MIT says we are done in 2030

We wouldn't need it if we hadn't come to rely on it. It's the transition from a modern world to a more primitive one that would be quite nasty.

 

One could say the Dinosaurs couldn't have benefited from science or advanced technology,,,

But of course only if they would not have also found the Ambitions to reach the Stars.

 

Not for me. The modern world is the one which thought up slavery, the 9-5 work day, TV, automobiles and private property.

I'm more than happy to wave those things goodbye.

 

The old worlds had tonnes of slavery, 12+ hours daily work, barefoot walking, and aggressively occupied lands. Just TV and autos are modern. There will be TV post energy apocalypse, most will be too busy struggling to survive and find food to watch much of it.

On the plus side, evolution loves hardship.

 

Where? I'm talking primitives here, not egyptians or romans. Nomadic life was fairly peaceful. Barefoot walking is fine, it only became a burden when shoes were invented.

 

But they became a necessity once nomadic cultures grew to a point they could no longer "Nomad about the place"

Once you begin with the monolith building, which is inevitable by our nature, you come to appreciate a good pair of boots.

 

The video I posted explains this in much better detail. The modern word relies on modern agricultural methods to stay alive. Fossil fuels are necessary to be able to grow the amount of food needed to support the 7 billion and increasing number of people in the world. Furthermore, fossil fuels are necessary to be able to transport food to people, especially now that more people than ever live in urban areas.

I actually sort of agree with you about the modern world. You could certainly make a case that if it never existed we'd have been better off and that civilization has brought misery to humans as well as other life forms in excess of what would had and would have existed in its absence. However, the point you're missing is that the world doesn't just transition smoothly back to that state from where we're at right now. It will not be pretty. However, what comes after the inevitable massive die-offs and what have you may be better and more like the primitive but sustainable pre-modern world you're talking about.

 

If you can't find anything good about modern civilization, I feel sorry for you. Have you never benefited from travel, from meeting people from other cultures, or from experiencing art, music, or literature from anywhere outside the area where you live? Do you not appreciate the drastic reduction in pain and suffering and the increased lifespan that we all get from modern medical and dental care? If not, then you are functioning on a lower intellectual level than the average family dog. After stray dogs experience "freedom" and "nature" for a couple of days, most of them return home, to bad old civilization.


You have to take the good with the bad, and try to make things better whenever you can. This idea of giving up is foolish. It's for losers.

 

Of course I have, though since I didn't say civilization was all bad for all people, this is a total strawman. I'm also from the U.S., though, and so I benefit from civilization more than most people in the world. Slavery (including wage slavery and indentured servitude), war, long working hours, chronic stress, human misery and oppression, etc., like it or not, have characterized and been the backbone of civilization. And again, I have to repeat myself, that going from civilization to no civilization will not work. But had it never existed, the organism would have already existed in a niche with the environment, otherwise their species wouldn't be alive.

 

But it doesn't always have to be that way. And you imply that uncivilized cultures have not had these same problems. Not true.

I'm going to live the rest of my life making the most of the best parts of human civilization, or die trying. The alternative is absolute shit.

 

"Civilization" is never going to go away, so long as there are still human beings eating, shitting, breathing and reproducing on this planet. We opened pandora's box on civilization the day we figured out that we could put a seed in the ground and make the food grow where we wanted. There's no going back from that, and I sometimes wonder if agriculture isn't the true original sin of Eden.

We've followed this notion of civilization very near to the point of absolute absurdity - to the point that it cannot be sustained in its present form, with its present assumptions - chief of all being that "there will always be more to be gotten". Civilization will change - it will become sustainable, it will achieve balance and harmony with the natural world. We don't have to do anything to ensure that. The question is, can we make the transition gracefully, with as little amount of suffering as possible - or will we continue to kick the can down the road, deny that a change is coming, and allow our grandchildren to bear witness to a new (and exponentially more terrible) dark age? So, we act now and avoid massive, violent, hellish population die offs. When all is said and done, we still will have each other to hunt and eat - won't we? So, do we act now, and continue to make cultural, technological and societal progress, or wait until things get so ugly that no one gives too shits about literature, art, history, or science (beyond the ability to create tools of death)?

Yes, we need to embrace the best parts of civilization, but first we need to really identify what those are. We need to cut the bad stuff, like racism, plutocracy, intolerance, oppression, greed, and mindless consumerism out like the cancers they are.

I keep thinking of the Venus Project - salvation through architecture and city planning - I don't buy it, but I wish more people were thinking and talking more about how we might go about surviving this impending crisis, or perhaps avoiding it altogether, by revolutionizing our thought process and attitudes. I see a lot of two camps on this topic. The first is the "I'm going to hunker down, stock pile guns, lay low, and survive until this all blows over, and then inherit the earth" camp. Then there's the "this shit isn't going to happen in my life time, so fuck it, I'll do what I want - eat drink and be merry" camp. These are both selfish contemporary attitudes - the very attitudes that will lead to the self fulfilling prophecy of human extinction. There's no law and certainly no logic that says you have to buy shit from a fucking store in order to live a happy, healthy and fulfilled life. There's no law that says you have to commute 45 minutes each day, for a six figure salary, when you can live happily and healthy on a five figure salary and ride your bike to work - and have time to actually have a relationship and raise your children to not grow up to be violent, selfish assholes. There's no logical reason anyone should have to work the hours we do, or endure the stress we do. But we're born into it and we are bombarded with that message, over and over again - made to feel unfulfilled and dissatisfied by design. Experimental communities like Dancing Rabbit, to name just one example, I believe are the beginning of the solution. We have to learn how to live, again. We need to study the Amish and the Shakers, the failures and successes of utopias past and present - and we need to measure those successes and failures with longevity, sustainability and above all humanity.

 

^^^ This ^^^






Also thanks for mentioning Dancing Rabbit, I hadn't heard of them before.

 

Just as a sidenote, someone mentioned modern healthcare. This has not neccesarily benefited humanity as a whole. It may benefit individuals, but when the current population is already outstripping the earth's natural resources, living longer lives doesn't really serve a purpose in the grand scheme of things.

Disease is a natural form of population control.

Not that I have anything against modern medicine (although I do think we know enough now to focus on prevention more so than cures or band-aids). When I'm really sick, I go to the doctor and I'm always very grateful afterwards.

Anywho. Our current system is broken. I don't think this means we have to go backwards. Jamgrass mentioned the Venus Project....I don't neccessarily buy into it either, but I think it represents a forward-thinking idealogy that most humans are not currently using. Most either think we need to return to our primitive roots or continue on our current path until shit hits the fan.

We don't need to do either. Going back to the MIT study, it isn't predicting an absolute apocalypse. Its merely predicting that we're screwed if humanity continues to use the earth's resources as its current rate.

Which means humanity needs to change. Change doesn't mean regress. It means taking our knowledge of the past, both what we've done right and what we've done wrong, and applying it to the future so that our great-great-great grandchildren will have an earth to walk upon.

 

Unfortunately, almost everything that greatly benefits individuals is bad for the planet.

 

When I made the OP, the article I linked to was quite misleading. A day later, it was heavily edited to clarify that the study had not been recently updated, which I talked about in post #42. But by then, the thread had taken off, and the major points being discussed still seemed relevant in a general way, so we have continued on.

Especially if nuclear weapons became involved.

In the short term, I'm more worried about the European banking situation. Some might think it farfetched to imagine that your Visa card might suddenly stop working one day because of previous decisions made in Greece and Italy, but it is quite possible, and entirely outside of US control. By the time an EU financial melt-down started having a serious impact on US banks, it would be much too big for anyone to stop.

Nobody has brought up China in this thread yet, but I'm concerned about the inexperience of their top financial leaders. At some point they will have to attempt to manage the slowing of their massive economy from an annual growth rate exceeding 20% down to a more reasonable and sustainable number, without triggering an economic implosion that would ripple throughout the world. And how are they going to know how to do that? They grew up in a country that was all about growing rice and building bicycles.

 

Not when you know how to make Dirt as a waste byproduct of your Energy production

Methane from HEMP,,,

Bio Char from compost,,,

Water Desalinization from the waste heat,,,

Go Me!

:2thumbsup:

(And dont forget the Bio-Diesel from the seed or the Textile fibers from the main stalks or Biodegradable plastics,,, wonder if they can be used for methane production?)

 

Can you imagine how many displaced construction workers will have to go into another line of work? In the West, we haven't seen that kind of unemployment in our lifetimes.

They are not used to going through business cycles, but of course our experience with that pattern doesn't necessarily prepare anyone to deal with such unimaginable numbers of workers in transition all at once. I'm sure their financial leaders are well-educated, but they are getting into areas where the theoretical models don't extend. It's uncharted territory.

They have my best wishes, partly because their problems could spread so easily.

I wish they had learned more from our environmental mistakes. In that area, their record has not been so good. They are learning lessons the hard way, like we did. And don't get me started on the human rights situation.

I can't think of any country that has ever gone through exactly what they are experiencing, on anything close to a similar scale. It's an amazing thing to watch. History in the making.

I'd be surprised if they can complete a soft landing, but only time will tell. If they can pull it off, they will have earned the right to dominate the world economy, in my opinion.

 

the world one generation is familiar with, seldom outlasts their own lives. this is how old people get out of touch. when the can no longer keep up with, or no longer take interest in doing so, the little changes that given a surprisingly few decades, add up to changing the whole picture. so yes, by 2030 a good deal of what we are not only familiar with, but familiar with assuming is how things will always be, will be no more then a fading memory.

and that may very likely include some very profound, even basic and fundimental things. what people think they know about so called human nature may very likely prove to be one of them.