Oh for chrissake! That idiot James Hansen is at it again!!!!

[CRH]

4. I know it appears cruel to say this, ...

but I think Hansen and nearly everyone else fall into the same insolvable dilemma.

Everyone is trying to to save the total unsustainable population with a vision that will maintain elevated lifestyles and even add to the middle class.

To me this is unrealistic. If attempts are to made to adapt to a future in crisis, a realism must be envisioned that all can't be saved, and expectations of lifestyles we presume as normal today need to scaled back to needs not wants.

There is not an good answer to who should survive, or what type of infra structure should be planned for the future. It is unrealistic to think an exercise in eugenics will in any way provide a better future. I feel, it should be more determined by Darwin than economists.

The people most suited to adaption to a chaotic future, might not be dominated by the educated, but rather the healthier most efficient people of the second and third world who still have a connection to 'old' agriculture, subsistence construction, and the knowledge for use of evolving local flora and fauna for food medicine and materials.

Planning of communities after the great migration begins, will be nothing what most people imagine today. Mining a dump will be more dependable for materials than waiting for a factory shipment. A pelican wheel more dependable than a pump, and a solar stove more realistic the GE.

I think in the future technologically moves backward not forward, status quo recedes to personal inventive ingenuity, and life will become more physical than cerebral.

Just my two cents, probably worth less.