Are We Looking at the End? — a Few Further Thoughts
In my recent post Are We Looking at the End? I quoted a few scientists who claim that human civilization will “unravel” somewhere between 2040 and 2050, due primarily to climate change and the loss of biodiversity, particularly the insects.
In response, longtime 2GreenEnergy supporter Cameron Atwood writes:
What we need is a global moonshot attitude toward transitioning, and that we don’t have.
We also need a buy-in by the most exorbitantly wealthy among us, the top 1%, and we don’t have that either.
Of course, the least powerful among us individually have little sway over the direction of the paradigm, and the most powerful are disinclined to alter their behavior.
Any advisors they listen to are dependent on their good graces and will wait until what they think is the last minute to advise change.
By then it will have been too late. It may already be now.
I don’t advise we give up, as potent action may still mitigate the worst of the consequences, and at least we will have tried.
Excellent points. This civilization has no paradigm of cooperative action to promote its survival. Rich people prosper, poor people suffer, and that’s about it.
Making matters worse is the fact that the United States is driving in reverse. Massive numbers of largely uneducated, anti-science voters just re-elected Donald Trump to a second term. We’re in a pathetic condition.
I’m not giving up either but ignoring the core of the problem is not helpful.
Yesterday, I happened to meet a guy who works for the California Department of Fish and Game whose life’s work is hunting nutria, an invasive species of rodent shown at left.
It’s true that Trump is probably the greatest single one-person threat to our capacity to address climate change mitigation and adaptation, not only in America, but in the world as a whole. That’s because a) he won the 2024 U.S. presidential election with his extraordinary skill at reeling in the affection of our nation’s least educated and most scientifically illiterate people, and b) has consistently made great use of the torrents of donations he’s received from the multi-trillion dollar fossil fuel industry.
Regarding English grammar, would you be well advised to “do as you please,” per the suggestion at left?
At left is an ad for an environmental conference in Dubai. While the event itself may be interesting, the answer to the question posed here is No.
The big difference between the current Gilded Age and the last one is the fragility of the environment. In the late 19th Century, we weren’t roasting our planet and losing tens of thousands of species annually.
As we take in these words of the great primatologist Jane Goodall, one obvious thought is this: How sure are we that we’ll still be here at some point in the future to have the opportunity to look back?
Many American schoolchildren in the southern part of the United States are still taught that the American Civil War was caused by northern aggression, where Union soldiers attacked the south, raped their women, and stole their land?
Here’s an 
At left is a profound thought, but it’s one that the vast majority of Trump supporters can’t relate to. The incoming president’s billionaire friends got rich by exploiting America’s workforce, not by helping the working class achieve its own affluence and pleasant living conditions.
