Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Going back to caverns or beyond the stars

What's on your mind?
General interest discussions, not necessarily related to depletion.

Re: Going back to caverns or beyond the stars

Unread postby Narz » Wed 06 May 2009, 14:28:00

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Hermes', 'W')ow. Why did I bother talking to Narz?

Lesson learned.

Evidently not since you posted again to get my attention right after this post.

You prefer to preach only to the choir who won't question your false assumptions or your sketchy logic? If so, goto a forum for that, while you're here you shouldn't expect everyone to glad-hand you.

I think though, the answer to your question is you need attention & reassurance. I'm afraid I can't offer you much of either.

If your own neo-tribal life were so satisfying you wouldn't be crying for attention here online. The only reason I'm here is my life is a goddamn mess right now. If I had half the resources you did I wouldn't be yapping online.

It's a shame so many people who want community the most don't have personalities suited for it & many of the ones you do manage to do well enough within the system to not want to admit to themselves it's not working.

Why can't people seek something better without making a godawful dumbass religion out of it. It's kind of disheartning. :(
“Seek simplicity but distrust it”
User avatar
Narz
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2360
Joined: Sat 25 Nov 2006, 04:00:00
Location: the belly of the beast (New Jersey)

Re: Going back to caverns or beyond the stars

Unread postby Ludi » Wed 06 May 2009, 15:04:45

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Shannymara', 'B')reeding is the most natural thing in the world, just like death. One of the things I hate the most about our civilization is how it forces us to suppress and subvert our instincts.



I don't think I have the breeding instinct. :|
Ludi
 

Re: Going back to caverns or beyond the stars

Unread postby Ludi » Wed 06 May 2009, 15:11:40

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Shannymara', ' ') Most of us do.



Yes. It just looked like you were saying my instincts were being subverted or something. 8O

I don't know if there's an instinct to have a ton of kids, though. Reading about settlers versus natives in North America, the settler women had more babies than the natives.
Ludi
 

Re: Going back to caverns or beyond the stars

Unread postby mos6507 » Wed 06 May 2009, 15:40:21

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Shannymara', '
')We are overpopulated because of industrial civilization and industrial agriculture, not because we are stupid.


We created industrial civilization and agriculture. For us to create a system that is unsustainable by itself is not that bad considering the short-term benefits, but to not have some kind of plan to gently ease out of it without a massive die-off is stupid, not to mention immoral.
mos6507
 

Re: Going back to caverns or beyond the stars

Unread postby Ludi » Wed 06 May 2009, 15:42:08

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Narz', '
')If your own neo-tribal life were so satisfying you wouldn't be crying for attention here online. The only reason I'm here is my life is a goddamn mess right now. If I had half the resources you did I wouldn't be yapping online.



I dunno, Narz. Hermes hardly posts at all. Both you guys cut each other some slack, ok?
Ludi
 
Top

Re: Going back to caverns or beyond the stars

Unread postby Ludi » Wed 06 May 2009, 15:43:28

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mos6507', ' ')For us to create a system that is unsustainable by itself is not that bad considering the short-term benefits, but to not have some kind of plan to gently ease out of it without a massive die-off is stupid, not to mention immoral.



There are lots of plans. Tough to implement them, though.
Ludi
 
Top

Re: Going back to caverns or beyond the stars

Unread postby yesplease » Wed 06 May 2009, 23:06:41

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mos6507', 'I')f we can have 10 billion w/o the crazy rate of species extinction we see today--if only we had the guts to do the right thing, then why can't you extend your clarion call to population reduction? I mean, why go to such extreme effort to reduce our per capita environmental footprint just to enable our population to expand unrestricted to 10 billion? Wouldn't it be a hell of a lot easier to engineer a comfortable life for, maybe, 4 billion by 2050 and 2 billion by 2100 rather than having to walk a literal tightrope at 10 billion at 2050 and then be left having to make ANOTHER hail mary pass to enable yet another population doubling? If the final goal is sustainability, population must, at the very least, flatline, otherwise humanity is just in kick-the-can mode and will eventually crash down the line.
I don't see much point in reduction because people tend to, sooner or later, reach some sort of balance w/ their environment, so the only thing fewer people will likely bring is greater rates of consumption/pollution/etc proportional to the reduction in population up to whatever limits there are.

In terms of another population doubling at ~10 billion, that's not where population is headed. Hell, w/o GW's change in overseas family planning/BC policy, we probably wouldn't be at 6.77 billion right now. Based on the policy and decline rates in fertility we've had over the last few decades, population will hit ~9 billion by 2050 and ~10 billion by 2150, declining after that. Granted, if that turns around, then we should make to appropriate changes to policy to insure it continues on it's current path, but as they say, so far so good.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Professor Membrane', ' ')Not now son, I'm making ... TOAST!
User avatar
yesplease
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3765
Joined: Tue 03 Oct 2006, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Going back to caverns or beyond the stars

Unread postby mos6507 » Wed 06 May 2009, 23:18:24

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yesplease', '
')so far so good.


It's good if you think the planet isn't already suffering due to overpopulation or if you do that it can just kind of limp along wounded until we get our act together. It seems like every vital sign of the planet is showing signs of severe stress. If that's not at least partly an unavoidable consequence of population, we better damn well transform society however it needs to be transformed in order to remedy it, because we don't have the 100+ years you think it will take for population to gently level off and start declining.
mos6507
 
Top

Re: Going back to caverns or beyond the stars

Unread postby yesplease » Thu 07 May 2009, 00:09:58

We don't need 100 year for population to level off, what we need is a change in how population behaves. Even if we nuke 6 billion people off the face of the planet, given how we've seen and see people behave, the billion or so left will just increase their impact on the planet proportionally. What we need to do is change to some extent what we do and how we do it depending on how much it impacts our environment, and let the birth rate continue to decline.

P.S. The planet will be fine. It was fine before we were here, and it'll be fine after we're gone. It's only limping along insofar as it's limped along many times before we were even a glimmer in a chimps eye. It's the people who are gonna be screwed if things don't change.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Professor Membrane', ' ')Not now son, I'm making ... TOAST!
User avatar
yesplease
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3765
Joined: Tue 03 Oct 2006, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Going back to caverns or beyond the stars

Unread postby Ludi » Thu 07 May 2009, 08:47:45

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yesplease', ']')I don't see much point in reduction because people tend to, sooner or later, reach some sort of balance w/ their environment



Yes, it is called "collapse and die-off."

Looks like an excellent strategy to me! :| <<<<<<sarcasm
Last edited by Ludi on Thu 07 May 2009, 08:49:31, edited 1 time in total.
Ludi
 
Top

Re: Going back to caverns or beyond the stars

Unread postby Ludi » Thu 07 May 2009, 08:48:33

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yesplease', 'W')e don't need 100 year for population to level off, what we need is a change in how population behaves.


I agree. We could start today.

But -

How successful have you been so far at getting population to behave differently?
Ludi
 
Top

Re: Going back to caverns or beyond the stars

Unread postby mos6507 » Thu 07 May 2009, 09:38:38

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yesplease', 'W')e don't need 100 year for population to level off, what we need is a change in how population behaves.


Too vague, Yesplease. The reason you're called a cornucopian is that you just don't fill in the details. There have been studies shown how as the population increases, in order to "do no harm" we'd have to all live at the standard of living of the average Bangladeshi or similar backwaters country. So clearly as the population goes up, the degree of powerdown required also goes up. What we have now is a case of energy hogs in the 1st world at the expense of the masses in the 3rd world having to live a depressed standard of living to prevent insta-doom. There just isn't enough carrying capacity to go around to enable everyone to live what most of us would consider to be a comfortable modern existence.

So trotting out "lifestyle changes" as some kind of magic wand that can always compensate for whatever population size we reach is bogus. The lifestyle changes will eventually reach dystopian levels, all in the name of AVOIDING the elephant in the room.

Image

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yesplease', '
')the billion or so left will just increase their impact on the planet proportionally.


Again, you are being vague. How would that happen exactly? Did you ever see the movie Brewster's Millions where Richard Pryor has to spend x amount of money in a short period of time? If you have enough surplus, a single person has to bend over backwards to blow through it. I mean, I believe in Jevon's Paradox, but I don't think if we wiped the population down to a billion or less that everyone remaining would instantly feel compelled to drive Hummers around all day or go hunting and wipe out all wild mammals. There is a point beyond which per capita human environmental footprint reaches a level of diminishing returns and people just won't go any farther with rampant consumption.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yesplease', '
') What we need to do is change to some extent what we do and how we do it depending on how much it impacts our environment, and let the birth rate continue to decline.


That's a faith-based argument, that the birth rate will continue to decline--because, well, that's what it's doing (ever so slowly of course). If some of these lifestyle changes required to avoid doom are going to be met with serious resistance, and you KNOW it will, why not also focus on population control while you're at it?

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yesplease', '
')It's the people who are gonna be screwed if things don't change.


And that change should incorporate the elephant in the room otherwise we're actually making things more miserable for ourselves.
mos6507
 
Top

Re: Going back to caverns or beyond the stars

Unread postby WildRose » Thu 07 May 2009, 11:10:24

For anyone who is interested in reading about transition towns:

http://www.celsias.com/article/introduc ... ion-towns/

The link is from a UK initiative. Several towns in the UK are adopting
low-energy lifestyle; I recall reading about them a couple of years ago.
User avatar
WildRose
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1881
Joined: Wed 21 Jun 2006, 03:00:00

Re: Going back to caverns or beyond the stars

Unread postby Ludi » Thu 07 May 2009, 12:59:56

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('WildRose', 'F')or anyone who is interested in reading about transition towns:

http://www.celsias.com/article/introduc ... ion-towns/

The link is from a UK initiative. Several towns in the UK are adopting
low-energy lifestyle; I recall reading about them a couple of years ago.



Here's a link for Transition USA: http://transitionus.ning.com/

More transition plans can be found in:

"Permaculture: a designers manual" by Bill Mollison

"Solviva" by Anna Edey http://www.solviva.com/

http://www.communitysolution.org/
Ludi
 
Top

Re: Going back to caverns or beyond the stars

Unread postby Narz » Thu 07 May 2009, 13:40:09

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Ludi', 'I') dunno, Narz. Hermes hardly posts at all. Both you guys cut each other some slack, ok?

He posted twice in a row. 2nd one being a smartass after he said "I'm wasting my time with you". That's invitation for a smackdown to me.

And anyway, what kind of neo-primitive hangs out trolling on an internet forum. If that's the best he can do with his time it's not much of an advertisement for his lifestyle.
“Seek simplicity but distrust it”
User avatar
Narz
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2360
Joined: Sat 25 Nov 2006, 04:00:00
Location: the belly of the beast (New Jersey)
Top

Re: Going back to caverns or beyond the stars

Unread postby yesplease » Thu 07 May 2009, 15:05:02

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Ludi', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yesplease', ']')I don't see much point in reduction because people tend to, sooner or later, reach some sort of balance w/ their environment
Yes, it is called "collapse and die-off."

Looks like an excellent strategy to me! :| <<<<<<sarcasm
Or they could simply reduce their impacts, or a little bit of both.

But you're right, it's much easier to drive our SUVs to our McMansions and let everything "collapse and die-off" like you mention. ;) (kidding)

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Ludi', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yesplease', 'W')e don't need 100 year for population to level off, what we need is a change in how population behaves.


I agree. We could start today.

But -

How successful have you been so far at getting population to behave differently?
Given my exposure and resources, I'd say I've been fairly successful.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Professor Membrane', ' ')Not now son, I'm making ... TOAST!
User avatar
yesplease
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3765
Joined: Tue 03 Oct 2006, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Going back to caverns or beyond the stars

Unread postby yesplease » Thu 07 May 2009, 15:07:56

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mos6507', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yesplease', 'W')e don't need 100 year for population to level off, what we need is a change in how population behaves.


Too vague, Yesplease. The reason you're called a cornucopian is that you just don't fill in the details. There have been studies shown how as the population increases, in order to "do no harm" we'd have to all live at the standard of living of the average Bangladeshi or similar backwaters country. So clearly as the population goes up, the degree of powerdown required also goes up.
What studies are those?

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mos6507', 'W')hat we have now is a case of energy hogs in the 1st world at the expense of the masses in the 3rd world having to live a depressed standard of living to prevent insta-doom. There just isn't enough carrying capacity to go around to enable everyone to live what most of us would consider to be a comfortable modern existence.
There aren't enough resources to plunk a couple SUVs in every McMansion that can wrastle up a Meaty McMeatMeat dinner every night, however there are enough resources for 10 billion people to have comfortable personal transportation, a nice climate controlled dwelling, plenty of food, and so on. There's a difference by a factor of about twenty five to fifty in energy consumption when comparing a big American lifestyle to a low energy version of the same thing.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mos6507', 'S')o trotting out "lifestyle changes" as some kind of magic wand that can always compensate for whatever population size we reach is bogus. The lifestyle changes will eventually reach dystopian levels, all in the name of AVOIDING the elephant in the room.
Driving a small vehicle, eating less meat, and living in a smaller well built house is dystopian? Have you hugged your SUV today? ;)
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mos6507', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yesplease', '
')the billion or so left will just increase their impact on the planet proportionally.
Again, you are being vague. How would that happen exactly? Did you ever see the movie Brewster's Millions where Richard Pryor has to spend x amount of money in a short period of time? If you have enough surplus, a single person has to bend over backwards to blow through it. I mean, I believe in Jevon's Paradox, but I don't think if we wiped the population down to a billion or less that everyone remaining would instantly feel compelled to drive Hummers around all day or go hunting and wipe out all wild mammals. There is a point beyond which per capita human environmental footprint reaches a level of diminishing returns and people just won't go any farther with rampant consumption.At a billion people all we would need is the same lifestyle someone in the upper working class and up part of America. A larger house, SUV, and so on is all a billion people would need to have the exact same impact as the ~7 billion now. Considering that the only thing preventing more people from engaging in this type of lifestyle is the scarcity of resources, w/ only a billion people, after the dust has settled, there's no reason to think people won't behave like they have behaved in the past.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mos6507', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yesplease', 'W')hat we need to do is change to some extent what we do and how we do it depending on how much it impacts our environment, and let the birth rate continue to decline.
That's a faith-based argument, that the birth rate will continue to decline--because, well, that's what it's doing (ever so slowly of course). If some of these lifestyle changes required to avoid doom are going to be met with serious resistance, and you KNOW it will, why not also focus on population control while you're at it?I never said it would 100% fer sure decline 4eva, just that it's declining now, so there's no reason to screw with it. If this changes, then we can just policy so the trend continues. Pragmatism isn't faith btw.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mos6507', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yesplease', 'I')t's the people who are gonna be screwed if things don't change.And that change should incorporate the elephant in the room otherwise we're actually making things more miserable for ourselves.The elephant in the room is population and resource consumption, not just one or the other. Given that attempts at radically reducing the population would probably result in destabilization and exacerbate resource consumption (Give it up for WW III!), it's probably a lot easier to downsize, eat less meat, and drive small vehicles.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Professor Membrane', ' ')Not now son, I'm making ... TOAST!
User avatar
yesplease
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3765
Joined: Tue 03 Oct 2006, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Going back to caverns or beyond the stars

Unread postby mos6507 » Thu 07 May 2009, 15:39:21

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yesplease', 'W')hat studies are those?


Quick google search: Here is an essay from Hardin. He does kind of speak in nerdspeak. I don't like his rhetorical style. But that's the best I can do in a 2 minute google search. There are many others that talk about how standard of living has to collectively go down in order to enable larger and larger population sizes. It's not rocket science.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yesplease', '
')there are enough resources for 10 billion people to have comfortable personal transportation, a nice climate controlled dwelling, plenty of food, and so on.


What studies are those?

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yesplease', '
')There's a difference by a factor of about twenty five to fifty in energy consumption when comparing a big American lifestyle to a low energy version of the same thing.


Yes, but if you concede that the earth is in overshoot, we can't just take a snapshot of the world as it is and sigh in relief that there is such a wide gap between american lifestyle and the 3rd world. The actual average standard of living we'd have to adopt in order to not kill the planet in a matter of decades is much much lower. Powerdown is something we'd have to do with or without fossil fuel depletion.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yesplease', '
')Driving a small vehicle, eating less meat, and living in a smaller well built house is dystopian? Have you hugged your SUV today? ;)


And what makes you think that's going to be enough?

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yesplease', '
')At a billion people all we would need is the same lifestyle someone in the upper working class and up part of America.


But we'll never get there with your plan, becuase you keep wanting to sidestep the population issue.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yesplease', '
')I never said it would 100% fer sure decline 4eva, just that it's declining now, so there's no reason to screw with it. If this changes, then we can just policy so the trend continues. Pragmatism isn't faith btw.


So you think a gentle decline in the population growth rate is enough? You really think we have that kind of time to wait and see what happens? The limits to growth models tend to predict a massive die off mid century. You really don't see us going over a cliff somehow?

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yesplease', '
')it's probably a lot easier to downsize, eat less meat, and drive small vehicles.

But it doesn't solve the problem if population keeps growing or we hit some kind of Leibig's law of the minimum clusterf*ck. We're really living on borrowed time. We can't afford to tackle this in a half-assed fashion and cross our fingers. We've got one shot to do this right, and many here feel we've already missed our window of opportunity. We really should err on the side of caution here.
mos6507
 
Top

Re: Going back to caverns or beyond the stars

Unread postby Narz » Thu 07 May 2009, 16:44:21

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Shannymara', 'B')ecause everything is black and white, and we all have to be perfect or we and our opinions are worthless, right, Narz? And because it's easy to become a pure anarchist hunter gatherer type person, and not have to pay bills, or deal with ownership, or any of that stuff, so obviously anyone who sees that as an ideal yet still uses the internet must be really messed up and immoral.

Grow up.

No, you grow up! :razz: :evil:

I'm not expecting anyone to be perfect, I'm just saying if you're gonna be talking about how satisfying community life is & then be a jerk on the Internet... I dunno, something's not adding up.

I don't see things in black & white, I'm not an -ist & not into -isms. I just live my life & try to call it as I see it. :)
“Seek simplicity but distrust it”
User avatar
Narz
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2360
Joined: Sat 25 Nov 2006, 04:00:00
Location: the belly of the beast (New Jersey)
Top

PreviousNext

Return to Open Topic Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

cron