Let's quickly put numbers in perspective. Just suppose we experience some of the worst case scenarios we discuss here. We'll leave Cid's forecast out of consideration because he is no fun as he leaves no wiggle room for slipping through the bottleneck. Let's get close to Cid though and assume 99% die-off of humans due to events that unfold say in the next 100 years. Guess how many humans will still be around? 75 million. That's enough genetic diversity still in the gene pool to keep us viable as a species. Shall we go to 99.9%? We still will have 7.5 million humans, still plenty of variation in our gene pool. It's a good exercise to look at some of the worst case scenarios and see that even if a tiny fraction of humanity survives that is still a viable number. Humans who will still be around and reflect on what transpired as they gaze upon the ruins. So my general optimistic projection of humans culturally adapting still has a viable chance if we look at some of the most extreme worst case scenarios. There are two issues One is that our species survives. The other is that they not only correct but also incorporate self regulation.
Our resiliency resembles an invasive weed. We are the Kudzu Ape
blog: http://blog.mounttotumas.com/
website: http://www.mounttotumas.com
User avatar
Ibon
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 5200
Joined: Fri 03 Dec 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Volcan, Panama

Re: Carrying Capacity/Human Overshoot; 21st century perspect

Unread postby SeaGypsy » Sat 04 Jun 2016, 20:43:50

Plus if it goes that way, most likely that percentile will be far from conglomerated, could be a few patches in highlands right around the globe, doing seasonal coastal migrations & trade, most likely some intrepid sailors. Who knows? Nobody of course. Cids view is as bland as it is bleak. There are cures for bland, but they all have risk attached, so Cid isn't going there. Bleak is something realists all have to live with. To some people there is always a light, to others just a tunnel.
SeaGypsy
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 8777
Joined: Wed 04 Feb 2009, 03:00:00

Re: Carrying Capacity/Human Overshoot; 21st century perspect

Unread postby dohboi » Sat 04 Jun 2016, 21:49:19

iirc, going through such a narrow bottleneck tends to make a species into and opportunistic weed species that becomes invasive.

That's probably partly how humans got to be the way we are in the first place.

Maybe this time will be different. But biological and (pre-)historical precedents are not on your side if you think just the fact of going through a bottleneck alone is some kind of guaranteed way to make a species live in an enlightened and self limited way.
User avatar
dohboi
Master
Master
 
Posts: 15525
Joined: Mon 05 Dec 2005, 03:00:00

Re: Carrying Capacity/Human Overshoot; 21st century perspect

Unread postby Shaved Monkey » Sat 04 Jun 2016, 22:07:44

They wont need to self limit.
They will just need to survive the lack of numbers should allow the earth to start repairing quicker than we can destroy.
Then you can only hope the next "religion" wont be created to reward the sociopaths but I wouldnt hold my breath
Ready to turn Zombies into WWOOFers
User avatar
Shaved Monkey
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 1988
Joined: Wed 30 Mar 2011, 00:43:28

Re: Carrying Capacity/Human Overshoot; 21st century perspect

Unread postby SeaGypsy » Sat 04 Jun 2016, 22:10:11

My thought is diversity will again bring a wide spread of outcomes in terms of new or reconstructed social environments. One of the meeting points I share with Ibon is that those with least to lose are not likely to tear themselves to pieces missing what they never had much of anyway. The flip side for those in an urban environment it's an all or nothing, sink or swim bet anyway, so projecting this onto the rest of the world comes naturally.
SeaGypsy
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 8777
Joined: Wed 04 Feb 2009, 03:00:00

Re: Carrying Capacity/Human Overshoot; 21st century perspect

Unread postby Ibon » Sun 05 Jun 2016, 06:56:45

Let’ take the focus off the end game for a moment of where we are going to end up as a species and instead focus on the short term. Let’s say the next 30 years. Let’s also assume we experience disruptions in climate and agriculture globally that reach a level of severity and an accelerated frequency unprecedented to anything we have seen to date. These events will force a response, impose themselves on the dominant cultural mind sets we see around the globe today. Events that cannot be denied or ignored or shoved off into the future as we see today.

ennui2 wrote: There are those who value individual life and liberty above the collective and who have no pressing need to self-sacrifice for the species or the planet. You can soapbox all you want, but in the end you can't impose values. It's subjective.


This sums it up pretty well. As I have mentioned several times you cannot put the cart before the horse trying to impose values or ideology before the consequences come. The dominant ideologies in the world today are too resilient. You guys recall my comment that a healthy biosphere is an invisible biosphere and that it is like oxygen, only noticed in its absence. Once the biosphere coughs up destabilizing consequences it will become visible.

The question: To those who value individual life and liberty above any collective consideration, what impact will these destabilizing consequences have on this dominant mindset?
Our resiliency resembles an invasive weed. We are the Kudzu Ape
blog: http://blog.mounttotumas.com/
website: http://www.mounttotumas.com
User avatar
Ibon
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 5200
Joined: Fri 03 Dec 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Volcan, Panama

Re: Carrying Capacity/Human Overshoot; 21st century perspect

Unread postby vtsnowedin » Sun 05 Jun 2016, 07:12:23

Ibon wrote:Let’ take the focus off the end game for a moment of where we are going to end up as a species and instead focus on the short term. Let’s say the next 30 years. ....
......
The question: To those who value individual life and liberty above any collective consideration, what impact will these destabilizing consequences have on this dominant mindset?

I expect those in countries that will be considered the "Have" nations to protect their self interest by becoming very Nationalistic and protective of their countries resources with strengthened National defense.
Borders will be closed. and I mean "shoot to kill "closed and exports of foodstuffs will be restricted to true surpluses that are paid for in cash or oil.
The media will be controlled and images of people starving in the "have not" will be banned and any proposal to extend charity or food will be ruthlessly suppressed with the ultimate punishment being permanent deportation to a "have not" country.
As W said . "You are either with us or against us".
User avatar
vtsnowedin
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 7026
Joined: Fri 11 Jul 2008, 02:00:00

Re: Carrying Capacity/Human Overshoot; 21st century perspect

Unread postby ralfy » Sun 05 Jun 2016, 20:39:23

Indeed. One can look at what happened in the past when there were less than 100 million people, and what took place thousands of years after that.

As for "haves" and "have nots," it will likely not involve countries or even nationalism but between those who are armed and those who are not. That is, armed police and military will secure resources for themselves while keeping citizens under control through internal borders, "camps," rationing, etc. Local politicians and voting will not matter, and much of the wealth of the middle class and oligarchs, which consists of numbers in hard drives, will become worthless. Survivalists who imagine some Hollywood movie scenario where they will be able to live happily in relative isolation will realize the opposite.

After that, the armed will turn on each other.
http://sites.google.com/site/peakoilreports/
User avatar
ralfy
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 4316
Joined: Sat 28 Mar 2009, 10:36:38
Location: The Wasteland

Re: Carrying Capacity/Human Overshoot; 21st century perspect

Unread postby ennui2 » Mon 06 Jun 2016, 05:51:22

Humans as an "opportunistic weed species" would be equivalent to the zombie horde. Nomadic warlords like the huns, but with a lot of scavenging. Mad Max (with machines) or The Road (without), the scenario some here just don't want to entertain as an endpont.
"If the oil price crosses above the Etp maximum oil price curve within the next month, I will leave the forum." --SumYunGai (9/21/2016)
User avatar
ennui2
permanently banned
 
Posts: 3933
Joined: Tue 20 Sep 2011, 09:37:02
Location: Not on Homeworld

Re: Carrying Capacity/Human Overshoot; 21st century perspect

Unread postby Cog » Mon 06 Jun 2016, 06:42:24

Ibon wrote:
The question: To those who value individual life and liberty above any collective consideration, what impact will these destabilizing consequences have on this dominant mindset?


To speak to that point, since I am of that mindset, it depends. In times of excess and plenty, I do not need to cooperate with my neighbors or even my relatives. I don't even want to know them for the most part. But in desperate times, you can't lone-wolf things. You need cooperation to survive. So I would say you have something here. Circumstances can force cooperation, at least until the crisis has passed. But before that you will have a lot of killing to fight over resources on an individual basis.

I know people have recommended that I form those relationships now. My response is why should I? Those might be the people I have to kill immediately or abandon to their fate. My thought is to see how the situation plays out and then form whatever cooperative arrangements best suit my personal survivability.
User avatar
Cog
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 7747
Joined: Sat 17 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: Metro-East Illinois

Re: Carrying Capacity/Human Overshoot; 21st century perspect

Unread postby Newfie » Mon 06 Jun 2016, 07:01:37

Cog,
It's funny how we both agree and disagree so strongly at times. An interesting and thoughtful post.

It does make me wonder about your particular religious viewpoint. As a Christian I would expect you to be involved with a church community and very protective thereof. I'm not familiar with a particular interpretation of Christianity that supports your viewpoint. Unless you are "lone wolf" in your religious beliefs as well.
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 8109
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 03:00:00
Location: US East Coast

Re: Carrying Capacity/Human Overshoot; 21st century perspect

Unread postby Newfie » Mon 06 Jun 2016, 07:06:51

I should add that my current opinion is that strong belief in God and the Cinstitution come from a single root. For what ever reason it is something that i am not attracted to, I find no solace in either. That sometimes makes life more difficult, but it is the truth as I see it.

I do have reverence for Earth and fellow creatures that you seem immune to.

I presume my worldview is as bewildering to you as yours is to me.
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 8109
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 03:00:00
Location: US East Coast

Next

Return to Environment

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests