Home | About | Donate

With Alarming New Assessment, 17 Scientists Offer 'Cold Shower' to Wake Up Humanity to Hot World

Thanks for this article Wings. I had never heard anything about the precipitous decline of vultures. Mother Nature created/evolved every species and thing on the planet to maintain an intricate balance of EVERYTHING. Destroy even the microbes in the soil with poisons and the balance is upset to the detriment of all living things.

I am convinced that life on Earth is doomed in the near term. Some living thing will survive and Mother Nature will go to work again to create something new with what she has left. Hopefully she will never again create a human like creature in the next iteration of life on Earth.


I weep with you.
May our collective sorrow stir the universe.
I pray you find another temple and heal.


You have my utmost condolences of the loss of your nature reserve. We are wiping out livable habitat and ecosystems at a horrifying rate.


Where I live, it already feels like spring. Its January 13.

drone –

Absolute and total truth –

"There’s one problem: without removing the profit in burning the place up, they’re not going to act on it. That’s still the 600 lb gorilla in the room.

As long as capital dominates this planet, the planet is doomed. It sucks. But it is.

And in the meantime, the propaganda apparatus has trained millions of Americans to view the whole things as yet another “hoax”, designed to steal their jobs and subordinate them to the liberal tyranny of “globalism”. And we can see how impossible it is to extract people in these echo chambers back out of them.

We’re in bad shape all the way around."

The same people who invented Capitalism were the same people who invented propaganda –

The times we are living now exist because populations could be distracted from what really wanted
to do with the shiny trinkets of consumerism and paper dollar bills.

And this will likely sound like I’m high, but what most of us have wanted to do was be in touch
with Nature, Make Love, Listen to Music - Sing and Dance and be with our loved ones.
There’s another high in seeing that most of us feel the same way.

The attacks on music in America and our songwriters weren’t only to quiet the PEACE MAKERS
but to stop the music – the singing and dancing. Above all, to stop the love.

BLM caused me to see this when they responded to very serious attacks against their protests – even by our deranged president who did all he could to disrupt their protests –

with music – song and dance.

Many other musicians and their music of various kinds have also helped me to see this –

1 Like

Thanks for the updates. Those big, expensive ads in my paper prompted my response.

Welcome to the world I’ve lived within for the couple of decades.
BTW, its not just the USA, and the dangers of Fascism are always imminent in the innate cyclical economic downturns of free-market capitalism.


Oh. I didn’t know that. What a lousy scam.

You have read what is described as his seminal work, haven’t you? ‘The Population Bomb.’

If not here is the wiki link to it

Since his ‘over-population’ predictions came to nothing, i would suggest he has switched to ‘over-consumption’ being the issue and joined the environmentalist movement, rather than continue with his eugenics advocacy.


And the global fertility rate is on the decline. The population that is looming now is one of de-population. It is upsetting the dependency ratio. In China it is called the 1-2-4 problem…one productive worker supporting parents and their parents. Elsewhere, the solution being offered is to make old people to work longer by raising retirement ages.

As for resources, the world can easily produce food for 10 billion. But with a population of almost 8 billion, yet as you say nearly a billion suffer hunger. The problem is not resources nor population numbers but the equitable distribution of what we produce. Surely we should question the economic structure of the world.

I happen to agree with what recent research says…because of what is called the population momentum, global numbers will continue to rise but will then stabilize and fall back. But as a socialist, i certainly do not anticipate poverty being alleviated by that lesser number.

And when it comes to accepting and rejecting truths, i tend to look at motives and from the very outset with Thomas Malthus, those who wish to blame population numbers on social problems, do so for the purpose of avoiding implicating the economic system that prevails.

The current over-consumptionism is limited to the industrialized developed world and requires a vast elaborate propaganda machine called advertizing to keep people wanting more and more new things that they don’t need and frequently never use.


We own a 155 acre Preserve which me and my Native spouse will never sell and we are weeping with you.

She likes the quote ( she does not post) from Chief Seattle:
In 1857 Chief Sealths response to an US Government inquiry to purchase his tribal lands:
" Every part of the Earth is sacred. Every shining pine needle, every sandy shore; every mist in the dark woods; every meadow, every humming insect. All are holy in the memory and experience of my people. We are part of the Earth and it is a part of us. What befalls the Earth befalls the sons of the Earth".


Thank you for your informative comments. I agree that attributing the ongoing collapse of Earth’s biospheres to human overpopulation alone is misleading. Overconsumption of natural resources and the pursuit of short-term economic gains are more culpable than human overpopulation.


Ahhh, the gospel of austerity which is built upon the assumption made about what the carrying capacity of the planet happens to be. Abstract statements such as infinite growth need to be place in a real world context.

Conventional economics declare that the true state of the world is scarcity - limited supply - versus- boundless demand, denying the potential for a state of abundance can exist. Let us define scarcity and abundance. Our wants are essentially “infinite” and the resources to meet them “limited” is the usual claim. According to this argument, scarcity is an unavoidable fact of life. It applies to any goods where the decision to use a unit of that good entails giving up some other potential use. In other words, whatever one decides to do has an “opportunity cost” — that is the opportunity to do something else which one thereby forgoes; economics is concerned with the allocation of scarce resources.

So lets begin with what abundance and scarcity really means. Abundance is not a situation where an infinite amount of every good could be produced. Similarly, scarcity is not the situation which exists in the absence of this impossible total or sheer abundance. Abundance is a situation where productive resources are sufficient to produce enough wealth to satisfy human needs, while scarcity is a situation where productive resources are insufficient for this purpose. Abundance is a relationship between supply and demand, where the former exceeds the latter. The modern world is a society of scarcity, but with a difference. Today’s shortages are unnecessary; today’s scarcity is artificial. More than that: scarcity achieved at the expense of strenuous effort.


So let us change our personal life-styles and impose cuts on those less fortunate upon us by ending their progress and growth. Is that the answer?

Not look at society and devise a rational one that ends waste, instead. What resources are devoted to the military, to the world of commerce of buying and selling, producing for profit and not production for use and needs? Let’s ignore that avenue of thought and rather keep capitalism going. Business as usual.

I fully wish a zero-growth steady-state society. But i think i know what is required to achive that,

Socialism will be an inter-linked system to provide for a self-sustaining society. This could be achieved in three main phases.

First, there would have to be emergency action to relieve the worst problems of food shortages, health care and housing which affect billions of people throughout the world.

Secondly, longer term action to construct means of production and infrastructures such as transport systems for the supply of permanent housing and durable consumption goods. These could be designed in line with conservation principles, which means they would be made to last for a long time, using materials that where possible could be re-cycled and would require minimum maintenance.

Thirdly, with these objectives achieved there could be an eventual fall in production, and society could move into a stable mode. This would achieve a rhythm of daily production in line with daily needs with no significant growth.

On this basis, the world community could reconcile two great needs, the need to live in material well being whilst looking after the planet


Though I don’t recall reading it anywhere nor hearing anyone else make the statement, I have said for the last decade that human beings are the worst thing that has ever happened to this planet. We’re slowly destroying it, and most just don’t know it.


But again i would add a caveat. Over-consumptionism is not a problem for most of the world. It is under-consumptionism. They are not getting their fair share of the planet’s resources and are living in dire deprivation, dying from preventable diseases that could end with decent housing, decent healthcare, decent santitation and decent nutrition.

The undeveloped and developing regions of the world are responsible for very little of the carbon-emissions or pollution of the air and waters, they are not to blame for the over-exploitation of the natural resources. Are they to have restrictions imposed upon them? Or should i say, are they to have the costs of changing to renewable energy and sustainable production imposed when their GDPs can’t even afford basic infrastructure due to their rich wealth being pillaged and plundered by the extractive transnationals who add to their theft with tax -evasion. Whether it is mining or food, the local people are exploited. The question the environmentalists must ask - how do we have progress for them if the lawsof capitalism are still applied.

Someone i would also add to the list of discredited ‘scientists’ like Ehrlich is the writer of the Tragedy of the Commons, by Garret Hardin.


Excellent quote!! Chief Seattle has a ream of eloquence to quote from as you probably already know…

1 Like

So, basically you are saying that we have a problem with the allocation of resources?

1 Like

Can I assume you are familiar with CASSE? I’ve been following their work for over 10 years and their thesis is very sound.

1 Like

I am and i did have a short interaction with one of their proponents who took umbrage at my making unapproved use of one of his images.

Reforming capitalism is not going to lead to any steady-state economy. Capitalism is predicated upon growth and expansion - it wants bigger markets and greater profits.

Regulation and legislation are futile. This is very much a case of either/or. There is no middle ground for capitalism. It is an existential issue for it. Grow or Die. CASSE stops short of advocating the only solution.

Have you read Richard Smith?

“Socialism”? “Economic democracy”? Call it what you like. But what other choice do we have? Either we save capitalism or we save ourselves. We can’t save both.

What about Murray Bookchin?

Capitalism can no more be ‘persuaded’ to limit growth than a human being can be ‘persuaded’ to stop breathing. Attempts to ‘green’ capitalism, to make it ‘ecological’, are doomed by the very nature of the system as a system of endless growth.”