[dohboi]

On the one hand, if one species could suddenly and universally change its behavior in fundamental ways, it would be the human species. We have adapted to nearly every terrestrial environment on the planet and to many sudden shifts in global climate. Some trace our crucial development--from just another ape to a creature "sapient" enough to handle an incredibly wide array of situations--to a sudden shift in global climate triggered by the joining of the two American continents by what is now Panama. Proto-humans had to adapt or die. And adapt they did. And went on adapting to new environments and diets as we swept around the globe as the most destructive exotic invasive species ever to hit the earth, leaving a wake of extinctions in our path. (Indeed, we are turning out to be the most powerfully life-destructive force ever to hit the planet, perhaps ushering in the end of complex life on earth for ever.)

So, because of our language and image driven culture, we can change even our most basic practices and beliefs quite rapidly. But, on the other hand, the likelihood of an entire planet of nearly 7 billion of us all changing rapidly enough, far enough, and in the right direction soon enough to avert utter catastrophe seems at this point vanishingly small. We have already awakened many ancient and enormous forces which will carry on the destruction we initiated, pretty much no matter what we do or don't do. (See the runaway GW thread.)

I think what needs to spread is a general (or at least very wide spread) understanding of the enormity of what desecration we have wrought, and a move toward a kind of universal penance--nearly everyone forsaking nearly all comforts and luxuries. Not because this will do anyone or anything any good, but because it is the only conceivable mass reaction that is not as morally repugnant as what we have been doing so far.

But try getting the average middle-to-upper-class American to even slightly reduce the amount of discretionary air travel. If we can't fathom even slightly restraining ourselves from this most luxurious of luxuries--and the most rapid (legal) way to dump the largest quantities of greenhouse gasses into the most sensitive parts of the atmosphere--what chances do we have to reduce our profligate use of resources in other spheres?

[Ludi]

And went on adapting to new environments and diets as we swept around the globe as the most destructive exotic invasive species ever to hit the earth, leaving a wake of extinctions in our path

Only recently (past 10,000 years or so). Prior to recently, humans were no more destructive than any other large predator moving into new territory. Another example is the big cats, who wiped out the giant predatory birds when they moved into what is now North America.

If we can't fathom even slightly restraining ourselves from this most luxurious of luxuries--and the most rapid (legal) way to dump the largest quantities of greenhouse gasses into the most sensitive parts of the atmosphere--what chances do we have to reduce our profligate use of resources in other spheres?

Humans as a species are very adaptable. Our culture is not adaptable. It is very specialized and getting more so by the decade. There's evidence other cultures were able to recognize destructive behavior and stop it. There's entire books about this so I won't go on about it here. Our problems are not the problems of being human, they are problems of our culture. Other cultures have changed. We have yet to see if ours can change appropriately.

[mos6507]

Our problems are not the problems of being human, they are problems of our culture.

"Culture" did not beam down from UFOs and render us automatons. Culture was human-made, brick by brick, generation by generation. Hence, our problems are human-made. I believe in the responsibility that comes from freewill. If we fail, we only have ourselves to blame.

[Ludi]

If we fail, we only have ourselves to blame.

I agree. What I meant was, if I didn't make myself clear (which I guess I didn't) was that not ALL humans have had these same problems. Some avoided them apparently completely, and others seemed to have recognized their behavior and were able to change it.

Will we recognize our bad behavior and be able to change it?

It's very hard.

[americandream]

Notwithstanding those who would seek to limit the Age Of Reason as a regional phenomenon, its effects were, as a matter of fact, worldwide.

This new crisis is of another order only to the extent that it is worldwide. But it's effects are of the same character as those that gave rise to the struggles for a socialised order in crisis ridden medieval Europe.

Marx prophetically opined that only a fully capitalised world economy in crisis would antecede the socio-economy he contemplated. A reasonable opinion at that, in my view, premised as it is on the primacy of reason, the socialisation of commonwealth and the complete extinguishment of the private.

So yes, the future promises to be an interesting one.

On the one hand, if one species could suddenly and universally change its behavior in fundamental ways, it would be the human species. We have adapted to nearly every terrestrial environment on the planet and to many sudden shifts in global climate. Some trace our crucial development--from just another ape to a creature "sapient" enough to handle an incredibly wide array of situations--to a sudden shift in global climate triggered by the joining of the two American continents by what is now Panama. Proto-humans had to adapt or die. And adapt they did. And went on adapting to new environments and diets as we swept around the globe as the most destructive exotic invasive species ever to hit the earth, leaving a wake of extinctions in our path. (Indeed, we are turning out to be the most powerfully life-destructive force ever to hit the planet, perhaps ushering in the end of complex life on earth for ever.)

So, because of our language and image driven culture, we can change even our most basic practices and beliefs quite rapidly. But, on the other hand, the likelihood of an entire planet of nearly 7 billion of us all changing rapidly enough, far enough, and in the right direction soon enough to avert utter catastrophe seems at this point vanishingly small. We have already awakened many ancient and enormous forces which will carry on the destruction we initiated, pretty much no matter what we do or don't do. (See the runaway GW thread.)

I think what needs to spread is a general (or at least very wide spread) understanding of the enormity of what desecration we have wrought, and a move toward a kind of universal penance--nearly everyone forsaking nearly all comforts and luxuries. Not because this will do anyone or anything any good, but because it is the only conceivable mass reaction that is not as morally repugnant as what we have been doing so far.

But try getting the average middle-to-upper-class American to even slightly reduce the amount of discretionary air travel. If we can't fathom even slightly restraining ourselves from this most luxurious of luxuries--and the most rapid (legal) way to dump the largest quantities of greenhouse gasses into the most sensitive parts of the atmosphere--what chances do we have to reduce our profligate use of resources in other spheres?

[Lore]

If we fail, we only have ourselves to blame.

I agree. What I meant was, if I didn't make myself clear (which I guess I didn't) was that not ALL humans have had these same problems. Some avoided them apparently completely, and others seemed to have recognized their behavior and were able to change it.

Will we recognize our bad behavior and be able to change it?

It's very hard.

Lovelock is correct in his overall assessment. It's not within our nature to change. As JT would sing, "No way to slow down."

Please, just one more Bombay Sapphire Martini up with a twist before it’s all gone!

[mos6507]

Will we recognize our bad behavior and be able to change it?

How long will that question be open-ended? Until we're down to the last breeding pair? At some point you have to render a verdict on humanity based on the cumulation of individual decisions and their consequences on the planet and our survival.

[Cid_Yama]

I believe civilization was the human response to overpopulation, when the vast numbers of humans could no longer survive on an egalitarian hunter-gatherer basis.

That was the moment when we ceased to live within the balance of nature.

We were quite successful in this respect, supporting a continued expansion of human populations beyond that which the natural environment would have provided for.

We pushed it exponentially further with fossil fuels and the green revolution.

The natural environment cannot support 5% of the population that now exists.

What changes were you proposing? Our success is our downfall having pushed our numbers so far beyond it's natural balance.

[dohboi]

How quickly do fashions change?

Huge numbers of people, nearly all of us in some cases, change basic things about what we wear, what we eat, how we speak...parts of nearly every aspect of our lives.

And we do at least some of this nearly every year, sometimes more frequently.

Change, in fact, is inevitable. The main problem is not that people don't change. People can do nothing other than change. The problem is how to constantly point change in the direction of lightening our load on the living world.

So far, change, driven partly by an enormous advertising industry, has been moving mostly the opposite direction.

Can we imagine that some entity would have the power and interest to move a substantial part of this persuasion industry toward consuming and procreating less?

Nader recently fantasized that the super-rich could combine their considerable wealth to save us. I am doubtful that any help will come from this direction, insanely rich people being--pretty much by definition--insane.

[bobcousins]

On the one hand, if one species could suddenly and universally change its behavior in fundamental ways, it would be the human species. We have adapted to nearly every terrestrial environment on the planet and to many sudden shifts in global climate.

I think it's worth looking at exactly how we adapted to new environments. Really, humans stayed the same, but "adapted" the environment to suit. The method of adaption is to use artifacts which create an artificial environment - in the simple case, a tent or hut provides shelter from the elements, foods we can't eat are processed into forms we can eat.

I agree with Tainter's view that complexity is a problem solving response, the problem at hand being how to create an artificial environment to suit us.

A lot of species modify their environment to a small degree, the notable feature of modern civilization is the massive degree to which we "modify" the environment to suit our physiology and culture.

So the question of adaptability of our culture is somewhat moot, the question is how long can we sustain the artificial environment to suit our culture. I expect that we can continue doing so until a tipping point is reached, either the environment changes beyond a point where we can adapt it, or internal factors restrict our ability to continue adapting the environment.

The first case would be severe global events, such as climate change or volcanic eruption, and in the long term ice age or asteroid impact.

The second case would be anything that reduces our organizational complexity - our "problem solving" ability. This could be political, it could also be forced on us by declining net energy, if we are unable to harness new energy sources.

The message of Tainter is also that we will continue BAU for as long as possible, until we reach the tipping point. Societies rarely voluntarily reduce in complexity because it would be an effective step backwards. Who would vote for that? Instead, they are forced to rapidly reduce complexity, ie collapse.

I think the question of whether we are anywhere near a tipping point is an impossible question to answer. I don't see any good evidence to say we are near it, but that is merely absence of evidence, not evidence either way.

[Lore]

I think the question of whether we are anywhere near a tipping point is an impossible question to answer. I don't see any good evidence to say we are near it, but that is merely absence of evidence, not evidence either way.

Impossible question to answer? All evidence points to the fact that we are IN the early stages of a tipping point. You need to do some more follow up on the many threads here if you can't see the evidence. Take the blinders off.

[bobcousins]

I think the question of whether we are anywhere near a tipping point is an impossible question to answer. I don't see any good evidence to say we are near it, but that is merely absence of evidence, not evidence either way.

Impossible question to answer? All evidence points to the fact that we are IN the early stages of a tipping point. You need to do some more follow up on the many threads here if you can't see the evidence. Take the blinders off.

I have read all the threads, I have seen the same arguments presented ever since the Limits To Growth was published over 30 years ago. Sure lots of people *think* they see signs of the tipping point, but it is only speculation. There is no science of collapse, just hunches.

People have been touting total collapse only "weeks away" for at least 5 years. I used to be a doomer, but not any more. The doomers are the people with the blinders on.

Collapse will not occur in weeks anyway, it will take centuries. It will be impossible to see signs of the tipping point except in retrospect.

[Lore]

I have read all the threads, I have seen the same arguments presented ever since the Limits To Growth was published over 30 years ago. Sure lots of people *think* they see signs of the tipping point, but it is only speculation. There is no science of collapse, just hunches.

People have been touting total collapse only "weeks away" for at least 5 years. I used to be a doomer, but not any more. The doomers are the people with the blinders on.

Collapse will not occur in weeks anyway, it will take centuries. It will be impossible to see signs of the tipping point except in retrospect.

First of all there is plenty of evidence from the scientific community that we are in a tipping point.

1) Peak Oil: The math has been done here ad nauseam . No amount of future magic is going to replace the use, economics and energy density we’ve derived from fossil fuels.

2) The Sixth Extinction: Humanity has increased the natural extinction rate by several hundred times. Double-digit extinction percentages are part of our history, not merely a prediction about the future and this rate is growing.

3) Population Overshoot: The world population in certain countries has already exceeding its steady state. Only a few bad seasons of low food production in export countries stands between these people and starvation. More food for human consumption equals more people; less food for human existence equals less people; and no food, no people.

4) Ground Water Depletion: The world’s aquifers are being sucked dry at an ever growing and alarming rate. See above for the outcome. Already some former growing areas have depleted their ready supply and this is rapidly expanding.

5) Climate Change: The 800 pound gorilla. The planet is warming way too fast, no ifs about it, and it’s predicted to get even warmer, way too fast. Implications of which detrimentally affect all life.

6) Peak Everything Else: It’s not just oil we have to worry about running low on, it’s also rare earth minerals in which we depend on to make many of our new age wonders that are being depleted.

7) Pollution: Garbage circulating in the middle of our oceans, The GOM, etc, enough said. While no single incident reeks global devastation, like termites undermining the foundation of a once solid house they will eventually add to bringing it down.

There are of course many other tipping point concerns playing out and scientifically documented, not simply based on speculation or hunches. All the above are observable and happening now. So your statement is really one of blind faith based on ignoring the scientific evidence. No one in the science community I’m aware of is touting that collapse will happen in 5 weeks. Neither does it take centuries for all the above and more to play out to its obvious conclusion. While we act like addicted smokers, having been warned of the consequences, we all hope somehow to be the one that is left unaffected.

[hillsidedigger]

I have read all the threads, I have seen the same arguments presented ever since the Limits To Growth was published over 30 years ago. Sure lots of people *think* they see signs of the tipping point, but it is only speculation. There is no science of collapse, just hunches.

People have been touting total collapse only "weeks away" for at least 5 years. I used to be a doomer, but not any more. The doomers are the people with the blinders on.

Collapse will not occur in weeks anyway, it will take centuries. It will be impossible to see signs of the tipping point except in retrospect.

First of all there is plenty of evidence from the scientific community that we are in a tipping point.

1) Peak Oil: The math has been done here ad nauseam . No amount of future magic is going to replace the use, economics and energy density we’ve derived from fossil fuels.

2) The Sixth Extinction: Humanity has increased the natural extinction rate by several hundred times. Double-digit extinction percentages are part of our history, not merely a prediction about the future and this rate is growing.

3) Population Overshoot: The world population in certain countries has already exceeding its steady state. Only a few bad seasons of low food production in export countries stands between these people and starvation. More food for human consumption equals more people; less food for human existence equals less people; and no food, no people.

4) Ground Water Depletion: The world’s aquifers are being sucked dry at an ever growing and alarming rate. See above for the outcome. Already some former growing areas have depleted their ready supply and this is rapidly expanding.

5) Climate Change: The 800 pound gorilla. The planet is warming way too fast, no ifs about it, and it’s predicted to get even warmer, way too fast. Implications of which detrimentally affect all life.

6) Peak Everything Else: It’s not just oil we have to worry about running low on, it’s also rare earth minerals in which we depend on to make many of our new age wonders that are being depleted.

7) Pollution: Garbage circulating in the middle of our oceans, The GOM, etc, enough said. While no single incident reeks global devastation, like termites undermining the foundation of a once solid house they will eventually add to bringing it down.

There are of course many other tipping point concerns playing out and scientifically documented, not simply based on speculation or hunches. All the above are observable and happening now. So your statement is really one of blind faith based on ignoring the scientific evidence. No one in the science community I’m aware of is touting that collapse will happen in 5 weeks. Neither does it take centuries for all the above and more to play out to its obvious conclusion. While we act like addicted smokers, having been warned of the consequences, we all hope somehow to be the one that is left unaffected.

But, it would still take maybe another 10 years for matters to become very critical and ugly for most of the world's people unless widespread military conflict breaks out and that could happen today.

[mos6507]

But, it would still take maybe another 10 years for matters to become very critical and ugly for most of the world's people unless widespread military conflict breaks out and that could happen today.

What's your point? We're only allowed to worry about one thing at a time? Certainly war could happen. War could always break out. You can waste your life away speculating who/when/where/how WWIII will start. But a simple passive continuation of BAU is what is going to do us in for sure.

[dohboi]

Bob makes good points about our drive to and ability to alter our environment, an ability enabled by our possession of language (and encouraged by the stories we tell ourselves about how it is our place in the world to control and to fundamentally alter it.)

But humans also have vast abilities to alter their own behaviors. We eat a broader array of foods than any other species. Some one publishes a book (remember the "Atkins Diet"), and millions of us, at least for a while, gave up what for millennia had been considered the "staff of life." If we can give up the very bread on our table for a stupid idea in a book, perhaps we could be convince (perhaps by trick, again appealing to our vanity?) to give up the more destructive aspects of our lifestyle?

I am actually doubtful myself, but I think we should keep in mind this flexible, changeable aspect of language and image mediated human culture.

[bobcousins]

I have read all the threads, I have seen the same arguments presented ever since the Limits To Growth was published over 30 years ago. Sure lots of people *think* they see signs of the tipping point, but it is only speculation. There is no science of collapse, just hunches.

People have been touting total collapse only "weeks away" for at least 5 years. I used to be a doomer, but not any more. The doomers are the people with the blinders on.

Collapse will not occur in weeks anyway, it will take centuries. It will be impossible to see signs of the tipping point except in retrospect.

First of all there is plenty of evidence from the scientific community that we are in a tipping point.

1) Peak Oil: The math has been done here ad nauseam . No amount of future magic is going to replace the use, economics and energy density we’ve derived from fossil fuels.

A tipping point is a point of inflexion. Most of what you describing are not tipping points, but linear increases in various parameters. We have no way of telling where the tipping point is for most of these parameters. We can tell for sure that oil is/has reached a tipping point, but we don't know whether net energy will undergo a similar inflexion. Even then, we can't tell if a peak of net energy will cause catastrophic social disruptions.

Qualitative assessments are just crystal ball gazing. Take pollution. I agree it's bad, and getting worse. But tell me a number for the level of pollution now, and the number where the tipping point is. You can't, no one can. So while we see the same trend, it is a pure guesswork whether a) there exists a tipping point b) whether we are about to approach it.

You know, I used to be like you, when I got my news and opinion from po.com. There is a whole raft of bad stuff going on and it all seems to point to imminent disaster. Then a guy called JD came along and started asking awkward questions. Of course he got banned, so I headed over to his blog to rip him to shreds. There I was presented with a well-reasoned alternative view, and I realized after the rhetoric is removed there was a different way to see the same parameters.

The thing is, speaking as a former doomer, I would tend to agree with you that wherever we look, humans are screwing things up. I can also accept that this indicates that we *may* be headed for a tipping point. But it is far from certain that this is the *only* way to look at it. We may be able to avoid the tipping point, we may not even be anywhere near a tipping point.

The concerned citizen fears that if we don't make dire predictions, then humans won't be persuaded to change their ways. Well, I have some news. Humans won't change by persuasion, only if they are forced to. BAU will continue whether we like it or not. This may mean humans run off a cliff, or maybe not, we can't tell except with hindsight. No amount of jumping up and down saying "watch out for the cliff!!" will make a blind bit of difference.

[bobcousins]

Bob makes good points about our drive to and ability to alter our environment, an ability enabled by our possession of language (and encouraged by the stories we tell ourselves about how it is our place in the world to control and to fundamentally alter it.)

But humans also have vast abilities to alter their own behaviors. We eat a broader array of foods than any other species. Some one publishes a book (remember the "Atkins Diet"), and millions of us, at least for a while, gave up what for millennia had been considered the "staff of life." If we can give up the very bread on our table for a stupid idea in a book, perhaps we could be convince (perhaps by trick, again appealing to our vanity?) to give up the more destructive aspects of our lifestyle?

I am actually doubtful myself, but I think we should keep in mind this flexible, changeable aspect of language and image mediated human culture.

Actually I think you make a hugely important point. Our ability to assimilate, analyze and disseminate information is truly unprecedented. That one feature alone renders any comparision with other species a step change different.

It is not a passive activity either, both in scientific and commercial circles there is a huge incentive to identify and exploit knowledge, the former mostly for kudos, the latter mostly for wealth. The very fact we are able to sit around and intelligently speculate 100's of years into the future means that we are at least able to identify approaching threats. The dinossars had no concept of asteroids, we are actively tracking them. That does not mean we can prevent a global disasters, but we are vastly more aware than the dinosaurs.

The ability of global capital to invest rapidly in new technology is amazing. Again that does not mean we are guaranteed to find technology to solve our problems, but that if there is a solution it is highly likely to be found. We are barely at peak oil, and commerce is investing in solar, wind power, and scientists and R&D departments are actively looking for materials and techniques to improve their efficiency and utility. We have only spent a fraction of time and effort on renewables that have been spent on developing fossil fuel technology over the past 200 years.

Tainter describes complexity as a problem solving response. There is no doubt our society is the most complex ever and by extension the most capable at problem solving. No government wants to sit by and watch their citizens starving and freezing in the dark. You can be sure that every problem solving ability will be brought to bear. I underline there is no guarantee of success, but to think humans will simply go out with a whimper is to severely underestimate our ability to respond to a crisis.

[Cid_Yama]

We are way past tipping points, Bob. Yes, BAU will not change. We are about to enter a period of worldwide famine, mass migrations, desertification and water shortage, and population die-off. Then things this will get really bad as we hit peak heat stresses over most of the planet, where it becomes impossible to shed metabolic heat.

I can tell you exactly how this willl play out as the East Siberian Arctic Shelf is about to release more than enough methane to kill us all off.

Enjoy your delusion of a future of no limits and everything will work out. It won't be long before reality rears it's ugly head, and those without hope start blaming and attacking each other.

To quote Semiletov, “We can do nothing about it, of course.”

[Lore]

A tipping point is a point of inflexion. Most of what you describing are not tipping points, but linear increases in various parameters. We have no way of telling where the tipping point is for most of these parameters. We can tell for sure that oil is/has reached a tipping point, but we don't know whether net energy will undergo a similar inflexion. Even then, we can't tell if a peak of net energy will cause catastrophic social disruptions.

Qualitative assessments are just crystal ball gazing. Take pollution. I agree it's bad, and getting worse. But tell me a number for the level of pollution now, and the number where the tipping point is. You can't, no one can. So while we see the same trend, it is a pure guesswork whether a) there exists a tipping point b) whether we are about to approach it.

You know, I used to be like you, when I got my news and opinion from po.com. There is a whole raft of bad stuff going on and it all seems to point to imminent disaster. Then a guy called JD came along and started asking awkward questions. Of course he got banned, so I headed over to his blog to rip him to shreds. There I was presented with a well-reasoned alternative view, and I realized after the rhetoric is removed there was a different way to see the same parameters.

The thing is, speaking as a former doomer, I would tend to agree with you that wherever we look, humans are screwing things up. I can also accept that this indicates that we *may* be headed for a tipping point. But it is far from certain that this is the *only* way to look at it. We may be able to avoid the tipping point, we may not even be anywhere near a tipping point.

The concerned citizen fears that if we don't make dire predictions, then humans won't be persuaded to change their ways. Well, I have some news. Humans won't change by persuasion, only if they are forced to. BAU will continue whether we like it or not. This may mean humans run off a cliff, or maybe not, we can't tell except with hindsight. No amount of jumping up and down saying "watch out for the cliff!!" will make a blind bit of difference.

You're talking semantics. A tipping point doesn't have to be an exact second in time. To deny the science is to deny that we have reached certain milestones for which there is no return from and there is plenty of evidence of that. For instance, it’s believed that 350 ppm (450 a certainty) was the tipping point for CO2 emissions, extinction means that particular species will never be seen again, there exists plenty of places where more people live then the surrounding environment can sustain without a steady external support system, which means they have overshot their carrying capacity, we have either passed or are in the tipping point of Peak Oil,… and so on.

Avoidance is a mute point since we have entered into many of these tipping points already. Some will take years to play out while others will crash like a bad day in the stock markets.

The fact that not much of anything will be done about the above problems until well beyond the tipping point is a whole other discussion.