Foundation for Global Community

I recently presented my population PowerPoint program to
the Foundation for Global Community/Atlanta.
Shown with me is one of the group's leaders, Janet Wells.

I have a small office in my backyard and spend most of my life there, so it's always a treat when I can actually get out and meet people. I call this "going into the atmosphere."

On Tuesday, Sept. 8, I had the honor of giving my population presentation to the Atlanta group of Foundations for Global Community (FGC). This is my fourth population presentation/event this year, and I always love getting out and talking about what I believe is the greatest issue facing humankind.

The group was kind and receptive, and this is one presentation where I gained more new knowledge and insight than the audience. The FGC is an incredible organization that is known for the behind-the-scenes work they did to help end the Cold War.

I thank one of the group's leaders, Janet Wells, for explaining to me what FGC Atlanta is all about, and just listening to her made me excited and hopeful for humanity. One of the things she shared with me is nicely summarized on their website:

It seems to us that the process of dialogue is part of the answer to HOW we are to create a cultural shift in values ... Dialogue involves listening, hearing each other, NOT refuting but HEARING. Everyone has a piece of the truth. If we remain open we might hear it.

When I think about all the rabid arguing and ugly partisanship that I'm currently seeing in the news, especially over the health care issue, it is now more obvious than ever to me that step one for achieving global sustainability is, well, talking. I know this is easier said than done because sometimes the other party is using violence, or else they are so uninformed that it's difficult to have a dialogue. But at least working toward a mutual understanding appears to be the first step in shifting our culture in a positive direction.

The mission statement on their website is so powerful and so beautifully worded, that I'm printing it below in its entirety:

The Foundation for Global Community/Atlanta grew out of the California group, formerly known as Beyond War. The name change, to FGC, reflected a shift in emphasis, from building consensus that WAR IS OBSOLETE (because of nuclear warheads) and that WE ARE ONE, to educating on the more general threat to our species and life system represented by environmental degradation and overpopulation. This crisis results from our behavior, which grows out of our values and beliefs. To change behavior we must create a shift in cultural values.

The power of culture over our lives is pervasive. It influences practically everything we do — from the trivialities of what we eat and how we dress, to the profundities of how we try to achieve meaning and purpose in our lives.

In our culture, the prevailing attitudes, values, and beliefs that guide our collective behavior — from unbridled materialism to rampant individualism — are devastating the life systems and human communities of the planet. The American Dream has become a global nightmare.

But with this crisis comes profound opportunity.

A whole new population — more idealistic and globally oriented — has emerged in the United States in the last decade. These people share a number of attitudes and beliefs: An interest in self actualization and spirituality; a desire to live a simpler lifestyle; a need for society to rebuild communities; a sense of nature and the feminine as sacred; and a concern for the global environment. Attitudes and beliefs like these form the basis of what is called integral culture. A leading study suggests that there are about 44 million North Americans who think this way, presenting a real possibility of positive cultural change. Our mission is to make this possibility a reality.

All culture is ultimately rooted in our understanding of who we are, where we have come from, and where we are going. We believe the root of our cultural crises is that our current answers to these age-old questions are obsolete. What information — from science, the wisdom traditions, and contemporary thought — can help us discover more adequate answers?

Wow, this is an incredible statement, and it has really given me a lot to ponder. I thank this group for the work they are doing, and for planting some new seeds in my consciousness.

Sincerely,

The Goose

The Myth of Capitalism

Capitalism assists humans in their locust behavior of consuming all resources of a given region, to produce wealth for the privileged few. Capitalism exploits labor and rapes the environment to create value-added goods at the lowest price possible.

Capitalism needs a larger, and ever-growing consumer base. Capitalism must have population growth because that means cheap labor and more consumers — no wonder capitalism loves immigration!

Capitalism controls government. If you think that government regulates capitalism, all I can say is "HA." Capitalism allows just enough wealth to trickle to the bottom to avoid civil disorder. Why? Because capitalism needs stable markets.

Capitalism controls the media, hires talking heads, and programs the public into believing that free enterprise is good, and that Socialism and Communism are bad. Capitalism programs the general public into booing down Socialism and accepting "the one right way" with open arms.

Capitalism dumbs down the public so that they don't question its virtues. Capitalism makes people just smart enough to serve its corporate empires.

Capitalism turns people into consumers. Capitalism lures people into believing that material goods bring happiness. Capitalism helps to addict people to consumerism.

Capitalism has no morals or rulebook. The system simply does whatever is necessary to make a profit in the next quarter. So, it's not surprising that Capitalism operates in a coalition with Conservative Religion. Capitalist-backed politicians say, "I'm against abortion," and that drives the conservative religious, single-issue voters to the polls, to vote in the Capitalist political puppets.

Capitalism controls government at all levels. Government simply provides the framework and apparatus for capitalism to function best.

Capitalism loves the high profits of war, and capitalism spreads the lies of patriotism. Capitalism build the armaments, but it still needs to convince mothers to kiss their sons goodbye and send them off to horrible deaths on the battlefield. There is huge money in "properly equipping the troops," and tending to their food and housing needs, and, of course, their medial needs.

Socialism and Communism are not good economic systems either. In fact, no economic system is perpetually sustainable. They all eventually fail. Perhaps the only system that works is straight barter — this could be made sophisticated by a computer system. If you perform a service, you earn credits. Those credits can then be spent. Government should get out of the money business. Wouldn't a world without money be wonderful? I'm not sure this system will work, but I KNOW the other three won't.

Sincerely,

The Goose

Humans, Viruses, and Favorite Quotes

At the recommendation of several people, I finally got around to renting The Matrix, a pretty incredible 1999 film. My favorite quote:

I'd like to share a revelation that I've had during my time here. It came to me when I tried to classify your species and I realized that you're not actually mammals. Every mammal on this planet instinctively develops a natural equilibrium with the surrounding environment but you humans do not. You move to an area and you multiply and multiply until every natural resource is consumed and the only way you can survive is to spread to another area. There is another organism on this planet that follows the same pattern. Do you know what it is? A virus. Human beings are a disease, a cancer of this planet. You're a plague and we are the cure.

— Agent Smith

Here are some other great quotes I collected this week, mainly from the WarSocialism discussion list:

Moreover, brains are "physical." After about age 25, they are mostly hardwired and it's almost impossible to teach them new world views.

People evolved, and are wired by experience, to execute "behavioral algorithms" in response to "environmental cues." It's almost like reflexes, like a doctor whacking you on your knee. If you change the environmental cues, you change the behavior. That the essence of AMERICA 2.0: same people, same education and values, different environmental cues.

— Jay

And another one. This is a short book that I own. I don't even remember who gave it to me.

You don't communicate with anyone purely on the rational facts or ethics of an issue... It is only when the other party is concerned or feels threatened that he will listen — in the arena of action, a threat or a crisis becomes almost a precondition to communication ... No one can negotiate without the power to compel negotiation ... To attempt to operate on a good-will basis rather than on a power basis would be to attempt something that the world has not yet experienced.

— Saul Alinsky, Rules for Radicals

So True:

The big corporations, our clients, are scared shitless of the environmental movement. They sense that there's a majority out there and that the emotions are all on the other side — if they can be heard. They think the politicians are going to yield to the emotions. I think the corporations are wrong about that. I think the companies will have to give in only at insignificant levels. Because the companies are too strong, they're the establishment. The environmentalists are going to have to be like the mob in the square in Romania before they prevail.

— William Greider, Who Will Tell the People

This is from an article about an ex-cop in Siberia who says that he's the Messiah. Based on this statement, I will follow him:

He says he realised that God has sent him to Earth to teach mankind about the evils of war and the havoc we are wreaking on the environment.

Oh, and the definition of Deep Ecology:

A philosophy that calls for a profound shift in our attitudes and behavior based on voluntary simplicity; rejection of anthropocentric attitudes; intimate contact with nature; decentralization of power; support for cultural and biological diversity; a belief in the sacredness of nature; and direct personal action to protect nature, improve the environment, and bring about fundamental societal change.

And yes, I absolutely love Gaylord Nelson, one of the greatest of all environmentalists:

The economy is a wholly owned subsidiary of the environment, not the other way around.

— Gaylord Nelson

It Is What It Is ...

I've been engaged in a fascinating debate this week on Jay Hanson's WarSocialism discussion list (see www.dieoff.org). The result of the discussion is downright depressing, and can be summed up in a few points:

• Humans are at the end of the modern age and are about to face a massive dieoff, which will likely be caused by nuclear war, an influenza pandemic, or ecological ruin. Not to mention, there is going to be mass chaos after the cheap oil is gone.
  
  
• Neither humans nor evolution have any kind of end plan or goal. As the saying goes, "it is what it is."
  
  
• The idea that human destiny is to colonize the Universe is not looking good. There are many factors that make interplanetary space travel basically impossible.

This leaves me with the conclusion that we humans are a one-in-a-trillion freak occurrence in the Universe, and we are about to go. We will likely go in an unpleasant way — extreme violence, starvation, or disease.

My own assessment is that losing jobs will just be the beginning. Before long we will be engaging in cannibalism again, like our chimp relatives. Also, I learned that a third of chimp males never make it to adulthood because they are murdered by chimp gangs, and that we share about 95% of the same genes as the chimp, so extreme violence is embedded in us as well.

This is sounding very, very grim, and tonight I'm about to give up all hope. But I know I won't, and I don't want to sell out my principles for food — I'm not sure how long I'll be able to hold out on that one.

The bottom line is human beings are a very sick, dysfunctional, and violent species. It's so sad because I see a lot of good in us too.

Space flight to other planets is impossible:

From Tom —

I recently saw a bumper sticker with the following slogan; "Earth First. We'll strip mine the other planets later." This is the perfect slogan for all the space cadets out there who believe the star trek, star wars science fiction fantasies Hollywood has filled our heads with throughout this soon to be fading, electronic age. Maybe we alpha males can even get lucky and score with some hot, green alien chicks while were propagating our benevolent expansion of the heavens as an added bonus. Captain Kirk sure seemed to get lucky a lot.

I find talk of colonizing other planets in other solar systems amusing because it's a perfect example of the arrogant, anthropocentric hubris that characterizes human beings which is what got us into this predicament of overshoot after in the first place. Colonization of other planets is practically impossible for at least a few logical reasons such as follow. The list is by no means comprehensive.

1. We are the product of billions of years of fine-tuned, ecosystem evolution and exploitation and our very existence is completely contingent upon the exact and delicate balance of atmospheric, climatic and terrestrial conditions (aka capital) that have yet to be verified on any other planet we could hope to reach before the consequences of our species overshoot overtake us.

2. As arrogant and capable as we are, the human body can't survive years in a gravity-free environment because our muscles, heart and bones are subject to radical atrophy. Any planet that we could potentially exploit is probably light years away and the laws of physics preclude such contingency. Don't bother talking to me about short-cuts through "worm holes" because no such thing has ever been verified. Worm holes are a science fiction hypothesis at best.

3. A significant feature of overshoot and collapse is the exponential conversion of capital into a waste stream leaving a degraded (read trashed) ecosystem behind with less viable resources for future generations. Translation: We won't have the energy nor the money available to get off the ground into space to export our benevolent intentions to other parts of the universe. In a nut shell, this is why space programs no longer practically exists for space exploration. Space exploration is past peak. We went to the moon, it was sterile and mainly useless and we'll probably never get any further.

Indeed flight was once thought to be impossible but the laws of aerodynamics permitted such after all (as long as the contingencies of capital, technology and energy are available). However, the laws of physics and specifically the laws of thermodynamics predict Homosapiens is destined (doomed?) to existence and eventual extinction here on good old planet Earth. It seems it's the only planet we'll ever really get to strip mine after all.

We Can't Evolve Our Way Out Of Our Problems

From Scott —

Several points to make about the likelihood of short term human evolution here. One is that evolutionary changes in primates and apes do not happen in just a few generations. It requires hundreds or even thousands of generations to evolve as a species. Humans have remained pretty much unchanged physically for over 100k years (not including the Neanderthals, which seem to have been a separate sub-species or population of humans that did not interbreed). Socially humans made a last significant change somewhere around 50k years ago into more or less what we are now. That is around 2,500 generations of humans since the last major distinctive change occured. If you want to put a stake in the ground for 'modern civilized humans' as the point of evolution that we made our last significant change (I do not believe this, this is just an example of scale) at about 12k years ago at the dawn of modern civilization, that is still over 500 generations of humans which remain basically unchanged from the dawn of history.

Another point is that as a population gets larger, like in humans today, the likelihood of a chance mutation or genetic alteration being passed on and affecting a large segment of the population (and hence leading to a genetic alteration and/or evolution) is pretty much drown out. The massively larger population of unchanged genes would be the ones that are passed on. 7 billion people are not going to evolve much, until/unless there are some abrupt environmental changes or pandemic that radically kills off large segments of the population.

Another factor that has risen from the human genome research is that humans have very similar genes to one another, as compared to our closest living relatives, the chimpanzees. As I recall, both types of chimps share something like 97% of chimp specific genetic traits, whereas humans are more like 99% similar in human genetic traits. This is not to be confused with the fact that humans and chimps share somewhere between 95%-99% of functional genes. The point here is that humans have far less genetic variation within the species than other primates, so the chances of our evolving from our current population is far less.

Given the three reasons stated above, we are not likely to evolve in just a few generations when a lot of 'stuff' is very likely to hit the global fan. We can and may well adapt culturally, but not genetically. Also one genration does not make Europeans a bunch of sloths. Humans (as well as chimps it seems) are prone to war; take away resources and you will fight your neighbors for them. Given that our ancestors likely diverged from the chimpanzees sometime about 5-6 million years ago, the war gene is deep in our genetics (and probably over 6 millon years old). Chimps have been observed to go to war with and kill rival chimps, BTW. They are also prone to cannibalism. Sound familiar?

Evolution Has No Goal

From reductio0adabsurbum:

Sorry Todd, but you're wrong again. Evolution has no "goal", no direction, and no purpose. It just is. Natural selection in a nutshell: if the gene(s) that is(are) responsible for a particular phenotypic variation which endows the possessor of that(those) genes with a reproductive advantage, then that(those) gene(s) will be propagated into subsequent generations more so than will those genes that are less able to do so. That's pretty much it. You may feel dissatisfied by how inhuman and unfeeling that may be, but just because we as a species with our culture think we need purpose, (an illusion of) continuity that projects into the future, it doesn't mean that this need will be worked out into an objective reality. You can't overlay our own human frailties onto evolution or anything else outside our heads. Or at least you can't do that and expect that doing so will affect it in any objective way.

Stone Deaf, Blatant Denial

This is another great post of the WarSocialism discussion list, which I am reprinting with permission. It feels really good to find other people like myself, which assures me that most people are stone crazy, and a few people are not. Most people are just going down the river, having a great time, and not realizing, caring, or denying that there is a waterfall just ahead.

Goose

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Do either of you run into opposition that uses logic to argue against doing something to save the planet? Or do they just put their heads in the sand?

Jay

Answer from Scott:

Stone deaf, blatant denial, or they run screaming for their pastor or rabbi. Or they cover their ears and say, "LA LA LA LA LA LA..." Most say its BS, an Al Gore political scam, the oil companies and Arabs trying to jack up the price of oil, or some other standard reply. Same result when I talk about evolution, geology, mass extinction, peak oil, fisheries collapse, population overshoot (or just birth control) or global warming. Does not matter which.

Even the tree huggers are not willing to listen to, 'the end'. They point to the stars, and say that we are going to colonize other worlds. That gets me riled up, as I used to work in the aerospace industry (General Dynamics in San Diego) and the energy required to go to another habitable planet in another star system is well, more energy than is available in the galaxy at least. Never mind the time or technology to cross deep space, or finding a place like Earth. Forget Mars; proof that any Mars colony will fail is right here above the timberline on Mt Hood. Pleanty of sun, water, seasonal warm weather, oxygen, all the rest, and no large plant growth. Reason? No soil microbes survive up there. Now its all rock in summer... all the Cascade peaks are grey and brown in summer now. The 'glaciers' are all melting off in summer now.

Funny (and typical) story: my ex girlfriend (we still get along) and I were in South Carolina with her brother birding at the beach. We stumbled into a rare early type of salamander, and her brother started an interesting lecture about the species. There was a small crowd gathered around after 5 minutes, and the kids and parents were interested, until... he said the "e" word. Parents' hands instantly went over childrens' ears and they were shuffled off. We still are in the cultural and religious stone age.

Hope in the Face of Overwhelming Odds

Various items of randomness:

Quotes That Don't Make Me Feel Giddy

I'm on several discussion lists that cover global issues like population and peak oil. Here are a couple of memorable quotes from the last week or so:

"Things will certainly change when the widespread domestic violence begins (probably a few years away). However, it may not be the kind of political change that anyone wants." — Jay

"As homo superstitious — dominated by his/her reptilian brain — is in massive numerical overshoot already, the only steady state likely is disaster. Humans will not reduce breeding nor consumption due to rational persuasion."
— Steve

Goose Responds: I'm just not going to give up. Somewhere deep inside us there is the ability to save ourselves. The right solution, connection, or whatever, just hasn't been found yet, but it is there somewhere inside our collective soul. I will always have hope .... always!

Book Review Time



Title: Threshold: The Crisis of Western Culture

Author: Thom Hartmann



Summary (from Sacramento Bee): In "Threshold: The Crisis Of
 Western Culture," writer and Air America host Thom Hartmann argues that the
 deteriorating state of our planet, where the dynamics of environmental,
 economic, and population change are boiling over the limits within which society can function, is inevitably near at hand. In clear
 and impassioned prose, Hartmann busts the myths and ideologies of religious
 fundamentalism, capitalism run amok, male domination, and militarism that are
 draining our world of its natural and human resources and engendering the 
suffering of millions for the benefit of the few.



Goose Comment: The paragraph above says it all. It is the "myths and ideologies"
of our institutions that are destroying us. It's hard to get any meaningful change because of the pushback from people who are in power and who benefit from the status quo.

Olduvi Theory

This chart is quite interesting. Click on it to download a copy of the research paper. Basically, the Olduvai Theory states that the life expectancy of industrial civilization is approximately 100 years: circa 1930-2030.

Beautiful Un-Sunset

I was driving home the other day and just thought this scene of the clouds was pretty. It was taken in Hiram, GA. I call it an un-sunset because the beautiful sunset was actually behind me, but it gave everything an orange hue. The colors of the cloud are really vivid. As I was heading east in my car I just felt like I was in another world for a brief moment. Time sort of stood still.

Patriotic Moment

This scene just struck me as I was in a parking lot — the sun setting behind an American flag. I really felt patriotic and proud when I saw this. Despite all the many social and other problems this country has, I do love it very much. What I love about this country most is the idealism, which keeps our nation unified. We are not a people who are united because of race, religion, looks or anything else, but rather we are united by our ideas, and that is a fantastic step forward for the progression of the species. Most beautiful of all is democracy and freedom, and every day we should cherish it and NEVER take it for granted, however I do realize I'm starting to sound cliché.

Madmen, To the Death

It's 6:43 a.m. in the morning, and I'm sitting here confused, and thinking that life is a total trip.

First of all, homo superstitious is a real disappointment as a species. During this health care debate I've seen what a pathetic, ignorant, and stupid lot that Americans really are. Democracy is a beautiful thing, but before it can work the citizens must be civil and educated, and must be able to participate in enlightened debate. But what we have now is a bunch of talking heads on TV who fan the flames of partisanship for the sake of higher ratings .... and dumbed down America absorbs their crap like a sponge and then they attend town hall meetings where they disrespect their elected leaders and regurgitate the mindless crap of the Fox News hatemongers. Albeit, the political left has their share of hatemongers as well.

So, whatever happened to teamwork? Whatever happened to working together to solve a huge national problem, like finding a way to provide health care for millions of uninsured citizens? I have seen so much greed, hate, and ignorance in the last few weeks that I am totally disgusted. As Rodney King said, "Why can't we just get along?"

Now, I'm pretty sure that if we can't even solve important social problems without all the partisan rancor, how can we ever solve our massive environmental and geo-political problems? We can't, and we are screwed. We are a pathetic and disgusting species, yet every time I say that I run into some wonderful individual who reminds me that humanity is worth saving. We are the good and bad, all rolled into one.

Most offensive of all to me are the under-endowed pricks who are carrying guns to the health care meetings and rallies. Does that gun really make you feel like a man, maybe for the first time in your life? Doesn't anyone see a paradox between health care and guns? America the beautiful is actually a dysfunctional, gun-crazed society that talks about Christianity and love, but is full of violence and hate. Once the cheap energy runs out and our economy continues to deteriorate, more of these gun-toting yahoos will start cracking under the pressure and using their guns. If you don't believe me, pick up the daily newspaper — it's already happening all over the nation and we simply accept it, as the NRA works vigorously to pump more bullets and weapons into our demented society.

So, wrap yourself in your American flag, wave your gun and Bible, and scream about Hitler and Nazis and death panels all you want. Because YOU, the average Jane and John Doe American, are the source of all your angst. You have created this sick, narcissistic, double-standard society that is now consuming you and crushing you. You are the hypocrites, the Bible-thumping madmen, and the beer guzzling dittoheads. You and ONLY YOU are bringing this nation down into the abyss that it so rightfully deserves.

Goose

The Worst Is Yet To Be

This book review actually made me feel good, in some twisted way. I'm laughing ... I'm giddy. Not sure why.

GLOBAL CATASTROPHES AND TRENDS: The Next Fifty Years. Vaclav Smil. xii + 307 pp. The MIT Press, 2008. $29.95.

Prolific writer Vaclav Smil characterizes his latest book, Global Catastrophes and Trends, as “a multifaceted attempt to identify major factors that will shape the global future and to evaluate their probabilities and potential impacts.” Smil is fluent in many languages of the East and the West, and his voluminous citations demonstrate an impressive command of the literature. His two major themes are sudden, catastrophic events and unfolding trends that are catastrophic in their accumulative consequences.

The past 50 years have been exceptionally stable and unusually benign in global terms, Smil says, but this will change. The risks of what are, in his view, the two most likely cataclysmic future threats—nuclear war and pandemic influenza—can be substantially reduced, he believes. He does not see terrorism as a great risk. He also notes that mega-eruptions of volcanoes are quite rare and that the risk of a near-Earth object striking our planet is even more remote and can be handled. Instead, it is unfolding trends that worry him most and occasion the book’s most striking observations.

Energy is a key variable affecting many trends. Smil’s substantial discussion of this topic connects only loosely to the theme of catastrophe but well illustrates his debunking posture toward scary headlines and faddish “solutions.” He gives short shrift to renewable energy. For example, he considers “massive biomass energy schemes” that have been proposed recently to be “among the most regrettable examples of wishful thinking and ignorance of ecosystemic realities and necessities.” Conversion of enough farmland for the production of biofuels is out of the question, he says—we would starve. Wind power will be only a marginal and unreliable source of energy. As for energy from nuclear fusion, it is a mirage, on which the United States has spent a quarter of a billion dollars a year for the past 50 years. Large-scale expansion of nuclear power plants would face significant opposition, Smil says, because of concerns about safety and the lack of permanent waste-storage facilities. (He does, however, note with approval Edward Teller’s proposal to build a nuclear power plant completely underground with enough fuel to last its lifetime.) And he sees no realistic possibility of a hydrogen economy for many decades.

Read the complete review in American Scientist

Summary of article: We're screwed.

Human Growth Annihilates Species

I'm thrilled to learn that the Center for Biological Diversity is launching a new population campaign. Here is the opening paragraph from their announcement:

The human population is 6.8 billion and growing every second. The sheer force of our numbers is dominating the planet to such a degree that geologists are contemplating renaming our era the "Anthropocene": the epoch where the human species is the dominant factor affecting land, air, water, soil, and species. We now absorb 42 percent of the planet's entire terrestrial net primary productivity. We use 50 percent of all fresh water. We've transformed 50 percent of all land. We've changed the chemical composition of the whole biosphere and all the world's seas, bringing on global warming and ocean acidification.

And here is the intro to their new website:

The human population doubled from 1 to 2 billion between the years 1800 and 1930 — an unparalleled event in the planet’s history. No large mammal had ever grown to such numbers or commandeered so many resources. The impact on North America’s native species was devastating:

• Driven extinct by hunters, the last eastern woodland bison was seen in West Virginia in 1825.
• Undulata delissea, a Hawaiian plant, was driven extinct in 1865 by domestic cattle.
• The beautiful Falls-of-the-Ohio scurfpea, which existed on a single island, was drowned by U.S. Dam No. 41 in Kentucky in 1881.
• The Whiteline topminnow was last seen Alabama in 1899, its spring habitat repeatedly pumped dry by the growing human population.
• The Culebra parrot was hunted and collected to extinction in Puerto Rico by 1899.
• The Rocky Mountain grasshopper was purposefully driven extinct — a bounty was even placed on its head — by 1903.
• Merriam’s elk was hunted to extinction in Arizona in 1906.
• The Tennessee riffleshell disappeared in 1930 due to pollution and dams.

The human population doubled again by 1975, this time taking just 45 years. The rate of extinction also increased. Today’s population stands at 6.8 billion and, if it continues on course, will reach 8 billion in 2020 before leveling off at about 9 billion in 2050. If it doesn’t level off, the worldwide population could theoretically reach 15 billion by 2050, but that is unlikely due to the insurmountable economic, political, and ecological crises that would likely ensue.

I am clapping my hands and going "bravo, bravo." This could not have been better said.

The point is that it's NOT FAIR for humans to drive tens of thousands of other species into extinction. This is criminal. If a desperate young woman aborts her fetus, the conservative Christian types scream "MURDER," but they don't bat an eyelash when 30,000 species are slaughtered due to human activity. The Christian conservatives FREAK OUT when two guys hold hands in a park, but they don't think twice about the millions of animals obliterated in North America. Where is the justice? Here is the fairness?

Please visit their site: Center for Biological Diversity Overpopulation Campaign

The Goose

Taking the Population Message On the Road

I've been back on the road again this year giving population presentations. It's always a thrill and honor to get in front of an audience and talk about the most important issue facing humankind.

In late April I was involved in a Green-Pink Party. The main emphasis was to raise funds for fistula, but I also had the opportunity to talk about population, and the need for complete gender equality and women's rights and empowerment. [Shown with me are girls from two Emory University groups that put the event together. The guy at right is a Planned Parenthood field organizer.]

On July 9 we held a Green Sex Party in Atlanta. The purpose of this event was to provide an opportunity for networking and mutual cooperation with women's groups and environmental groups. We had a jar of green condoms, a special green cocktail, and lots of literature to give away. I had the honor of giving the Sierra Club's PowerPoint presentation on population growth. [Shown are fellow members of our Sierra Club team, which organized the event. A very special thanks to Sam for her outstanding organizing.]

On July 18 I spoke at the Atlanta Freethought Fellowship. I really appreciated the curious and inquisitive audience, who asked a lot of questions and provided some great input into the program. It was a great Sunday afternoon! [Shown are two leaders from the Atlanta Freethought group.]

Favorite Quotes

Population growth is the 800 lb Gorilla in the room constantly being ignored. It's clear that continual expansion of humanity is the real reason for a perpetually growing economy. Now that energy costs are rising and economic growth is slowing, look at how the economy has reacted. America and other industrialized nations are going to have a real problem with a subsistence-level economy.
— Fred Kaluza, posted on WarSocialism discussion list

There will continue to be ultra-conservatives who detest the idea that women have control over their own bodies; there will always be those narrow-minded traditionalists who hide behind their "love" for the unborn, despite the fact that they oppose all government support for children already born.
— Cynthia Tucker, Atlanta Journal-Constitution editorial page editor

The idea that population growth guarantees a better life - financially or otherwise - is a myth that only those who sell diapers, baby carriages and the like have any right to believe
— Author Unknown

Al Qaeda was handed a way to achieve its agenda on a platter and so speeded up the process. But the real issue is us. We are a bad weather animal and during the Pleistocene we evolved into a desert ape that manipulates its environment to survive and flourish. Over the 10 millennium since we have become better and better at it. We are the natural destroyers of ecosystems; it's our heritage and our destiny. We have developed religions that support our behavior and now we have developed enough technology to give us the power of God. Power without wisdom is pure evil and wisdom has come slowly to a few but so far the species doesn't listen. Can we be saved? I think so, but we will probably wipe out much of what's beautiful about the Earth before enough people believe strongly enough and make the change. Our job is to spread wisdom and fight conservative thinking on every issue. We need to be clever and patient, the spread of knowledge and public opinion are more important than winning each battle. Being a purist just makes us look foolish, we must turn the minds of humanity and that can't be done without seeing the world as it really is.

— Snaildarter



There are already enough memes that have bled virally into the minds of the human race as it is. Many believe that the world belongs by right to Man to do with as he wishes. Countless believe that global warming is either a myth, or a reality that will be fixed by merely buying the right kind of lightbulbs and carpooling ... that continued growth is business as usual and still the best way to go for humankind. Our goal at The Stumbling Block is to make accessible the resources sharing the truth. That there is no truth in our religions that justifies the worldly havoc we have caused. That the world is not ours to ruin. That we were not made to rule it. And that we are but slightly more advanced monkeys who have no more special place on this earth than worms and cockroaches. Share what you see. Pass them on. Fill the world with truth.

— PaganBear



The late Edward Abbey is one of the great environmental writers of all time. I'm sharing a few of his quotes because I love his writings.

The tragedy of modern war is that the young men die fighting each other - instead of their real enemies back home in the capitals.

The missionaries go forth to Christianize the savages - as if the savages weren't dangerous enough already.

Society is like a stew. If you don't stir it up every once in a while then a layer of scum floats to the top.

Love implies anger. The man who is angered by nothing cares about nothing.

Power is always dangerous. Power attracts the worst and corrupts the best.

Abolition of a woman's right to abortion, when and if she wants it, amounts to compulsory maternity: a form of rape by the State.

When a man's best friend is his dog, that dog has a problem.

The only thing worse than a knee-jerk liberal is a knee-pad conservative.

— Edward Abbey

The good Earth will simply die slowly by a thousand tiny cuts until nothing beautiful is left. The best we can do is limit our participation in its death and fight the human race as hard as we can to limit its impact on the Earth. When I say fight I mean using what ever effective means are available. Whether it is voting for Obama, or riding a bicycle to work, or telecommuting, or buying locally or fighting the Catholic church's birth control policy. I think the only hope is that people who participate in the system change their behavior and raise their children to try and live sustainably. Fringe people like "leavers" and environmentalist are only relevant when we can get the greater public to move more toward sustainable living.
— Snaildarter (a friend), October 12, 2008

To put this in context, you must remember that estimates of the long-term carrying capacity of Earth with relatively optimistic assumptions about consumption, technologies, and equity (A x T), are in the vicinity of two billion people. Today's population cannot be sustained on the "interest" generated by natural ecosystems, but is consuming its vast supply of natural capital — especially deep, rich agricultural soils, "fossil" groundwater, and biodiversity — accumulated over centuries to eons. In some places soils, which are generated on a time scale of centimeters per century are disappearing at rates of centimeters per year. Some aquifers are being depleted at dozens of times their recharge rates, and we have embarked on the greatest extinction episode in 65 million years.
— Paul Ehrlich, September 25, 1998

If you were born after 1960, you will probably die of violence, starvation or contagious disease. Although it's news to you, your generation is challenged with a technically-insoluble problem — a political problem — which will ultimately kill five out of six worldwide — or perhaps all. You cannot solve this problem because that carbon-based, selfish-gene rational computer on your neck isn't logical!
—Jay Hanson, February 20, 2007 (from the article "Thermo/Gene Collision"")

The problems that exist in the world today cannot be solved by the level of thinking that created them.
— Einstein

Is there meaning to life? What are we for? What is man? The point I want to make now is that all attempts to answer that question before 1859 are worthless and that we are better off if we ignore them completely.
— George Gaylord Simpson, 1969 (it's a Darwin thing, maybe???)

One of the most widespread approaches to emerge is what might be called fit­ness teleology. Teleological explanations are found in Aristotle, and arguably constitute an evolved mode of interpretation built into the human mind. Hu­mans find explaining things in terms of the ends they lead to intuitive and often sufficient. Social science theories have regularly depended on explicitly or implicitly teleological think­ing. Economics, for example, explains choice behavior not in terms of its an­tecedent physical or computational causes but in terms of how the behavior serves utility maximization. Of course, the scientific revolution originated in Renaissance mechanics, and seeks ultimately to explain everything using forward physical causality — a very different explanatory system in which teleology is not admissible. Darwin outlined a physical pro­cess — natural selection — that produces biological outcomes that had once been attributed to natural teleological processes. Williams mounted a systematic critique of the myriad ways teleology had nonetheless im­plicitly infected evolutionary biology (where it persists in Darwinian disguises). ... Or­ganisms are adaptation executers, not fitness pursuers.

— Toby & Cosmides

Progressives, Liberals, and Conservatives

I am a big admirer of progressives like Teddy Roosevelt and Barry Goldwater. But what, exactly, is a progressive? My friend and colleague David provides a great definition below.

The point being is that I've found liberals who are just as dogmatic, righteous, and close-minded as conservatives. I would never buy into any pre-packaged dogma from either political party. Regardless of someone's political persuasion, if they can make a good case for something, I'll accept it. Both the Democrats and Republicans have things I like and dislike. But what I really like is the American two-party system — it is a beautiful thing. And though I define myself as a "Democratic sympathizer" and typically vote Democrat, there are a lot of things I admire about traditional Republican ideals. What I dislike most about the Republicans is that they've sold their soul to the corporations and religious zealots, who have formed a perverted alliance. What I do like is a good ol' moderate Republican, particularly one who is a social liberal and fiscal conservative.

Okay, my rule is to tie every post into the theme of this blog. So, the theme here is that both sides of the political spectrum need to have an open mind and be respectful of the other side. I've just run into some pious liberals recently, and believe me, they are as annoying as pious right-wingers.

Let's all just chill out, have a little thicker skin, and keep an open perspective. And please, leave your righteousness at the door. I'm SICK of all the self-righteousness that I've been seeing lately.

From my friend David:

Todd,

Ten years ago I would have explained it this way. A Liberal is someone who fully embraces programs and ideas from the Kennedy and Johnson years, with lots of government mandated or regulated programs, and who is a full supporter of the philosophy of New Deal concepts. Over the years, the folks on the right have demonized what a Liberal is, and have made it a four letter word. I also would have said that a Progressive is someone sympathetic to the objectives of those on the left (social justice, sustainable business, an end to lots of -isms, etc), but who disagrees with Liberals about the methods for achieving those ends. A Progressive is more likely to embrace market solutions to problems, consider the possibilities of school vouchers, and endorse local economic solutions before government programs.

I used to think the terms were different, but Liberals - in an effort to escape the negative associations that the right put on their politics - began calling themselves Progressives. From what I can tell of the national conversations these days, the terms are interchangeable, and mean more of what Liberal used to mean, and only a smattering of what I used to think Progressive meant.

That's my two cents.

David