[onlooker]

P, because this ship like the Titanic cannot be turned around or deviated. So they are trying to maintain business as usual as long as possible. We are truly in a bind as a human species are we not?

[onlooker]

Tell me, since 2005 when all the dire consequences of various perils like peak oil, GW, economic collapse, environmental destruction were known, what measures has global civilization enacted or taken to prepare or to deal with all this. NONE. It is maybe why I continue posting I am frozen perhaps like all of you in a time period somewhere around 2005 when maybe their was still time to do something about all this. Now I do not think so. As Ibon has stated consequences will occur and we will muddle through as best we can. I think what unites us all on this site is we proactive and diligent people with regards to the eventualities of life and are stupefied by humanities both lack of awareness of these issues and even more so lack of action to head them off. Oh well hungry going to eat something. haha.

[ennui2]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('onlooker', '
')what measures has global civilization enacted or taken to prepare or to deal with all this.

[onlooker]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ennui2', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('onlooker', '
')what measures has global civilization enacted or taken to prepare or to deal with all this.

[ennui2]

But considering that this is a dilemma and not something that has painless solutions, it's all just a matter of opinion on what constitutes positive mitigation and what doesn't. For instance, look at the reaction to China's abandonment of the one-child policy. Very few brought up the real-world risks of overpopulation. They focused on the damage to freedom and attempts by the Chinese to have just male babies. There isn't any mitigation that would be universally adopted by the public because, whether people want to admit it here or not, BAU status quo has a lot of advantages to Joe Public. When Obama gave his speech about KeystoneXL, he tried to counter the prevailing opinion that green-tech is bad for the economy. But there are free-market types that simply don't want government to favor technology, you know, let's not ban incandescent bulbs or subsidize EVs, because this interferes with the invisible hand of the free market. You see what I mean? It's easy to sit here and just say "look. We're not doing anything!" But then you realize WHY that gridlock exists. People have very strong opinions about the way things should be, which usually comes from a value-system that is pretty far away from the laws of ecology or thermodynamics.

[onlooker]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'P')eople have very strong opinions about the way things should be, which usually comes from a value-system that is pretty far away from the laws of ecology or thermodynamics.

[ennui2]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', '
')Ennuie might want listen to his own advice and stop lecturing on issues he doesn't understand.

[onlooker]

So true we HAD the means to powerdown at least here in the Western Hemisphere but we have not done anything in this respect to what Pstarr refers to permaculture etc. So now we are supposed to believe in some new techo-magic to come rescue us when the very foundations of this civilization are approaching a terminal phase. Who Ennui is being less realistic here. In fact your just one step below Kaisers beam me up Scotty illusions in fantasy concoctions. For us true realists it has not been easy reconciling this present we are in, but that is the nature of reality you either see it for what it truly is, or your not seeing it.

[ennui2]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', 'D')ude, intelligent folks gave up on permaculture and powerdown years ago. Not because those models were not solutions to the peak-oil dilemma (they were) but because we ran out of time. You must not have kept up with things here since you last quit.

[ralfy]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ennui2', 'B')ut considering that this is a dilemma and not something that has painless solutions, it's all just a matter of opinion on what constitutes positive mitigation and what doesn't. For instance, look at the reaction to China's abandonment of the one-child policy. Very few brought up the real-world risks of overpopulation. They focused on the damage to freedom and attempts by the Chinese to have just male babies. There isn't any mitigation that would be universally adopted by the public because, whether people want to admit it here or not, BAU status quo has a lot of advantages to Joe Public. When Obama gave his speech about KeystoneXL, he tried to counter the prevailing opinion that green-tech is bad for the economy. But there are free-market types that simply don't want government to favor technology, you know, let's not ban incandescent bulbs or subsidize EVs, because this interferes with the invisible hand of the free market. You see what I mean? It's easy to sit here and just say "look. We're not doing anything!" But then you realize WHY that gridlock exists. People have very strong opinions about the way things should be, which usually comes from a value-system that is pretty far away from the laws of ecology or thermodynamics.

[ralfy]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ennui2', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', '
')Ennuie might want listen to his own advice and stop lecturing on issues he doesn't understand.

[ralfy]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ennui2', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', 'D')ude, intelligent folks gave up on permaculture and powerdown years ago. Not because those models were not solutions to the peak-oil dilemma (they were) but because we ran out of time. You must not have kept up with things here since you last quit.

[Pops]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ennui2', 'T')hat's what Pops should be insisting in these feuds but for whatever reason he refuses to weigh in.

[ennui2]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ralfy', '
')If they are not solutions, then what is the point of discussing them?