Monday, July 10, 2017

Quote Note #1


This article from NY Magazine is quite something.
"Humans, like all mammals, are heat engines; surviving means having to continually cool off, like panting dogs. For that, the temperature needs to be low enough for the air to act as a kind of refrigerant, drawing heat off the skin so the engine can keep pumping. At seven degrees of warming, that would become impossible for large portions of the planet’s equatorial band, and especially the tropics, where humidity adds to the problem; in the jungles of Costa Rica, for instance, where humidity routinely tops 90 percent, simply moving around outside when it’s over 105 degrees Fahrenheit would be lethal. And the effect would be fast: Within a few hours, a human body would be cooked to death from both inside and out.
Hmm. I wonder where he is going with this? Let's continue reading.
"As Joseph Romm has put it in his authoritative primer Climate Change: What Everyone Needs to Know, heat stress in New York City would exceed that of present-day Bahrain, one of the planet’s hottest spots, and the temperature in Bahrain “would induce hyperthermia in even sleeping humans.” The high-end IPCC estimate, remember, is two degrees warmer still. By the end of the century, the World Bank has estimated, the coolest months in tropical South America, Africa, and the Pacific are likely to be warmer than the warmest months at the end of the 20th century. Air-conditioning can help but will ultimately only add to the carbon problem; plus, the climate-controlled malls of the Arab emirates aside, it is not remotely plausible to wholesale air-condition all the hottest parts of the world, many of them also the poorest. And indeed, the crisis will be most dramatic across the Middle East and Persian Gulf, where in 2015 the heat index registered temperatures as high as 163 degrees Fahrenheit. As soon as several decades from now, the hajj will become physically impossible for the 2 million Muslims who make the pilgrimage each year."
Let me get this straight: global warming is going to kill everyone living in the Middle East and the Tropics? Am I correct? And Africa? They will just be baked to death. Is that what you are saying? And the only habitable places will be Scandinavia, Russia and Canada, right? And maybe (ahem, mostly white) Argentina and Southern Australia?

Oh how terrible. That's awful. It truly is. I feel bad. No really, I actually do. It's tragic. It really is.
"Climates differ and plants vary, but the basic rule for staple cereal crops grown at optimal temperature is that for every degree of warming, yields decline by 10 percent. Some estimates run as high as 15 or even 17 percent. Which means that if the planet is five degrees warmer at the end of the century, we may have as many as 50 percent more people to feed and 50 percent less grain to give them. And proteins are worse: It takes 16 calories of grain to produce just a single calorie of hamburger meat, butchered from a cow that spent its life polluting the climate with methane farts.
Tell me more. Please. Go on. This is very interesting.
"Remember, we do not live in a world without hunger as it is. Far from it: Most estimates put the number of undernourished at 800 million globally. In case you haven’t heard, this spring has already brought an unprecedented quadruple famine to Africa and the Middle East; the U.N. has warned that separate starvation events in Somalia, South Sudan, Nigeria, and Yemen could kill 20 million this year alone."
I shouldn't express any glee here, not even secretly. It's unseemly and dehumanizing.

These people preoccupied with climate change think that they can fear-monger people into taking action. That simply isn't the way the world works. The failures of communism prove that humans are completely incapable of changing their economic system in any meaningful way. And humans are masters at procrastination.

Unlike Mencius Moldbug, I don't reject the idea that global warming is happening. Though I have heard various arguments for and against it, and though I recognize government science is bound to follow the incentives of the state in a bias feedback loop of the grant mill industry, I still think it is is probably happening. Sea level has already risen 4 to 8 inches, and regardless of climate effects, the oceans are becoming more acidic, and the the rate of species extinction has increased dramatically.

Of course, none of it matters. Any solution that works must necessarily kill billions of people. The only countries that complied with the Kyoto protocol were the ones in recession, and the agreement only called for a 5 % reduction in CO2 emissions. You cannot reduce the inputs of a distributed system without mass die-off.

Previously we asked the question: is Africa building towards collapse? Perhaps we should ask, is the entire brown part of the world going extinct?

We might be moving to a dramatically more k-selected world.

As Land says in Hell-Baked
"It is only due to a predominance of influences that are not only entirely morally indifferent, but indeed — from a human perspective — indescribably cruel, that nature has been capable of constructive action. Specifically, it is solely by way of the relentless, brutal culling of populations that any complex or adaptive traits have been sieved — with torturous inefficiency — from the chaos of natural existence. All health, beauty, intelligence, and social grace has been teased from a vast butcher’s yard of unbounded carnage, requiring incalculable eons of massacre to draw forth even the subtlest of advantages. This is not only a matter of the bloody grinding mills of selection, either, but also of the innumerable mutational abominations thrown up by the madness of chance, as it pursues its directionless path to some negligible preservable trait, and then — still further — of the unavowable horrors that ‘fitness’ (or sheer survival) itself predominantly entails. We are a minuscule sample of agonized matter, comprising genetic survival monsters, fished from a cosmic ocean of vile mutants, by a pitiless killing machine of infinite appetite. (This is still, perhaps, to put an irresponsibly positive spin on the story, but it should suffice for our purposes here.)"

No comments:

Post a Comment