I find that most predictions for the life of most of the resources we are using on this planet are based in the very short term and are very wasteful. Mankind has existed for thousands of years and for our descendends to survives we should be planning for there future. With this in mind I would propose that a United Nations body be formed called the MILLENIUM COUNCIL. This council would look at all forms of activity on earth to see if they are sustainable for the next thousand years. The MILLENIUM COUNCIL would have powers to look at the following and make strong recommendation:
Population levels
Energy use
Sustainable use of resouces
Transport
Trade
Envirement
If we do not do this then we are no better than animals that mindlessly expand than die back because they have depleted their envirement
PeakOil is You
Mankinds Future
First unread post • 14 posts
• Page 1 of 1
Mankinds Future
by Kiwismith » Sun 27 Apr 2008, 02:35:51
-
Kiwismith - Wood
- Posts: 1
- Joined: Sun 27 Apr 2008, 03:00:00
Re: Mankinds Future
by BigTex » Sun 27 Apr 2008, 02:55:41
I appreciate the sentiment, but I'm afraid this is what the annual office party for the Millennium Council would look like:
I don't think the United Nations is the place to look for answers to this one. I'm not sure there is any government solution at any level, given that no government of which I am aware, nor the citizenry of any government, has recognized the fundamental problem of exponential growth assumptions in a finite world.
***
By the way, welcome to the site! Nice first post.
I don't think the United Nations is the place to look for answers to this one. I'm not sure there is any government solution at any level, given that no government of which I am aware, nor the citizenry of any government, has recognized the fundamental problem of exponential growth assumptions in a finite world.
***
By the way, welcome to the site! Nice first post.
-
BigTex - Intermediate Crude
- Posts: 3858
- Joined: Thu 03 Aug 2006, 03:00:00
- Location: Graceland
Re: Mankinds Future
by Judgie » Sun 27 Apr 2008, 04:47:23
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Kiwismith', 'I') find that most predictions for the life of most of the resources we are using on this planet are based in the very short term and are very wasteful. Mankind has existed for thousands of years and for our descendends to survives we should be planning for there future. With this in mind I would propose that a United Nations body be formed called the MILLENIUM COUNCIL. This council would look at all forms of activity on earth to see if they are sustainable for the next thousand years. The MILLENIUM COUNCIL would have powers to look at the following and make strong recommendation:
Population levels
Energy use
Sustainable use of resouces
Transport
Trade
Envirement
If we do not do this then we are no better than animals that mindlessly expand than die back because they have depleted their envirement
Population levels
Energy use
Sustainable use of resouces
Transport
Trade
Envirement
If we do not do this then we are no better than animals that mindlessly expand than die back because they have depleted their envirement
This has all been discussed to death on here since 2004. Please use the search function to make sure that there is not already a post/s like yours before posting.
Cheers
"That the cream cannot help but always rise up to the top, well I say, <censored by peakoil.com> floats"
Jarvis Cocker - "Running the World"
Jarvis Cocker - "Running the World"
- Judgie
- Coal
- Posts: 418
- Joined: Mon 07 May 2007, 03:00:00
- Location: Adelaide, South Australia
Re: Mankinds Future
by ohanian » Sun 27 Apr 2008, 05:09:12
According to Lovelock, Mankind has a wonderful future.
All mankind shall come together to make a circle.
The Arctic Circle.
"Such at least is James Lovelock's fear. The esteemed - if controversial - environmentalist and futurologist (he prefers to be called a planetary physician) also believes that by the middle of this century, the America-sized chunk of floating ice that currently covers the Arctic will melt. As a result, the current habitat of polar bears will eventually be the place where we, or our probably very fed-up descendants, live out their pitiful existences. "Most life will move up to the Arctic basin because only it and a few islands will remain habitable," says Lovelock, who is most famous for coming up with the so-called Gaia hypothesis - the idea that the Earth functions as some kind of living super-organism." - 15th March 2007
All mankind shall come together to make a circle.
The Arctic Circle.
"Such at least is James Lovelock's fear. The esteemed - if controversial - environmentalist and futurologist (he prefers to be called a planetary physician) also believes that by the middle of this century, the America-sized chunk of floating ice that currently covers the Arctic will melt. As a result, the current habitat of polar bears will eventually be the place where we, or our probably very fed-up descendants, live out their pitiful existences. "Most life will move up to the Arctic basin because only it and a few islands will remain habitable," says Lovelock, who is most famous for coming up with the so-called Gaia hypothesis - the idea that the Earth functions as some kind of living super-organism." - 15th March 2007
-
ohanian - Heavy Crude
- Posts: 1553
- Joined: Sun 17 Oct 2004, 03:00:00
Re: Mankinds Future
by FourOfSwords » Sun 27 Apr 2008, 10:37:57
Mankinds Future...think Morlok and Eloi...
Alex
Alex
-
FourOfSwords - Lignite
- Posts: 375
- Joined: Sun 05 Mar 2006, 04:00:00
- Location: East edge of the Milky Way
Re: Mankinds Future
by Ferretlover » Sun 27 Apr 2008, 10:52:29
Welcome, Kiwismith.
You've managed to find a seat down in front for the show.
Enjoy!
You've managed to find a seat down in front for the show.
Enjoy!
"Open the gates of hell!" ~Morgan Freeman's character in the movie, Olympus Has Fallen.
- Ferretlover
- Elite
- Posts: 5852
- Joined: Wed 13 Jun 2007, 03:00:00
- Location: Hundreds of miles further inland
Re: Mankinds Future
by wisconsin_cur » Sun 27 Apr 2008, 10:58:08
imagine a picture of a sharecropper's shack
Last edited by wisconsin_cur on Mon 28 Apr 2008, 10:50:25, edited 1 time in total.
http://www.thenewfederalistpapers.com
-
wisconsin_cur - Light Sweet Crude
- Posts: 4576
- Joined: Thu 10 May 2007, 03:00:00
- Location: 45 degrees North. 883 feet above sealevel.
Re: Mankinds Future
by AgentR » Mon 28 Apr 2008, 04:25:10
What part of 10 billion medium weight predators, eating thousands of years of biological productivity annually, leaves any doubt, in anyone's mind, about what the future holds.
Whether its in our lifetime or not, I would never claim to know.... Whether it is geologically soon, is certain.
bloom, bottleneck, die-off, reset.
Whether its in our lifetime or not, I would never claim to know.... Whether it is geologically soon, is certain.
bloom, bottleneck, die-off, reset.
Yes, we are. As we are.
And so shall we remain; Until the end.
And so shall we remain; Until the end.
-
AgentR - Heavy Crude
- Posts: 1946
- Joined: Fri 06 Oct 2006, 03:00:00
- Location: East Texas
Re: Mankinds Future
by allenwrench » Mon 28 Apr 2008, 10:46:02
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Kiwismith', 'I') find that most predictions for the life of most of the resources we are using on this planet are based in the very short term and are very wasteful. Mankind has existed for thousands of years and for our descendends to survives we should be planning for there future. With this in mind I would propose that a United Nations body be formed called the MILLENIUM COUNCIL. This council would look at all forms of activity on earth to see if they are sustainable for the next thousand years. The MILLENIUM COUNCIL would have powers to look at the following and make strong recommendation:
Population levels
Energy use
Sustainable use of resouces
Transport
Trade
Envirement
If we do not do this then we are no better than animals that mindlessly expand than die back because they have depleted their envirement
Population levels
Energy use
Sustainable use of resouces
Transport
Trade
Envirement
If we do not do this then we are no better than animals that mindlessly expand than die back because they have depleted their envirement
Nice idea, but it isn't going to happen.
We are worse than any animal my friend. No other animal destroys its environment except mankind. We are the only ones that do not accept and live within our comfortable means. We not only debt with our finances we debt with our environment. What we are borrowing in terms of petroleum, coal and natural gas takes millions of years for nature to make. Yet we are using it all up in just a couple hundred years...we can never pay it back.
Thoreau once said when people invited him to dinner they 'put their pride' in how fancy and expensive a meal they could make. Whereas he put his pride in how simple and inexpensive a meal he could make.
Where do we put our pride?
We surely don't put it in living within our means and in balance with nature.
The world is in a death spiral. It is just how we have built our world over the years.
It would be one thing if we all reverted back to rural living, burning trees for fuel and housing and living within our comfortable means allotted to us by nature, as our ancestors did back in the day. But seven billion people can't burn the trees!
Our world built on steroids would collapse with your proposals. Everyone's retirement fund would be next to worthless. Too much vested interest to do anything else. And the sick minded politicians are so delusional and ego based to adopt such drastic measures as you propose.
I posted about population control to another group and one responder commented "if eating babies is right I want to be wrong."
http://dieoff.org/
People like to talk about how to fix global warming and peak oil. Well, nothing can be done about either of these topics other than 'talk about' them.
Humans are too invested is delusion and money to do a damn thing. And to do anything substantive would cause a financial and population backlash of unimaginable proportions.
Lets look at just 'a token move' in the right direction...a move that wont fix a thing, but would 'buy us' a little more time.
Can we cut back on GNP by 25%?
Cut back on utility use at home by 25%
Cut back on driving by 25%?
Cut back on consumption whether it be food or hard goods by 25%?
Cut back on interstate trucking by 25%?
Cut back on air travel by 25%
And cut back in all related areas that use energy or petrochemicals by 25%?
ABSOLUTELY NOT!
The 'public' gets their underpants in a bind when the GNP declines at all...even when it is still in the positive numbers.
They start a panic in the stock market when the GNP is +1%, so how can it survive a -25% GNP drop?.
And as for cutting back on our demands...well it goes against the American dream.
And even if America decided to cut back 25%, that is only a drop in the bucket, as the rest of the world is ever increasing their demands on the environment and would soon make up for such a small decrease in greenhouse gas and fossil fuel depletion.
Petrochemicals make up a large portion of crude's importance to mankind. About 9% of every barrel of crude goes for petrochemical use. Even if we cut back 100% on the burning of fossil fuels this very instant, the petrochemical business would still deplete our crude oil, albeit on a longer time scale.
A partial list of some of the products made from crude oil.
Solvents Diesel Motor Oil Bearing Grease Ink Floor Wax Ballpoint Pens Football Cleats Upholstery Sweaters Boats Insecticides Bicycle Tires Sports Car Bodies Nail Polish Fishing lures Dresses Tires Golf Bags Perfumes Cassettes Dishwasher Tool Boxes Shoe Polish Motorcycle Helmet Caulking Petroleum Jelly Transparent Tape CD Player Faucet Washers Antiseptics Clothesline Curtains Food Preservatives Basketballs Soap Vitamin Capsules Antihistamines Purses Shoes Dashboards Cortisone Deodorant Footballs Putty Dyes Panty Hose Refrigerant Percolators Life Jackets Rubbing Alcohol Linings Skis TV Cabinets Shag Rugs Electrician's Tape Tool Racks Car Battery Cases Epoxy Paint Mops Slacks Insect Repellent Oil Filters Umbrellas Yarn Fertilizers Hair Coloring Roofing Toilet Seats Fishing Rods Lipstick Denture Adhesive Linoleum Ice Cube Trays Synthetic Rubber Speakers Plastic Wood Electric Blankets Glycerin Tennis Rackets Rubber Cement Fishing Boots Dice Nylon Rope Candles Trash Bags House Paint Water Pipes Hand Lotion Roller Skates Surf Boards Shampoo Wheels Paint Rollers Shower Curtains Guitar Strings Luggage Aspirin Safety Glasses Antifreeze Football Helmets Awnings Eyeglasses Clothes Toothbrushes Ice Chests Footballs Combs CD's Paint Brushes Detergents Vaporizers Balloons Sun Glasses Tents Heart Valves Crayons Parachutes Telephones Enamel Pillows Dishes Cameras Anesthetics Artificial Turf Artificial limbs Bandages Dentures Model Cars Folding Doors Hair Curlers Cold cream Movie film Soft Contact lenses Drinking Cups Fan Belts Car Enamel Shaving Cream Ammonia Refrigerators Golf Balls Toothpaste Gasoline
http://www.beloit.edu/~SEPM/Geology_and ... _need.html
Are you starting to see the folly of thinking mankind can stop global warming or fix our peak oil woes, when our world is built on such a ludicrous foundation?
But, lets forget the public for a moment and look at someone in the know.
Matt Savinar is one of the well known names in peak oil circles and runs the 'Life After the Oil Crash' website and was interviewed in the movie 'A Crude Awakening.'
In the movie Matt Savinar said he would probably not vote for a president that would adopt strong peak oil measures, giving an example of cutting back on auto production which in turn would cut back on Americas GNP.
So if someone in the know cannot stomach what needs to be done how on earth could an everyday Joe or Jane do it?
When it comes down to the tough decisions it is always a case of...honor dies where the interest lies
Fueling the problem of our consumption sickness are the games the Federal and World banks play with interest rates. They manage the economies in ways to fuel consumption and mask the real trend. If anything, we are hell bent to deplete our resources as soon as humanly possible and not save them.
Witness the constant cries for Federal bankers to lower interest rates...so the stock market can go up...fueled by spending of the consumer.
The more we consume to bolster our economy, the more fossil fuel we deplete...the more fossil fuel we deplete the warmer the earth gets. Yet we talk about fixing global warming and fixing peak oil?
Our consumption sickness is drug habit that Greenspan got us hooked on and we just can't get away from.
Sure, we were always consumption based, but Greenspan 'mainlined our drug' to us and once we got a taste, we were sunk. Even now, the government is proposing ways to help the consumer keep spending while we are suffering through the sub-prime lending debacle.
Our economy is not based on sustainable health - it is based low interest credit to encourage compulsive spending, debt and living a life of constant consumption with a 'disposable mentality' when it comes to durable goods.
The US is built on consumer consumption to artificially fuel our economy to make our retirement funds only go up. Then the governments juggle the numbers to make the inflation figures seem artificially low, so everyone's retirement portfolio will make them happy so they will continue to buy and consume more...and on it goes....it is all we know.
The US GDP is based 70% on consumer spending. Our economy is based on the philosophy of constant consumption. Our cars are not made to last, nor is our economy built on such ideals of durability. We are slaves of fashion and progress and every car produced sucks down more crude in its manufacturing as well as heats up our planet in the process.
Matt Savinar may not have been exactly right when he said "oil is our god" in the movie Crude Awakening - our real god is CONSUMPTION.
We consume our planet whether it be animal, mineral or even its environment.
I guess it is just how we humans are.
While we are free to do what we want -- we are not free to want what we want. As all our actions have consequences, and many of our actions produce consequences that end up destroying peace. (both ours and other's peace).
This is what separates us from the animals that run solely on instinct. Humans run by instinct as well as moral guidance.
Sure, most humans try to do good, but when decisions have to be made, mistakes can and will happen.
And sometime these mistakes lead to ends that just cannot be fixed and we must accept responsibility for our actions. Once we accept responsibility, we can at least be at a semblance peace with the outcome of our actions and recover a modicum of honor in the process.
-
allenwrench - Tar Sands
- Posts: 862
- Joined: Wed 23 Apr 2008, 03:00:00
Re: Mankinds Future
by Ludi » Mon 28 Apr 2008, 15:18:34
"Mankind" doesn't destroy his environment. Our culture (civilization) does. "Mankind" lived on the planet no more harmfully than any other apex predator for 100,000 years or more. Millions of "mankind" still live that way.
http://anthropik.com/thirty/
http://anthropik.com/thirty/
- Ludi
Re: Mankinds Future
by cavemandoom30 » Wed 30 Apr 2008, 00:18:42
I'm with Ludi, It's civilized man that has the problem, not man in general, we are not evolved as a species to be civilized, we are tribally -based hunter gatherers"enjoying " a very brief, in evolutionary or geological terms, vacation from our tribal, sustainable past and future. All civilizations will eventually collapse , because of many complex factors..read "Collapse" by Jared Diamond, "Ishmael" by Daniel Quinn, and definetly check Ludi's link to the thirty theses, ..I've read that list before, very excellent.
Oh, and I'm quite sure some animals actually do destroy their environments from time to time...our only difference, is that we have a choice, we know what the consequences of our actions will be, and yet we still do it.
Finally, anybody else ever wonder if maybe our utilization of fossil fuels is not some sort of "Gaia's master plan" to "permanently"end the millions of years of cooling that have been taking place since the Oligocene? It seems to me that during that Eocene thermal maximum, the warmest it's ever been here on earth, the whole Earth was pretty much one big rainforest, and life was quite diverse, if not large... I'm not a huge believer in the Gaia theory, but this is just a thought experiment I run sometimes...
Oh, and I'm quite sure some animals actually do destroy their environments from time to time...our only difference, is that we have a choice, we know what the consequences of our actions will be, and yet we still do it.
Finally, anybody else ever wonder if maybe our utilization of fossil fuels is not some sort of "Gaia's master plan" to "permanently"end the millions of years of cooling that have been taking place since the Oligocene? It seems to me that during that Eocene thermal maximum, the warmest it's ever been here on earth, the whole Earth was pretty much one big rainforest, and life was quite diverse, if not large... I'm not a huge believer in the Gaia theory, but this is just a thought experiment I run sometimes...
-
cavemandoom30 - Wood
- Posts: 48
- Joined: Wed 17 Jan 2007, 04:00:00
- Location: Central PA
Re: Mankinds Future
by BigTex » Wed 30 Apr 2008, 00:34:01
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('cavemandoom30', 'I')'m with Ludi, It's civilized man that has the problem, not man in general, we are not evolved as a species to be civilized, we are tribally -based hunter gatherers"enjoying " a very brief, in evolutionary or geological terms, vacation from our tribal, sustainable past and future. All civilizations will eventually collapse , because of many complex factors..read "Collapse" by Jared Diamond, "Ishmael" by Daniel Quinn, and definetly check Ludi's link to the thirty theses, ..I've read that list before, very excellent.
Oh, and I'm quite sure some animals actually do destroy their environments from time to time...our only difference, is that we have a choice, we know what the consequences of our actions will be, and yet we still do it.
Finally, anybody else ever wonder if maybe our utilization of fossil fuels is not some sort of "Gaia's master plan" to "permanently"end the millions of years of cooling that have been taking place since the Oligocene? It seems to me that during that Eocene thermal maximum, the warmest it's ever been here on earth, the whole Earth was pretty much one big rainforest, and life was quite diverse, if not large... I'm not a huge believer in the Gaia theory, but this is just a thought experiment I run sometimes...
Oh, and I'm quite sure some animals actually do destroy their environments from time to time...our only difference, is that we have a choice, we know what the consequences of our actions will be, and yet we still do it.
Finally, anybody else ever wonder if maybe our utilization of fossil fuels is not some sort of "Gaia's master plan" to "permanently"end the millions of years of cooling that have been taking place since the Oligocene? It seems to me that during that Eocene thermal maximum, the warmest it's ever been here on earth, the whole Earth was pretty much one big rainforest, and life was quite diverse, if not large... I'm not a huge believer in the Gaia theory, but this is just a thought experiment I run sometimes...
The creation of the factory was the beginning of the end.
It destroyed the human habitat.
It turned men into machines.
It created a consumption based lifestyle to support its existence.
It put people in power who spoke the factory language and had factory values.
It separated the craftsman from his work.
It led to the commoditization of everything, including creativity, individuality and freedom.
It has its own form of spirituality, with efficiency as its Nirvana.
The factory-fossil fuel complex fattened us up for slaughter.
And we thought it was a free lunch.
-
BigTex - Intermediate Crude
- Posts: 3858
- Joined: Thu 03 Aug 2006, 03:00:00
- Location: Graceland
Re: Mankinds Future
by zeke » Fri 04 Jul 2008, 07:12:48
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('allenwrench', '
')
Nice idea, but it isn't going to happen.
We are worse than any animal my friend. No other animal destroys its environment except mankind.
')
Nice idea, but it isn't going to happen.
We are worse than any animal my friend. No other animal destroys its environment except mankind.
I can't add anything to that.
Except this: I hope that whatever smackdown is headed our way is *so* severe that our species un-learns the self-delusional/greed/aggression combo that has made us Earth's worst parasite.
zeke
-
zeke - Lignite
- Posts: 308
- Joined: Fri 07 Dec 2007, 04:00:00