I have always loved the ocean. As a child, inspired by Jacques Cousteau, I wanted to be a marine biologist. Reality and some years intervened, and I became a corporate lawyer. But I never lost my love for the ocean, and eventually, was able to enjoy some of the Pacific recreationally. Then, just a few short years later, I watched the coral reefs start to die. It has been an utter heartbreak, and a lonely one because, since I’m not a scientist, I know few people who love the ocean the way I have, even among so-called environmentalists. What a gutting experience it is to witness the natural world that has meant so much to you die, and to have liberal, well-educated but urbanized and terribly disconnected peers really not understand the magnitude of what is happening. I watch these videos because I have no one to talk to about what I have seen with my own eyes. Alone at the ending of the world we have known.
I’ve listened to many of your podcasts, Nate, and they do get “dark“, but this one went above and beyond. I know polar bears have become a cliché, but the image of dolphins with their ribs showing, of the fish being asphyxiated because there is not enough oxygen in the water, this made me weep. My first instinct was to text three people close to me, “I love you.“ My second instinct is to find a local extinction rebellion group to hang out with.
Thanks Nate and team. Not only are you improving our knowledge of the predicament, we are also increasingly aware of all the work it takes to do a high quality dialog, then produce your show notes, and eventually a transcript. Wow! Recorded Jul 31, released in Sep. We are very grateful!
from slightly depressing, to moderately depressing, to very depressing, thank you for the reality checks! Thank you for steering our approximations much closer to truth and for getting our dialectic focused on energetics and biophysical limits! amazing work all of you
Absolute gratitude for this discussion and all the work you and your colleagues are doing to enlighten the world population on all aspects of the dire predicament we have brought upon ourselves affecting every aspect of life on this planet Earth. Devastatingly heartbreaking on the one hand, illuminating on the other. Most grateful for this high caliber presentation.
Thank you, Nate, this is a particular discussion that has been needed in the public forum for almost 3 decades. It wasn't until I began to understand the role the oceans play in the entire climate system that I fully realized just how much was at risk, and how vulnerable the existence of Life itself on any given planet really is, despite Life's apparent and remarkable resilience. But try to explain this to people... Try, even, to get them to listen for more than a few seconds. It's obvious that people don't really grasp the urgency of what it is that we are facing. We need to develop better ways of describing the complex interrelationships that govern climate, in much simpler terms that someone in a high school freshman biology class can comprehend, with clearer, bare bone diagrams that people can look at and accurately intuit the pattern of interrelationships within the whole. Yes, obviously people are being exploited by an economic system that enriches and serves only the few, but the truth is that in relation to what is happening to the biosphere, it doesn't really matter anymore in terms of the big picture at this late date. We no longer have the luxury of the time it would take to fix that as a first step. I keep thinking we need something on the level of a worldwide general strike, something that brings business as usual to a halt. We need some way to lever global leaders into finally addressing the situation honestly, openly and realistically. But I lay no claim to knowing what will work in the small amount of time we have left. Does anyone have any workable, practical ideas for getting the majority of us moving in a realistic direction? If so, that's what I'd like to hear about. It seems that a critical part of what is holding us back right now is the actual complexity of the problem itself. Too many holes that need plugging right away -- too many problems to pursue, not to mention wrong-headed cultural dictums. We need some way to bind ourselves together as one species. Certainly together we have the ability to pursue all the many needed directions at once, but as a species we currently have no heart -- nothing that is immediately apparent to everyone that ties us together with one greater vision and purpose. If we don't find a way to pull together on this, I see only chaos ahead. Unlike some of the comments made here, however, I consider attitudes that smack of death wish as taking the easy way out, rather than indicative of anything remotely intelligent or "clever." Thinking like that puts a larger burden on the rest of us. I think we can do better than that. Anyone got any ideas at all on how to get a whole species to make an about face? I've been stumped and searching on this for a long while now.
The peasants tried in 1525 and failed, now the power in the hands of the few at the top of this world investor governing money system is so great nothing will stop them from tearing apart the planet to sell it. There are no longer any peasants by design, they killed off that culture and installed a race of people who only know how to buy what's offered. Including you and me.
I relate to so much to what you’ve said here. I’ve also been listening (and learning) from Nate and his rather amazing gang of guests for some time. Regarding your lament around “death wish” comments, I feel that as well. It seems to me a combination of our natural fear of uncertainty combined with our propensity for binary (yes/no) thinking is what’s behind these comments. For me, I experience we humans as deeply social animals, who live by stories. That’s good and bad news. Of course we happen to have a bad story now, that has veered far away from our biophysical reality. Still I’m deeply encouraged by all the new stories that are swirling about. And yes, the hour is late, the times dire, and it is an epoch of much grief. And yet…
Nate!!! How can people work with you? How can I work with you, Nate? I have an undergrad degree in bio and am having trouble integrating into this structurally insane society. I devour your content. I love your work. I love your paper about moving beyond the metabolic superorganism! I love thinking about ecological economics of the future. I think that paper is one of the best descriptions of our predicament that exists anywhere!
Thanks Nate ; providing us all the parameters of our fragile system called Earth with those brilliant experts is very useful. And it gives more and more goosebumps !
As an spaniard I love that Antonio is now being heard all over the world. He is a true national treasure here. I didn't know Daniel or Peter but they are now on my list of people that I have to follow.
Thank you all...Such an informative and emotion invoking discussion... I am more aware now of the issues particular to the oceans...It is such a tragic state of affairs....My sincere gratitude to all...
Absolutely outstanding guests. Thank you all for the work you do. Nate, you have been able to put together a truly amazing piece yet again. There has to be a way to introduce your work to much broader audience.
thank you. I thought the animated movie The Great Simplification was a 'simplified' way of introducing to broader audience. It's so complex and threatening a story that upends most of our beliefs and plans, I think just doing this and having a high signal/noise will attract those humans who are awake, and choose to be engaged. I don't know if that demographic is ultimately 1/10 of 1%, or 1% or 10% of population - but they - you - are out there - onwards. - thanks for comment
Suffocating fish, but plenty of slime, cephalopods, and sulphur, towards an ecosystem of jelly fish and sea urchins. Killer whales fighting back as mafioso fatten up tuna with rare sardines for dystopian sushi joints in Tokyo. 100-degree water in Florida as do-gooders toss rotting lettuce to starving manatees. What crazy animals we are.
Professor Pauley is right when he says that the average person is too busy trying to make ends meet to be concerned about the oceans. The water where I live is polluted by PFAS. I have tried to talk to a few working people in our community about this problem. One person got upset and said that she didn't want to know about the PFAS problem. They just have too much on their plate.
It's great to understand that, but it doesn't make one bit of difference to the situation as it is. The situation still has to be faced and pertinent informed choices made, no matter our individual circumstances. Look at it as a learning experience. You put a bigger problem off or ignore it because it's inconvenient, (and if global destruction of the the biosphere isn't a bigger problem than your individual woes, I don't know what is)... The bigger problem just keeps getting bigger.
I had to go through the same problem explaining about climate change and plastic pollution by even following some extreme measures myself to a couple of friends but it's all in vain. It's a matter of choice and it is not so easy to change our daily choices. I would also recommend reading The catalyst by Jonah Berger, which through more light on what makes people change.
Nate, your efforts are so benignly intended, and intelligently presented, and generously offered that I can't help but weep for the everyday "schlock" that most people are subjected to from the "mainstream". Truth will be our only salvation and yet are "deciders" spin a different tale. Perhaps our hubris will be truly "Darwinian" in all of its implications.
Objectively speaking, the human ambition to change the environment to suit their own local short-term interests is highly mal-adaptive, and a clear evolutionary dead end. It puts those of us who want to align our interests with life and Darwinian long-term survival as awkwardly in conflict with the human species, its instituions and governance structures.
Truth changes so much, 3 degrees means 2-4 metres, 30 year mortgages on quite a few properties might not be able to happen anymore, how do you tell the world the monetary system we have, all based on debt, is not going to be the same? I'm not sure of the lag between temperature and the resultant ice thaw but who is going to be the news announcer to announce that are now different, what are the policies after, would it be a leader of govt and they immediately say we are on a war footing, how hard would it be to live if your countries medium of exchange, the dollar for example, was suddenly devalued? Individuals find it hard to reduce consumption overall, how do we tell society that's it, you stay home, you get food, water shelter, clothing, electricity, for free but that's it for a while.."
Since I was a small boy, I have always loved the ocean and today I miss not living near it. What your guests said made me very sad, but I don't want to live in ignorance of the facts even when they are this brutal. Thanks for a great podcast.
A very useful conversation. Thanks Nate and team for platforming these ocean experts. Yes - The "Medea hypothesis" seems entirely credible under these circumstances.
The density of salt in ocean water is increased by the formation of sea ice near the poles in winter. If there is less ice formation there is less of the salt concentration that would have occurred. Sea ice does not hold onto salt but releases the salt into the liquid water that remains liquid around it. That greater salinity is what drives the sinking of ocean water.
The fishing industry is dominated by a handful of large investment firms, including BlackRock, Vanguard, State Street, Capital Group, and Norges. These firms are seeking to gain a monopoly in the fishing industry, and they see wildlife as a competitor to their profits.
A billion snow crabs pulled a no show in Alaska this year. What little remains of marine life is migrating to and gathering at the poles. Because the oceans are getting too hot with the gigatons of daily heat we’re pumping into the atmosphere daily. All of which should indicate to you that Blackrock and all the rest will be sh out of luck soon. And that we, at the very least, have more important existential matters to consider with what little time we have left.
@@mischevious yeah I suspect their lives are so opulent they live in bubbles with sycophants telling them their plan is genius, they have a god complex, peak arrogance and they think they can control nature but nature will always be bigger than human constructs
@@mischevious DarkHeart BlackRock VanGuard are sufficiently diversified that any given species crash they have caused or benefitted from will not materially affect them . They must be smashed as a deliberate preemptive Act of self- and eco-defense
Thank you Nate for hosting a great discussion and for highlighting the importance of the world's oceans for all life on Earth. The news is not great; our oceans are dying. The oceans have been saving humanity ever since we started spewing carbon dioxide into the atmosphere; over 90% of heat retained by the Earth due to greenhouse gases is absorbed by the oceans. If it wasn't for the oceans ability to sequester excess heat, the Earth would have become uninhabitable a long time ago. However, we are now witnessing increasing stratification in the Earth's oceans and this is one of the causes of the recent off the charts sea surface temps that have been recorded. Oceanographer Jim Massa has done a lot of work to highlight the desperate plight of the Earth's oceans, particularly regarding the heat content, and you may wish to invite him for your next roundtable discussion on the oceans. Thanks again for all you're doing.
Amazing job. Thanks. It would also be great a podcast around all the new technologies being put on the stage every week in order to understand wich have actual potential. Although we know that technology alone will not be the answer, we also know that will be part of the responses. And honestly, its quite complicated to distinguish what's real, what's greenwashing, what's maybe promising but not in the short term or what's is just not faisable without massive energy inputs or too much extractivism
Fantastic discussion. Thank you for bringing such remarkable guests to these focused, intelligent and illuminating conversations - Super informative regarding heat effects on the oceans, but surprisingly little mention of ocean acidification and the impacts of changing ocean chemistry on oceanic food chains.
Another rather unusual thing this year (that can appear a good thing at first), is the number of sea turtles (Caretta caretta) that have laid eggs in the western Med this summer, around 12 nests on the French coast, more than 30 I think in Spain (especially in Catalunia), and more than 400 in Italy. In fact one laid eggs where I spend my vacations, but I missed all the eclosions :( (62 litttle turtles one day, then 3 3 days later, and another two times 2 I think). This never happened before, and apparently no turtles were laying eggs in the Northern western med in past centuries (or very exceptional)
Inspiring and depressing haha..A much needed conversation. Deep gratitude Nate, Daniel, Antonio, and Peter for your efforts to inform us about the truth of the Ecology and it's current trajectory towards radical imbalance.
We ALL have to choose to have fewer kids. We have to reduce the demand, the stress on every single system. And reducing our population does this. Easily, and quickly. Most of us here have the rights, means, tools, to choose to have smaller families... We need to help the rest of the world to get the same. We have to choose quality of life over quantity of life.
@@antonyjh1234 here lies the issue. When you look at what's involved in powering, supplying our civilisation at the 'nice' level we have, you realise that going veggie, not owning a car, etc, etc, etc, simply doesn't add up to much... Plus we're facing issue from every direction.. Climate change is but one. So we have to accept that the earth, its ecosystem simply cannot support 8 billion humans... And definitely not at the standard of living many of us enjoy.... Therefore, we have to reduce our population. And the only nice way of doing this is to choose to have fewer kids. And to have the rights, tools, freedoms, education, understanding, etc. to do such. I've had my vasectomy, and won't have any kids. But there's only a few of us that don't want any. (more than you think tho). We just have to hope that people get to hear about this, understand, and might choose to have fewer kids. It's very much in their, their children's, and all of our interests.
You do you but I'd disagree we can't do things better, people having to work for a central bank that earns over 100% of your loan, after the govt takes 50% of your working life has kept us from our homes, growing our own veges, the largest maintained crop in USA is the lawn, we barely do things right now.@@cheeseandjamsandwich
So I own a small business which is a part of the system and I have been reducing. For years actually. But it doesn't matter as the 'competition' has swept it all up. Matter-of-fact, the competition has big investors in the tune of pension funds who are buying more machines using more fuel than my process did per unit. Your question is not fair not knowing this person's circumstances.
I don't know if you meant my question but I don't think the question unfair, without knowing most peoples circumstances I'm sure there are things they could cut back on/out.@@RickLarsonPermacultureDesigner
Love your work Nate and these three gentlemen sent shivers up my spine. I want to contrast this show with a previous guest who has a book titled “Unsettled”. Here is what I see. Enormously talented, genuine and sincere well meaning but unfortunately Silo driven specialists. It’s like the parable of the blind men describing an elephant. If the oceans have been a heat sink, how can the numbers produced in Unsettled have any meaningful credibility? I hope you Nate will build the over arching integrative platform capable of smashing the silos and letting these wonderful experts co-exist, thrive and contribute to a greater all inclusive model of each of the driving forces impacting on our climate. Until we achieve that, all we have are meaningless microcosm takeouts of an enormously larger phenomena. And the so called Elephant in the room remains unseen in its entirety.
If you are depressed by the thought of our future extinction, think on this, after each of the previous mass extinction events, when complex life was able to bloom again, it bounced back increased in complexity, abundance, and diversity. So the next time complex life is able to thrive on the planet, it's going to be absolutely spectacular, especially without any Sapiens to contaminate the place.
More cloaked death wish, that. There are never...ever...any guarantees of anything. This what we have, right here right now. The rest is a story you're making up in your head.
let me tell you, the reason people don't properly consider the ocean is because its like a great cauldron you can dip into and it seems everlasting. If yu=ou could look into the ocean and see the dwindling stocks just the same as we see dwindling mammals and birds and insects then it would be obvious but we treat it as an everlasting bowl then act surprised when it runs "dry"
i was lucky during my uni days at Otago uni in New Zealand, i had a true mad scientist as my chemistry tutor. he was so cool. He said they (NIWA) did an experiment where they dumped tons old iron into a specific part of the southern ocean to see if there was an incease in plankton, and there was a huge increase. The iron rich sand that gets swept into the sea from the deserts of Australia help marine life. Thats the 2c of info that i remember from 19 years ago.
The only way of addressing the subsidy issue is to use import duties that offset the subsidy value. This is not just a problem of fish in our supermarkets, it also affect oet and animal feed. Various governments will complain voiciferously but stand firm on the issue.
Thanks Nate for this and all your work that is so important! It grieves me to see only 43K subscribers - hope you will find ways to translate into other languages to reach a wider audience.
this is true - from slightly depressing, to moderately depressing, to very depressing, I knew it was bad, but not how bad and the details. not for the faint of heart. ...it is painful if you can still feel. I already don't eat fish, not sure what else to do given who i am and where i live
Excellent podcast. I have one comment about Peter Ward’s tale of extinction and biomass increase afterwards. This strikes me as an analogue to early succession. When you knock down all the trees in a forest, nature’s first reaction is to cover the soil with grasses of only a few species. Grasses specialize in quickly producing biomass. Killing off all the big fish is similar to cutting down trees. The cephalopod and slim ocean is similar to grassland cover. Low diversity and lots of biomass. So how are they different? With forests, there are likely to be seed sources and animals ‘nearby’, to gradually feed into succession. Sadly, with widespread ocean depletions, there may be no easy inputs, and nature will need to wait on evolution as with other extinction events, not on migration as with succession. - Tom Abel
Sea surface temperatures (SST) were trending downwards 2000-2018 (HadSST 4), and from 1950-1980, and from 1880-1910. The oceans warmed at a faster rate 1910-1940 than 1980-2010. Remember CO2 has been accumulating in the atmosphere at an accelerating rate all the time, so there is little correlation between the two. The most recent rise stopped in August 2023, and has been declining since (NOAA SST v5 monthly). The ocean has warmed rapidly and repeatedly during the current interglacial with no correlation to CO2 e.g. 10,300-10,200 years before the present (y BP), 9,500y BP, 6,000-5,900y BP, 5,400-5,300y BP, 2,500-2,300y BP, 1,700-1,600y BP (Berner et al., 2008). There is a high frequency (18 events) of SST variability on the order of 1-3°C during a 10-50 year time resolution throughout the Holocene in the North Atlantic with no correlation to CO2. And Life just carried on.
Notion that west coast inshore cold water is because of Alaskan current is not the whole reason for the cold water, the statement omits the upwelling factorof this region. Wind driven surface water pushes warm water offshore and coldwater is brought to the surface. This is a primary production zone , the basis of the food chain for ocean life. This is currently being threatened by the introduction of wind farms for electricity that will have some effect and could effect regional balance and ocean stasis.
Antonio, it's great to see someone with Vitiligo with such a passion for climate change!! My daughter has vitiligo and is 16. What do you do to fight the disease?
In this cleverly designed physical reality, there is a food chain and then there is purpose interconnectivity. Each creature seems designed to move in such a way as to agitate a specific layer of our earth, air and water. Eliminating species from the storyboard creates gaps in both the food chain and purpose.
your love is like an ocean that always takes me home whispering wind is blowing telling me i'm not alone your love is like a river that i am floating down i've never been a swimmer but i know that i'll never drown i know that i'll never drown - i'll carry - the weight - i'll do anything for you - my bones may break - but i'll never be untrue- oh what i wouldn't do - oh - what i wouldn't do
Very good discussion... for part 2, questions I have: Sea water acidity , from co2 adsorption, update on impacts. The oceans have absorbed around 30% of co2 emissions in the atmosphere, as water warms solubility will be less, if H2S forms acidification will rise, making co2 less soluble... is a tipping point likely where the oceans release more co2 than they take up?
This is the problem with the entire 1° or 1.5° global average temperature message. Layman cannot perceive the threat of this: - that it is not just the air but all the water on the planet increasing by 1°. And the absolutely spectacular amount of energy it takes to make that happen to the water. - that the danger is not actually temperature, but the amount of energy the temperature represents. How it changes jet streams and ocean currents to have that much more energy. - That the air and ocean currents changing means regional weather changing. Where it used to be hot it is now cool, where it used to be cool it becomes hot. One part of the world is in a panic to buy air conditioners while the other part of the world is in a panic to buy insulation and central heating. More important whatever crops your region has grown through the history of humanity, will no longer grow, and ag will need to swap crops around the world. This will not happen easily. - that we were already near a recent natural cycle thermal maximum and had barely started to cool, then reversed up unnaturally. And the graph looks to aim way above any temperature seen in a million years. Before humans were on this planet. Starting near the warmest ever, then shooting up warmer than that is scary. We have never seen it, and it is not the temperatures all the species of the world have evolved to cope with. - That it is not direct harm to humans that is the problem. We can move away from the equator and coastlines, we can build different buildings, we can heat homes or provide air conditioners. The problem is the small species, the micro organisms that are not a hearty to change as we are. What if we lose bees, or worms, or plankton, or algae - any of the keystone species? What if a different algae or bacteria or virus bloom in the new environment? The first problem is that these species can affect food - ALL FOOD. We may all be starving in our AC or Heated Homes. And some of those micro organisms affect our atmosphere. Like provide the majority of our oxygen. What if they stop producing oxygen and start producing something poisonous to us instead? We could all suffocate due to a bloom of some algae or bacteria. Maybe a new airborne bacteria loves the hot temperatures and just kills us all? This needs to be explained to humanity, cause the 1.5° messaging just does not cause the panic is should.
@@thegreatsimplificationthere's a scientist at a non profit called American Resiliency that does a good job of taking Big Ideas on climate and making them relatable to everyday people. She has a RU-vid channel too, called American Resiliency and does state by state breakdowns of the national climate report (among other things)
Thirty years ago I represented a large environmental organization that pushed for Population Control and the response split our organization as we lost memberships and the religious types really went nuts ! But I still believe this is the real answer as when I was born there was only approx two billion and now we exceed eight billion as the Biosphere / Oceans die ! Probably too late now as the oceans use to feed two billion an produced half our oxygen ! Maybe AI can produce a solution ?
I'm loving your talk and your guests - probably the only issues that we should be talking and thinking about eh? I've been following Guy McPherson for years and find that like him, you too have no fear in addressing The Truth. How interesting that 95% of humanity is too ignorant or frightened to face what is happening right in front of them. As one reaches one's 70's I have found that I contemplate the brevity of life constantly as well as the looming reality of death. Does concern about Life on Earth even matter? As a follower of Vipassana meditation I find much comfort in my practise and the understanding of non-duality. Following great thinkers such as Rupert Spira is also very enlightening. I wonder if humanity's tendency to dualism might not be the bottom-line of our habitual ignorance . . .
Nate. Thanks for sharing ❤paul beckwith had a lot of knowledge and would be an interesting guest as the climate is already killing species and humans and heat waves are killing the old and obese population and cities are heat zones and people would die even in the modern World when electricity blackoutd occur.❤❤❤
Just repeating what better-qualified people have pointed out: more people die of cold than of heat, so a warming world is actually beneficial from that point of view.
Many years ago now on the east coast of Canada every one and their dog depended on the cod fishery. The scientist working for the government had been warning for years that the stock was disappearing and that quitos needed to be cut. Long story short that did not happen and the cod have not recovered in almost 40 years and likely never will.
George Monbiot is a very bright guy. He’s pretty disruptive re modern agriculture and is on the anti capitalist side. People may not agree with all he says but he’s done a lot of research and is very tenacious. If you want to hear some strong well argued views get him on the show.
Lamentablemente no aprendemos hasta que las cosas pasan y no tienen vuelta atrás, tuvimos la oportunidad de cambiar muchas cosas después del COVID y todo volvió a ser igual o peor, es la triste realidad que vivimos. La economía y el modelo económico actual no dan oportunidad de cambio, si no modificamos eso, no hay forma de cambiar nada.
Putting sulfur in the atmosphere - 20 years ago, everyone was screaming about acid rain. How could hucksters even mention it - oh wait, because they are hucksters.
Scary stuff, though I dont understand how you can hear stuff like this from your guests and still think people who speak of human extinction are going too far. Maybe they are but I dont see how you can dismiss that as a real possible future for humanity
If an interruption of the AMOC does create a colder & drier Europe, would there be some regional benefits, like slowing or halting of the permafrost melting around the European Arctic region coastlines ?
The guests' comments are even more disturbing than their factual evidence suggests. We simply don't know at what point the entire ocean ecosystem will undergo a phase shift in to a significantly less habitable environment for ocean life. All we can now say is that we are stressing the ocean ecosystems, and are heading rapidly towards the trigger (tipping) point.
Any action the investors, those who control the flow of money with investments, might imagine to mitigate the damages, will have to provide a return on investment. They can't do anything themselves personally all they know is money beget money. So. Nothing positive will occur because there is no return on investments when this agricultural supporting money system collapses from overuse and/or abrupt climate change. Studying and reporting the issues won't change their minds methinks and its collapse or worse. But ok, I listened and am thinking about what I heard, an episode of tuning in an out as my thoughts are not disciplined to take it all in at once. I did hear dolphins with ribs exposed from the lack of food because the oceans are transforming from complex to more simple life forms. More motivation to live simply now realizing it might not work out anyway.
For us on earth there are not enough handkerchiefs to mop up the tears. The time for optimism is over. Now is the time for coming to peace with the emergent disaster and moving beyond doom to what Michael Dowd calls "post doom".
The problems of the world: socially, politically, environmentally cannot be resolved and will continue to deteriorate. An extinction event is just what we need or even quicker a global nuclear war. Extinction events throughout history have always turned out to be good things except for the victims. BRING IT ON!!
I was happy not to hear "1.5 degrees Celcius" or "2100". Any science communicator that uses these terms should be put in jail for a long time or at least be banned for publishing.
Bottom Line. What can we do to reverse the Earth Energy Imbalance so that more heat escapes into space than is absorbed by our ecosphere? Until we achieve that everything else is just hot air.
Aside, note that harvesting geothermal energy (heat) from the interior of the earth is not going to help that project. Tapping the heat of the Earth's core, gee what could go wrong?
Somewhat ironic that prof Peter Ward is sitting in front of an air-conditioning unit. Far more people are going to be using AC in the years to come, only increasing our global energy usage. I believe such processes are now collectively referred to as comrising the 'doom loop'.
Even more ironic that we’re are all on our electric powered digital devices and we all know where the raw materials for those came from and where they will end up.
Oh Mother Gia, please forgive us of our carbon sins, forgive us of being made of carbon and breathing the C02 poison. May we swiftly all die out so your anger is satiated.
Why has capitalism triumphed in the West and failed in Africa? This radical critique of the growth doctrine offers a compelling new history of recent capitalism, from an African perspective. For a generation brought up to regard GDP growth as a triumph of modern capitalism, The The Tyranny of Growth reveals a truth which is altogether more shocking, and more shameful. From the citadels of power and wealth in Washington and Wall Street to the ruthless devastation of lives and livelihoods in Africa, it lays bare just how ill-equipped our existing frameworks are for understanding, defining and measuring growth. Malcolm Ray comes to grips with the current social and economic turmoil across Africa by tracing the history of the growth doctrine to a broken economic system, born out of the ashes of the Second World War. In a masterful blend of serious scholarship and journalistic sleuthing, he brings to life the cast of characters and circumstances that have mythologised growth over the turbulent twentieth and early twenty-first centuries. By giving a historical account of the origins and mythologisation of growth, Ray explains how the concept of GDP came to have such bewildering appeal and complexly resonant power over our lives, despite its ruinous consequences. By shedding light on the story in this moment of profound social and economic crisis, he gives the reader a new way of imagining the world and transcending the limits to change. The Tyranny of Growth by Malcolm Ray will be available by February 2022. More details: ow.ly/S7Ib50HA14Q
I would think a good theemonuclear war could save a lot of species, after the tjernobyl disaster the natural world in these abandoned Arias is thriving. Apparently radiation has not haemed non human Species ❤
NO! See episodes w Chuck Watson and my Frankly on Nuclear War. If strategic (as opposed to 1-2 missiles) would be worst possible scenario for biodiversity and life on Earth. Would kill the ocean food web and oxygen systems. Truly unimaginable (and unknown but we can speculate)
Pauly actually talked about the effects on nuclear war on oceans when he did the one on one podcast with Nate, that scared the shit out of me because I already knew what would potentially happen on the surface during an (even moderate) nuclear exchange. What I didn't know was how much worse nuclear war will be to oceans. Make no mistake, nuclear war is a mass extinction event with devestatingly permanent effects. Natural earth will never fully recover from it. It's a worst case scenario that can easily be eliminated but is currently disgustingly easy for civilization to engage in.
You gotta stop the climate catastrophe by shutting down the money system completely and focusing on necessities like food,shelter, and clothing. And you really have no choice. Or else you'll have to face the uglier alternative.
Delglobalization and deindustrialization are salvation with attendant end to competitive markets and consumerist lifestyles. Replaced by small scale local agrarianism, and perhaps minimal centrally planned delivery of essential services that support a high quality of life. The capitalists have no one else to blame, they did it to themselves.
@@antonyjh1234That's not what i said. Are you so blinded by your own mind you cannot recognize anything? I said we need to shut down the money system and focus on supplying all our needs basically by focusing on the necessities. Our species has no chance in hell if we stay on the money system. We have to evolve and advance to a higher level to improve.
I'm working on it. This is not about an abrupt lifestyle change though as the system demands we all work for it. This is more of how can we have access to the funds necessary to make changes, slowly overtime its possible...
AMOC will collapse when the earth stops spinning, its due to the corrliolis effect. Give me a call when you toilete flush changes direction. As for surface water stopping getting cold and sinking in the North Atlantic, if there was a drastic increase in sunshine hours dur to a relocation of the sun or a change in the tilt of the Earth thats what it would take. a 3-4C change. would only move the location of the thermal inversion 50-75 miles north. Fisheries is in real threat due to industrial overfishing, good thing nobody understands how weather affects water bodies which affects where fish schools locate themselves or it would be worse.
First off, the title and thumbnail is slightly emotive, which doesn't lend itself to an 'open' debate, but 'loads' the table, albeit a little. I don't know anything of the guests in the debate, but feel the contribution to the effect of an 'echo' chamber, realizing that probably every academic position mentioned here, is reliant on some form of funding. Now i know, that in itself is no reason to dismiss these views out of hand, but to counter that criticism i think a more diverse range of opinions could have been sought, that could've included a few, people like maybe, Patrick Moore, William Happer, Richard Lindzen theres's even a chap on youtube; Tony Heller. Just to give the arguments for both sides a chance. That's a REAL debate , when there is conflict of opinion, and hopefully reason will prevail.
@@thegreatsimplification O.k. with respect discussion, ( to me they're the same), but the guests are by and large, all singing from the same hymn sheet. My main point was on the diversity of opinion that was missing.
@@generic_youtube_comment the hymn sheet is ocean science. These 3 are among the best most respected in the world on this topic. Peter has 17 books on prior extinctions and their relation to oceans. Patrick Moore?? Lol. No. Likeable guy but not qualified at this table, sorry
@@generic_youtube_comment Can you point out where the panel members are wrong? Is your concern that these people are wrong? Or is your concern that they may be right...but that we should not care? We should care more for other problems?
