Why is it that the Koch's figure so highly in your focus of vilification, but 
George Soros dies not? Why is political meddling by one side gets targeted but 
the other doesn't. You seem to have a decided preference for certain 
billionaires, rather then have a mistrust of all. 



-----Original Message-----
From: Chris de Morsella <cdemorse...@yahoo.com>
To: everything-list <everything-list@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Mon, Mar 17, 2014 12:56 pm
Subject: RE: New NASA study predicts high probability of collapse of industrial 
civilization



 
 
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com 
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Alberto G. Corona 
Sent: Monday, March 17, 2014 8:48 AM
To: everything-list
Subject: Re: New NASA study predicts high probability of collapse of industrial 
civilization
 

An excellent piece of postmarxist (marxism rephrased as sociological "science") 
 by the church of progressivism.

 
I suppose you believe that the only climate change science is being done by the 
Heritage Foundation and other such Koch brother funded “think tanks”? If you 
have some actual science based reason to criticize this study, by all means 
share it with us. But you don’t do you – you have not even bothered to read it 
now have you? Be honest. Your rebuttal of the NASA study is sorely lacking in 
scientific rigor, preferring instead to rely on a series of colorful adjectives 
to present your case.
If you are such a lover of science then use science and scientific data, and 
arguments based on clear deductions from that data to try to make your 
hypothesis. 
As it is all you have shared is a stale retreaded Tea Party rant; frankly its 
weak.
Worn out and weak.
Chris

 

 

 

Unless the budget of the NASA and specially these "experts" is increased and a 
change in global politics and another international bureau of world engineers 
is created overcoming democratic control. Of course it must be headed by these 
"experts" 

 

2014-03-15 13:46 GMT+01:00 Edgar L. Owen <edgaro...@att.net>:

All, this seems like a very reasonable scenario and is in line with my 
thinking...... Edgar

 

 

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/earth-insight/2014/mar/14/nasa-civilisation-irreversible-collapse-study-scientists

NASA-funded study: industrial civilisation headed for 'irreversible collapse'?

             

Natural and social scientists develop new model of how 'perfect storm' of 
crises could unravel global system




This Nasa Earth Observatory image shows a storm system circling around an area 
of extreme low pressure in 2010, which many scientists attribute to climate 
change. Photograph: AFP/Getty Images


A new study sponsored by Nasa's Goddard Space Flight Center has highlighted the 
prospect that global industrial civilisation could collapse in coming decades 
due to unsustainable resource exploitation and increasingly unequal wealth 
distribution.
Noting that warnings of 'collapse' are often seen to be fringe or 
controversial, the study attempts to make sense of compelling historical data 
showing that "the process of rise-and-collapse is actually a recurrent cycle 
found throughout history." Cases of severe civilisational disruption due to 
"precipitous collapse - often lasting centuries - have been quite common."
The research project is based on a new cross-disciplinary 'Human And Nature 
DYnamical' (HANDY) model, led by applied mathematician Safa Motesharri of the 
US National Science Foundation-supported National Socio-Environmental Synthesis 
Center, in association with a team of natural and social scientists. The study 
based on the HANDY model has been accepted for publication in the peer-reviewed 
Elsevier journal, Ecological Economics.
It finds that according to the historical record even advanced, complex 
civilisations are susceptible to collapse, raising questions about the 
sustainability of modern civilisation:

"The fall of the Roman Empire, and the equally (if not more) advanced Han, 
Mauryan, and Gupta Empires, as well as so many advanced Mesopotamian Empires, 
are all testimony to the fact that advanced, sophisticated, complex, and 
creative civilizations can be both fragile and impermanent."

By investigating the human-nature dynamics of these past cases of collapse, the 
project identifies the most salient interrelated factors which explain 
civilisational decline, and which may help determine the risk of collapse 
today: namely, Population, Climate, Water, Agriculture, and Energy.
These factors can lead to collapse when they converge to generate two crucial 
social features: "the stretching of resources due to the strain placed on the 
ecological carrying capacity"; and "the economic stratification of society into 
Elites [rich] and Masses (or "Commoners") [poor]" These social phenomena have 
played "a central role in the character or in the process of the collapse," in 
all such cases over "the last five thousand years."
Currently, high levels of economic stratification are linked directly to 
overconsumption of resources, with "Elites" based largely in industrialised 
countries responsible for both:

"... accumulated surplus is not evenly distributed throughout society, but 
rather has been controlled by an elite. The mass of the population, while 
producing the wealth, is only allocated a small portion of it by elites, 
usually at or just above subsistence levels."

The study challenges those who argue that technology will resolve these 
challenges by increasing efficiency:

"Technological change can raise the efficiency of resource use, but it also 
tends to raise both per capita resource consumption and the scale of resource 
extraction, so that, absent policy effects, the increases in consumption often 
compensate for the increased efficiency of resource use."

Productivity increases in agriculture and industry over the last two centuries 
has come from "increased (rather than decreased) resource throughput," despite 
dramatic efficiency gains over the same period.
Modelling a range of different scenarios, Motesharri and his colleagues 
conclude that under conditions "closely reflecting the reality of the world 
today... we find that collapse is difficult to avoid." In the first of these 
scenarios, civilisation:

".... appears to be on a sustainable path for quite a long time, but even using 
an optimal depletion rate and starting with a very small number of Elites, the 
Elites eventually consume too much, resulting in a famine among Commoners that 
eventually causes the collapse of society. It is important to note that this 
Type-L collapse is due to an inequality-induced famine that causes a loss of 
workers, rather than a collapse of Nature."

Another scenario focuses on the role of continued resource exploitation, 
finding that "with a larger depletion rate, the decline of the Commoners occurs 
faster, while the Elites are still thriving, but eventually the Commoners 
collapse completely, followed by the Elites."
In both scenarios, Elite wealth monopolies mean that they are buffered from the 
most "detrimental effects of the environmental collapse until much later than 
the Commoners", allowing them to "continue 'business as usual' despite the 
impending catastrophe." The same mechanism, they argue, could explain how 
"historical collapses were allowed to occur by elites who appear to be 
oblivious to the catastrophic trajectory (most clearly apparent in the Roman 
and Mayan cases)."
Applying this lesson to our contemporary predicament, the study warns that:

"While some members of society might raise the alarm that the system is moving 
towards an impending collapse and therefore advocate structural changes to 
society in order to avoid it, Elites and their supporters, who opposed making 
these changes, could point to the long sustainable trajectory 'so far' in 
support of doing nothing."

However, the scientists point out that the worst-case scenarios are by no means 
inevitable, and suggest that appropriate policy and structural changes could 
avoid collapse, if not pave the way toward a more stable civilisation.
The two key solutions are to reduce economic inequality so as to ensure fairer 
distribution of resources, and to dramatically reduce resource consumption by 
relying on less intensive renewable resources and reducing population growth:

"Collapse can be avoided and population can reach equilibrium if the per capita 
rate of depletion of nature is reduced to a sustainable level, and if resources 
are distributed in a reasonably equitable fashion."

The NASA-funded HANDY model offers a highly credible wake-up call to 
governments, corporations and business - and consumers - to recognise that 
'business as usual' cannot be sustained, and that policy and structural changes 
are required immediately.
Although the study is largely theoretical, a number of other more 
empirically-focused studies - by KPMG and the UK Government Office of Science 
for instance - have warned that the convergence of food, water and energy 
crises could create a 'perfect storm' within about fifteen years. But these 
'business as usual' forecasts could be very conservative.
Dr Nafeez Ahmed is executive director of the Institute for Policy Research & 
Development and author of A User's Guide to the Crisis of Civilisation: And How 
to Save It among other books. Follow him on Twitter @nafeezahmed

 




-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.





 

-- 
Alberto. 

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to