tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5189370505125033122.post7541515405643430551..comments2023-11-02T05:04:02.912-07:00Comments on The End Times: a cli-fi newspaper that expires in 2500 A.D.: Arctic to be the Center of a New World by 2300 and Home to 300 ''Polar Cities'' for Desperate Survivors of Climate Chaos in Lower 48 and EuropeUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5189370505125033122.post-19430293855092113422011-11-27T19:49:44.809-08:002011-11-27T19:49:44.809-08:00Susan Kraemer says
''Oh, no. I just mean...Susan Kraemer says<br /><br />''Oh, no. I just meant that that we have had so little time to be a civilized and rational species since the Enlightenment, when our civilization accelerated because we relied on science. Now - in just a few short centuries, we are turning around and throwing away science because of the "inconvenient truths" in its findings about the climate changes we are causing, and which will end our civilization.<br /><br /><br /><br />It is really sad that we had such a brief flowering. Especially as we have solutions already. Only politics makes us dither.<br /><br /><br /><br />Our technologies are sufficiently advanced that governments could requisition every available roof to put solar on it and every available windy plain to put up wind turbines and string them to transmission, etc, etc. If we implemented all the clean technology we HAVE, we could mitigate the worst catastrophic civilization-ending climate changes... But we dither, instead. <br />Source: Clean Technica (http://s.tt/12tEK)<br /><br /> Susan Kraemer 1 year ago in reply to Andy <br /><br />Oh, no. I just meant that that we have had so little time to be a civilized and rational species since the Enlightenment, when our civilization accelerated because we relied on science. Now - in just a few short centuries, we are turning around and throwing away science because of the "inconvenient truths" in its findings about the climate changes we are causing, and which will end our civilization.<br /><br /><br /><br />It is really sad that we had such a brief flowering. Especially as we have solutions already. Only politics makes us dither.<br /><br /><br /><br />Our technologies are sufficiently advanced that governments could requisition every available roof to put solar on it and every available windy plain to put up wind turbines and string them to transmission, etc, etc. If we implemented all the clean technology we HAVE, we could mitigate the worst catastrophic civilization-ending climate changes... But we dither, instead. <br />Source: Clean Technica (http://s.tt/12tEK)<br />Source: Clean Technica (http://s.tt/12tEK)<br /><br /><br /> Susan Kraemer 1 year ago in reply to Andy <br /><br />Oh, no. I just meant that that we have had so little time to be a civilized and rational species since the Enlightenment, when our civilization accelerated because we relied on science. Now - in just a few short centuries, we are turning around and throwing away science because of the "inconvenient truths" in its findings about the climate changes we are causing, and which will end our civilization.<br /><br /><br /><br />It is really sad that we had such a brief flowering. Especially as we have solutions already. Only politics makes us dither.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5189370505125033122.post-82438549905232824772011-11-27T19:48:23.217-08:002011-11-27T19:48:23.217-08:00Uh, I got the feeling your article was biased agai...Uh, I got the feeling your article was biased against science, being written in a way that suggests the blame should be put on science and scientific advancement for our current global environmental problems.<br /><br /><br /><br />The fact that we had 200,000 years before The European Age of Enlightenment means nothing. Technological progress has been the quintessential reason for the rise of human civilisation from the time of the first Homo Sapien Sapiens (true humans). However technological progress was incredibly slow at the beginning end of human history but now is on a geometric rise at this furthest end of human development. Which is consistent with the graph of technological advancement if taken from the year 1900 through to the present day.<br /><br /><br /><br />Science in and of itself is not the problem, as science is neither "good" or "bad", it is merely a tool that is used. The real problem lies in the extreme apathy exhibited by people in first world countries towards environmental conservation. And the extreme inequality of global wealth that sees 2/3rds of the planet classified as 2nd world or 3rd world status.<br /><br /><br /><br />The global problem is political, not technological. Our technologies are sufficiently advanced that we could actually start to repair damage to the earth tomorrow, but that would mean taking the first world out of its comfort zone. How many want to do that when there is no immediate need? I would say, very very few. As is illustrated by the fact that oil drilling shall continue, and move into even more sensitive ecological zones.<br /><br /><br /><br />Andy.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com