General Discussion

AverageJoe90

(10,745 posts)

233. It's not so much an aversion to anything as trying to be realistic.

Sun Jan 13, 2013, 10:29 PM

Jan 2013

Yes, everyone knows that AGW is a complex problem, that the environment is indeed a complex thing, but again, short-term(at least out to 2100) global civilization collapse just isn't at all likely. It is quite possible that certain regions may suffer some serious issues by the middle of this century, such as the Middle East, or much of Africa for example, but barring a worldwide nuclear conflict(already extremely unlikely now), or Yellowstone erupting.....I just can't see this logically occurring.

What may happen out to say 3000 or so, I can't really say. Perhaps there may indeed be a real possibility of that then. But not in the foreseeable future.

Paul, I hate to say this, but you are reading WAAAAYYY too much into the theoretical stuff.....no offense meant.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

256 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Experts Fear Collapse of Global Civilisation [View all] Hissyspit Jan 2013 OP

Too many people and too few resources...and that gap is increasing rapidly. nt. OldDem2012 Jan 2013 #1

It's not the amount of resources. It's the distribution. KittyWampus Jan 2013 #216

I partly agree, but..... AverageJoe90 Jan 2013 #223

Yes, it is. It's just basic math... OldDem2012 Jan 2013 #241

This is where we learn, through our actions or inactions, whether the species is worthy of being Fire Walk With Me Jan 2013 #2

define sustainable DonCoquixote Jan 2013 #28

I'll leave that to those who will either live or die through its initiation or failure. Fire Walk With Me Jan 2013 #40

Humans have always been parasites upon the planet. Sekhmets Daughter Jan 2013 #80

+1, n/t RKP5637 Jan 2013 #82

yes,and DonCoquixote Jan 2013 #138

Who cares? NoOneMan Jan 2013 #143

part of the reason those " simpler times" were easier on the planet is because we died younger. BlancheSplanchnik Jan 2013 #151

It has more to do with resource use in the West than with population explosion in the rest. antigone382 Jan 2013 #154

Population is only a concern... NoOneMan Jan 2013 #155

no sorry if I was a little unclear. didn't mean that it's the fault of subsistence populations BlancheSplanchnik Jan 2013 #157

Yes, you're right, and I don't mean to dismiss your point. antigone382 Jan 2013 #159

Surplus accumulation leads to exponential growth NoOneMan Jan 2013 #158

True DonCoquixote Jan 2013 #175

I'd define sustainable, for starters, truebluegreen Jan 2013 #59

Exactly. First Nations consider water to be life, children to be sacred. These are good ideas Fire Walk With Me Jan 2013 #81

+100 truebluegreen Jan 2013 #112

Nature most certainly culled primitive people NoOneMan Jan 2013 #74

Huge maternal and infant mortality rate without OBs and C-sections. Manifestor_of_Light Jan 2013 #152

Of course DonCoquixote Jan 2013 #160

Lets trash modern diets, stresses and environmental toxins NoOneMan Jan 2013 #163

stresses? DonCoquixote Jan 2013 #167

Stress is working 40-60 hours/week for a seat in the good house that exploits the rest of the world NoOneMan Jan 2013 #171

Interestingly enough, foraging humans didn't experience high perinatal and infant mortality rates NoOneMan Jan 2013 #162

sustainable kardonb Jan 2013 #166

Why is the belief that technology will always save you more rational than that of God saving you? NoOneMan Jan 2013 #172

And I Was Just Getting Over the Flu Too! triplepoint Jan 2013 #3

prince fucking charles? he's the 'expert'? please. HiPointDem Jan 2013 #4

Yes. He is, and the article is right. JDPriestly Jan 2013 #11

I am sick of the class that uses & directs enormous resources for their own profit posing as HiPointDem Jan 2013 #25

Charles Windsor, if you prefer, is actually well-known as committed to environmental causes Hekate Jan 2013 #30

he makes a profit on his investments, too. funny he would care about such things, what with HiPointDem Jan 2013 #32

So does every successful renewable energy company NickB79 Jan 2013 #36

So does Warren Buffet. I'd say he's on 'our' side, though. randome Jan 2013 #45

"His" money is for having Ilsa Jan 2013 #35

Do you lump Al Gore in with Sir Charles? AgingAmerican Jan 2013 #72

If you read the "profit from investments" quote, they probably do. joshcryer Jan 2013 #131

I don't think HRH Prince Charles is so bad..... AverageJoe90 Jan 2013 #121

Sorry, but I know someone in the field, and environmentalism is not psyops. JDPriestly Jan 2013 #248

If you read the paper Prince Charles is cited only for a quote. joshcryer Jan 2013 #130

Read the fucking article. It's not "Prince Charles." joshcryer Jan 2013 #129

He's been evangelising about environmental issues for decades. nt. sibelian Jan 2013 #179

^^^ This truebrit71 Jan 2013 #202

Oh, goody. Le Taz Hot Jan 2013 #5

I take it you're not too worried about it? Comrade Grumpy Jan 2013 #48

More like I can't do anything about it Le Taz Hot Jan 2013 #56

You don't have to 'control' something to be helpful, do you? randome Jan 2013 #58

I'm an activist. Le Taz Hot Jan 2013 #66

Okay. Sorry to have assumed anything, then. randome Jan 2013 #146

Is it environmentally responsible AgingAmerican Jan 2013 #73

It's not just you acting alone but all of us acting collectively CreekDog Jan 2013 #206

don't go by them: they have posted that the Clean Air Act doesn't apply to the Bay Area CreekDog Jan 2013 #210

"So why should I waste my beautiful mind on something like that?" NoOneMan Jan 2013 #75

Yes, 'cause that's exactly Le Taz Hot Jan 2013 #83

Feel free to elaborate in the next doomer article NoOneMan Jan 2013 #85

you made fun of something you say you take seriously CreekDog Jan 2013 #211

Exactly! AverageJoe90 Jan 2013 #90

In contrast to what? NoOneMan Jan 2013 #98

It does matter, thank you very much, because it's part of the reason we're still in this mess, AverageJoe90 Jan 2013 #101

Since nothing is apparently "working", what difference does it make? NoOneMan Jan 2013 #104

You're not getting it. You REALLY aren't. AverageJoe90 Jan 2013 #110

Yeah, you aren't making sense NoOneMan Jan 2013 #111

Well, I'm sorry if I haven't been able to explain things to your satisfaction. AverageJoe90 Jan 2013 #126

Its a mystic thing, right? NoOneMan Jan 2013 #128

Really? AverageJoe90 Jan 2013 #132

for someone who claims to believe in the dangers of global climate change, why do you... CreekDog Jan 2013 #213

Enough of the dishonesty already. AverageJoe90 Jan 2013 #222

Good old Joe can sure twist it up, eh? RobertEarl Jan 2013 #127

Hey, I'll admit I'm not all that good at explaining myself, compared to some..... AverageJoe90 Jan 2013 #188

You said: NoOneMan Jan 2013 #192

Took me out of context again, I see. AverageJoe90 Jan 2013 #227

Yet you haven't proved it. You wont. You can't. NoOneMan Jan 2013 #236

..... AverageJoe90 Jan 2013 #238

Prove it then! NoOneMan Jan 2013 #239

Oh, and since its part of this mess.... NoOneMan Jan 2013 #106

WTF? AverageJoe90 Jan 2013 #189

You said it was part of the problem NoOneMan Jan 2013 #190

Please, no more semantics. Seriously. AverageJoe90 Jan 2013 #198

Oh, are you trying to say alarmism increases denialism or some crap like that? NoOneMan Jan 2013 #199

Believe what you want. AverageJoe90 Jan 2013 #203

Thanks for trying... NoOneMan Jan 2013 #204

You keep using these idiotic semantics. AverageJoe90 Jan 2013 #208

The people saying that we're playing with fire and likely to get burned aren't the problem CreekDog Jan 2013 #212

Nope. Sorry, but the reality is...... AverageJoe90 Jan 2013 #214

calling us "extreme doom mongers" CreekDog Jan 2013 #215

Nice try, but no cigar. AverageJoe90 Jan 2013 #217

tens of millions of Bangladeshis displaced by minor increases in sea level isn't a bad thing to you? CreekDog Jan 2013 #219

I never said that, and you know it. AverageJoe90 Jan 2013 #220

if you think it's a big deal, stop arguing against people who think climate change is a big deal CreekDog Jan 2013 #224

What I've been arguing against..... AverageJoe90 Jan 2013 #225

the OP does not posit "inevitable collapse" but you are attempting to make a straw man of the OP CreekDog Jan 2013 #226

I'm not the one who engaged in strawmen here. AverageJoe90 Jan 2013 #229

for someone who is living what was once an inland sea, you are pretty cavalier CreekDog Jan 2013 #209

Will the cyborgs save us? ErikJ Jan 2013 #6

Most of humanity could die off without cyborgs lunatica Jan 2013 #52

Don't say that to the Republicans...severely limit human fertility? Frustratedlady Jan 2013 #97

Corporations such as Monsanto and BP, and the do-nothing Republicans will speed the process. AdHocSolver Jan 2013 #7

And of course all the gleeful investors. Willing to kill anything for a dollar. raouldukelives Jan 2013 #39

Your post reminds me of something said to me by a scientist friend of mine. airplaneman Jan 2013 #168

''The problems we face today cannot be solved by the minds that created them.'' – Albert Einstein DeSwiss Jan 2013 #8

It's HIGH time for every Gov't on earth to require their decision makers to 99th_Monkey Jan 2013 #9

Prophetic marions ghost Jan 2013 #187

Hm. Our food supply is pretty robust, actually. AtheistCrusader Jan 2013 #10

Actually, we are ruining our soil with fossil-fuel-based fertilizers. For the moment, we produce JDPriestly Jan 2013 #13

This is the end result of Capitalism AZ Progressive Jan 2013 #16

Its the result of not understanding our impacts on the greater system NoOneMan Jan 2013 #69

Not just depeling the soil AtheistCrusader Jan 2013 #18

Years ago in NW Iowa the trees grew along the river banks on every farm and along the roads etc. jwirr Jan 2013 #43

I'm very glad you're seeing a reversal in planting the trees back lunatica Jan 2013 #54

We're sucking the aquifers dry. CrispyQ Jan 2013 #76

yeah...stupidity is the one infinite resource. BlancheSplanchnik Jan 2013 #153

Yes they started that after they drained their wells dry by getting rid of the trees. It is sad to jwirr Jan 2013 #180

A 5 year drought would destroy our food supply in quick order. joshcryer Jan 2013 #134

And a 100 year drought? NoOneMan Jan 2013 #140

Interesting ... MindMover Jan 2013 #169

Prince Charles stated this: AZ Progressive Jan 2013 #12

" We have to see ourselves as utterly embedded in Nature" hootinholler Jan 2013 #37

In the cosmic scheme of things... nikto Jan 2013 #14

What you said tavalon Jan 2013 #22

Some people think we are why the universe exists NoOneMan Jan 2013 #70

They're idiots for thinking the Earth is 6,000 years old, however..... AverageJoe90 Jan 2013 #103

As long as civilization is preserved, yes, probably not much more will happen biologically NoOneMan Jan 2013 #107

And, TBH, any one of us Americans would be more likely to die in an auto accident in any given year, AverageJoe90 Jan 2013 #108

Depends what you mean by short term NoOneMan Jan 2013 #109

I had 2050 or so in mind. AverageJoe90 Jan 2013 #113

Yeah, maybe your techno-God will save you in 2050 NoOneMan Jan 2013 #117

No "optimism" here. Just a more realistic outlook, that's all. AverageJoe90 Jan 2013 #118

Your reality is a result of confirmation bias NoOneMan Jan 2013 #120

What confirmation bias? What conflict? AverageJoe90 Jan 2013 #123

"Its going to all come down to food." nikto Jan 2013 #177

I believe Isaac Asimov pondered that in an article. CrispyQ Jan 2013 #77

Or perhaps we expect other intelligent life to mimic our own. Perhaps other intelligent life KittyWampus Jan 2013 #218

I suppose so. AverageJoe90 Jan 2013 #221

So many possibilities! CrispyQ Jan 2013 #244

I wish I could agree with that.....n/t AverageJoe90 Jan 2013 #102

In the grander cosmic scheme of things... Xithras Jan 2013 #149

+1000 n/t sendero Jan 2013 #207

We should consider the possibility... nikto Jan 2013 #15

Speak for yourself and not for my daughters, okay? randome Jan 2013 #46

Reminder: Ehrlich wrote "The Population Bomb" in 1968. moondust Jan 2013 #17

It's not just Ehrlich AZ Progressive Jan 2013 #20

Planet Under Pressure, State of the Planet Declaration AZ Progressive Jan 2013 #23

Thanks. n/t moondust Jan 2013 #24

I heard about the "Club of Rome" in the early 70's.... AntiFascist Jan 2013 #29

Around the time Borlaug got hybrids to sustain populations. joshcryer Jan 2013 #136

And that spurred research into population dynamics. Iterate Jan 2013 #253

What. you mean, Paul Ehrlich and Prince Charles? That's it? AverageJoe90 Jan 2013 #19

Checked out Australia lately? truebluegreen Jan 2013 #65

Did I say anything about drought? No. AverageJoe90 Jan 2013 #84

Drought--massive widespread drought--in one or several of the world's breadbaskets-- truebluegreen Jan 2013 #122

Okay, it does happen sometimes. No biggie. =) AverageJoe90 Jan 2013 #124

Erlich was right. Viking12 Jan 2013 #99

Was that Wiki article I posted not enough? AverageJoe90 Jan 2013 #135

He couldn't predict Norman Borlaug's agri-innovations. joshcryer Jan 2013 #137

World War Z tavalon Jan 2013 #21

LOL....I don't think so. AverageJoe90 Jan 2013 #105

I did mean that tavalon Jan 2013 #178

Wait.. what? Fumesucker Jan 2013 #26

The 'preppers' can't manufacture ground water out of nothing. Or breathable air. randome Jan 2013 #47

Too late! Larrymoe Curlyshemp Jan 2013 #27

It doesn't take a PhD to figure out the world is going all to s*** davidn3600 Jan 2013 #31

I don't think so, TBH. AverageJoe90 Jan 2013 #125

I don't know this "news organization" cali Jan 2013 #33

No, Fox News reads like a comic book Agony Jan 2013 #133

The writing has been on the wall for a long time but most CHOOSE to ignore it stultusporcos Jan 2013 #34

The corporations still control our government AZ Progressive Jan 2013 #44

They only control what we allow them to control. That's where the problem lies. randome Jan 2013 #50

Big Corporations make sure any alternatives to them are inconvenient AZ Progressive Jan 2013 #79

I hear you. But a few well-placed laws forbidding those practices would solve it. randome Jan 2013 #144

I am not a prepper, survivalist or gun nutter, just a regular guy who likes to be prepared. airplaneman Jan 2013 #170

Don't worry, when every tree is cut down & every river is poisoned, we can eat money. JaneyVee Jan 2013 #38

"Everyone whatchamacallit Jan 2013 #41

some of us have been saying this for a while now I am B Jan 2013 #42

Some of us have even been YELLING it marions ghost Jan 2013 #191

thanks for the welcome I am B Jan 2013 #243

Duers--passionate about the issues, intelligent marions ghost Jan 2013 #245

Is your handle taken from Dan Quinn's novel? GliderGuider Jan 2013 #249

I to am a fan of Ishmael and I am B Jan 2013 #255

I thought so. Good on ya. GliderGuider Jan 2013 #256

You had me right up until "too much growth"..... AverageJoe90 Jan 2013 #197

thanks for welcome, this place is amazing I am B Jan 2013 #242

Wow, there's some surprising willful blindness on this thread. Comrade Grumpy Jan 2013 #49

The Corrosive Effect Of Three Decades Of FrightWing Politics cantbeserious Jan 2013 #51

Cynicism has become the new normal it seems lunatica Jan 2013 #61

I see the opposite. AverageJoe90 Jan 2013 #88

And that is why you might need a gun. dkf Jan 2013 #53

You'd probably be better off with a community. Comrade Grumpy Jan 2013 #55

Yeah the communities will organize with guns. dkf Jan 2013 #57

Cool, a new arms race for the end times. Comrade Grumpy Jan 2013 #62

Where have you been? dkf Jan 2013 #64

Busy living my life, without a gun. Comrade Grumpy Jan 2013 #92

I have to agree. AverageJoe90 Jan 2013 #116

How are you going to manufacture breathable air? randome Jan 2013 #60

Needing a gun in order to survive is very different lunatica Jan 2013 #63

You have to be fucking kidding me. Are you going to shoot climate change? Warren Stupidity Jan 2013 #68

Not rightly, WRONGLY. n/t AverageJoe90 Jan 2013 #114

This is the same Erlich who though there would be 1st Word mass starvation... Odin2005 Jan 2013 #67

Exactly! AverageJoe90 Jan 2013 #89

Ehrlich was right. Viking12 Jan 2013 #100

When do we get to quit our day jobs? NoOneMan Jan 2013 #71

Big picture ... mankind often does little 'till after a catastrophic event. My take is RKP5637 Jan 2013 #78

Yes, you will be. AverageJoe90 Jan 2013 #86

Thanks! RKP5637 Jan 2013 #91

No offense meant with that last comment, btw. AverageJoe90 Jan 2013 #93

No, you didn't offend me at all. RKP5637 Jan 2013 #94

Well at least all of our nuclear wastes are safely disposed of for tens of thousands of years Tom Rinaldo Jan 2013 #87

Revisiting The Limits to Growth: Could The Club of Rome Have Been Correct, After All? FarCenter Jan 2013 #95

The meaning of homo sapiens existence PATRICK Jan 2013 #96

Even if we last several million more years....we will still have been a blip on the radar. NYC Liberal Jan 2013 #115

True, but we aren't at all likely to go extinct in at least the next several thousand years or so... AverageJoe90 Jan 2013 #119

So, start phasing out oil limpyhobbler Jan 2013 #139

Sure, and this will decrease GDP NoOneMan Jan 2013 #141

Go stand in front of a bulldozer limpyhobbler Jan 2013 #142

Itll win NoOneMan Jan 2013 #145

I don't disagree with the idea that the odds are against us. limpyhobbler Jan 2013 #148

And it may not be closed for some time, really. AverageJoe90 Jan 2013 #161

Where are you getting your info? limpyhobbler Jan 2013 #182

Yeah, well..... AverageJoe90 Jan 2013 #183

I'm not good at science stuff so I just follow what the scientists are saying. limpyhobbler Jan 2013 #184

Hansen is alright, but he's said some pretty way-out stuff before. AverageJoe90 Jan 2013 #185

Can you provide examples of what has been "constructive"? NoOneMan Jan 2013 #200

"I don't "get" my "information" from anywhere." GliderGuider Jan 2013 #201

Well, Hello, GG, long time no see. AverageJoe90 Jan 2013 #205

A failure of education or imagination? GliderGuider Jan 2013 #228

It's not so much an aversion to anything as trying to be realistic. AverageJoe90 Jan 2013 #233

As my father used to say, "You can lead a horse to water," GliderGuider Jan 2013 #240

One cosmic instant by John a. Livingston a natural history of human arrogance kimbutgar Jan 2013 #147

overpopulation. overpopulation. overpopulation. BlancheSplanchnik Jan 2013 #150

Mainly in North America NoOneMan Jan 2013 #174

but instead of a.. stuntcat Jan 2013 #231

Humans are too stupid to control our overpopulation. tabasco Jan 2013 #156

So the preppers and gun nuts are right then? pediatricmedic Jan 2013 #164

Not at all NoOneMan Jan 2013 #173

Me neither. AverageJoe90 Jan 2013 #176

Even if the world's superpowers could do anything about it, we know they wouldn't. blkmusclmachine Jan 2013 #165

We'll almost all be dead by 2100 FarCenter Jan 2013 #181

Not even close to likely..... AverageJoe90 Jan 2013 #186

More reactionary over optimism from you NoOneMan Jan 2013 #193

This message was self-deleted by its author AverageJoe90 Jan 2013 #195

Just add 87 years to everyone's age; even the majority of newborns won't live to 2100. FarCenter Jan 2013 #194

Well, okay, but the way you phrased it..... AverageJoe90 Jan 2013 #196

i'm starting to get very worried samsingh Jan 2013 #230

I'm pretty concerned as well, Sam. AverageJoe90 Jan 2013 #234

thanks for the post. i'll review it. samsingh Jan 2013 #246

So when everything collapses madville Jan 2013 #232

In the extremely unlikely event of a collapse..... AverageJoe90 Jan 2013 #235

I agree, an armed like-minded group would be ideal madville Jan 2013 #237

Global Collapse is for the Little People. Octafish Jan 2013 #247

There are a large number of things that can bring us crashing down - globally. GreenStormCloud Jan 2013 #250

Theoretically, perhaps..... AverageJoe90 Jan 2013 #251

You need to read up on what a Carrington Event would do. GreenStormCloud Jan 2013 #254

With the droughts reminder2 Jan 2013 #252