Could be but this is not that forum.
Could be but this is not that forum.
OK here are today's thoughts on that:{start of the OP} This thread is to talk rationally about the upcoming collapse of industrial civilization. ...
The advocacy group founded by the creators of the atomic bomb moved their famed "Doomsday Clock" ahead two minutes on Thursday. It said the world is now three minutes from a catastrophic midnight, instead of five minutes.
"This is about doomsday; this is about the end of civilization as we know it," bulletin executive director Kennette Benedict said at a news conference in Washington.
She called both climate change and modernization of nuclear weaponry equal but undeniable threats to humanity's continued existence that triggered the 20 scientists on the board to decide to move the clock closer to midnight. "The probability of global catastrophe is very high, and the actions needed to reduce the risks of disaster must be taken very soon," Benedict said.
The two are inseparable. Reduce the population and the issues of climate change go down as well. Grow the population and even with aggressive reduction in emissions per capita you don't make a dent in CO2.Climate change, on the other hand, is real. Within two or three centuries, Florida and the Maldives will be underwater. Almost all of the world's major cities (which were built on sea, river and lake shores because in pre-industrial days boats were the fastest and most economical way to travel) will have lost a considerable portion of their real estate to tidal flooding. They will all have to be rebuilt about 20 miles (32km) inland.
Overpopulation? Probably not. The birth rate has been falling steadily since the mid-1980s. World population is predicted to reach its maximum early in the next century, considerably less than double the current population. The sparsely populated Western Hemisphere, plus Australia, with our enormous bounty of farmland, can easily feed all those people--five meals a day if they're that hungry! When the population begins to shrink, we'll have a problem no one is prepared to face: Every economic model since Adam Smith assumes, without analysis, that the engine that drives prosperity is a never-ending increase in the number of producers and consumers.
80 pages of chicken little crap? I'll bet he has 50 more pages at least. So many words yet so little content....Probably not, but if you have an update to make on your stance, there could be something new/relevant to discuss.
Since his first estimates failed to come to pass, I suspect a new slew of apocalypses real soon now.80 pages of chicken little crap? I'll bet he has 50 more pages at least.
The planet's warming-cooling cycle has been going on for billions of years, long before our species came along. Human activity may cause a modest acceleration of global warming. But when we're talking about a phenomenon with a duration measured in hundreds of millions of years, and moreover we happen to be only a few centuries from the very end of the warming cycle, the long-term effect of our contribution will be negligible. A few centuries faster or slower is nothing on the cosmic time scale.The two are inseparable. Reduce the population and the issues of climate change go down as well. Grow the population and even with aggressive reduction in emissions per capita you don't make a dent in CO2.
Not militarily, that's never going to happen. Perhaps you've forgotten that our military budget is equal to the military budgets of the next seven countries combined.Israel is the problem. The US is in the way of 'successfully' dealing with that problem, the current prevailing policy 'winds' notwithstanding. We will be neutralized militarily, politically, and economically by Russia, China, and Iran.
Sure, China fought us to a draw in Korea, but that was on their back doorstep. Who thinks they could do that in a global conflict?The US will become a type of chinese colony or even part of China itself.
That "export toxic crap" POV is obsolete and by world trade or just exports, China is number 1, not 2. Junk, plastic toys, etc. are < 1/5 of China's exports now.... The only country you mentioned that has a strong economy is China. Without Americans to buy their toxic crap in Walmart, they'll lose their status as the world's number-two economy in a heartbeat.Sure, China fought us to a draw in Korea, but that was on their back doorstep. Who thinks they could do that in a global conflict?
Note that US importance to China as buyer of its exports is in rapid decline. Less than a decade ago, US bought 25% of China's exports. In contrast, China's exports to almost all others are increasing. Even with it sick economy, the EU has displaced the US as China's largest buyer of its exports. Trade with the prospering nations of the Association of SE Asian Nations is growing by about 10% /year. In large part because real wages in China are growing by about 10% annually.http://www.tradingeconomics.com/china/exports said:Export growth has been a major component supporting China's rapid economic expansion. Exports of goods and services constitute 30% of GDP. China major exports are: electromechanical products (57 percent of total exports) and labor-intensive products like clothing, textiles, footwear, furniture, plastic products, bags and toys (20 percent). In recent years, the exports of high tech products have been also growing and in 2012 accounted for 29 percent of total exports. China’s main export partners are the United States (17 percent), European Union (16 percent), ASEAN (10 percent), Japan (7 percent) and South Korea. This page provides - China Exports - actual values, historical data.
I do. All are big losers in nuclear war, so the conflict of WWIII is economic. China has been winning that war for about two decades now.... Who thinks {China} could {win conflict with the US} in a global conflict?
The "gradual tapering" is already happening. Since the last turn of the century, when vaccines, antibiotics, covered sewers, indoor plumbing, wrapped food and automobiles (until then the streets of every major city were shin-deep in horse manure) caused a phenomenal decrease in infant mortality, world population was doubling every 30 years.. . . . inevitably there will be a time where the human population wil experience zero or even negative growth. This can happen in two ways; a gradual tapering off or by apocalyptic events (wars, disease, starvation).
To put it politely! The data upon which that calculation was based is out of date.Above I cited 70 years. This is assuming that we can keep the growth rate of human and human energy consumption to just a single percent. At a steady growth rate of just 1 % , the human race will double and we will consume more natural resources in 70 years than we have in the entire history of industrial use of those resources. The lecture is somewhat outdated
Not militarily, that's never going to happen.
So could the US - point being?China and Russia could wipe this place off the map.
And? The beat goes on...Formerly healthy individuals in the prime of life reduced to mangled wrecks and charity cases--for what? To "fight for our freedom"? Those same individuals are ignored by the very government they fought for. Politicians living off the fat of the land while they suffer physically, mentally, and emotionally.
I take it that you believe such a country (The USA in this instance) is NOT worth defending? Is there another country that you believe IS worth defending?They are surely aware of the current situation in Iraq/Middle East...The V.A. itself, tasked with caring for these people had to be taken to task for neglect. They observe this poor excuse for commander in chief doing what he does with respect to foreign policy, social engineering with the military itself, the purging of top brass worth their salt...what's left when you force out through sheer odiousness a majority of personnel retaining any sense of honor, moral fiber, self sacrifice, etc.? What do you have left to defend (or for that matter, send off on misguided, immoral 'crusades' that serve to alienate us?) this country when those same caliber leave the service? Only those who think such a country* is worth defending/propping up abroad.
Only to the extent that your existential angst effects "the overall capability of the Armed Forces" - which, thankfully, is not much...Sure, there is the odd patriot enduring in the midst of it, but by and large the current state is sad...and that's putting it mildly..you don't think this effects the overall capability of the Armed Forces? You bet it does.
"Our entire way of life can be ended in a single day. And it wouldn’t even take a nuclear war to do it."
http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/...-explosions-to-send-america-back-to-the-1800s