The End of The World (as we knew it)

Just watched ‘How to Boil a Frog’ yesterday.

Documentary about the all the problems in society and how they are effecting global temperature (ie: global warming). It addresses the problem in some pretty straight-forward ways and realizes that the upward curve in consumption occuring is driving this whole process. It also offers some solutions one could do to make a difference here and now to change some of what our carbon footprint is andhow we support others with larger carbon footprints (ie: don’t buy from Exxon and don’t eat beef as examples).

After watching the show I had a few small critiques, namely on who’s to blame and maybe the actual outcomes of all of this.

He mentions over-population as one of the problems that need to be addressed. I agree, the world is getting over-populated – but is this the problem? Do we blame medicine for making us live longer? Isn’t the problem that the wealth of the nations resides in so few irresponsible hands that poverty remains an absolute terror on 3rd world nations? Let’s take the blame of the severely wealthy and tell the poor and middle classes to wear condoms…interesting. Isn’t that ‘passing the buck’?

As for outcomes of such a catastrophe in the future which includes things like deforestation, resource depletion, need for water and food, avoiding the heat and natural disasters, etc…what might happen? It’s not hard to figure if push comes to shove, he with the most weapons and money takes what he wants first while others languish in the resulting tide (ie: I think we see that with Oil right now).

The future is not about to be kind if global warming cannot be averted. I would be amazed if we made it past 2085 to be perfectly honest (and that may even be a stretch). Once the temperatures of this planet reach 2% higher than normal – the process is irreversible – we reach 5% in some time after that. One must remember, 1987 was the year we should of been planning for the future, not 2010, that puts us 23 years behind, and a few new generations accelerating the process.

The land grabs in times of pressure might be more obvious than one thinks, Canada and Russia. 2 biggest land sources on this planet that could face the least amount of problems in face of this catastrophe – also both have abundant resources. Russia is still a somewhat super-power so a grab there is not going to be easy, but Canada? Just saying when things come to ‘shove’, he with the most money and power will make their way first.

If global warming doesn’t end us, war will. No one is getting out of this unscathed it would seem.

Advertisements

6 thoughts on “The End of The World (as we knew it)

  1. I think I’d be willing to cut down on beef. And I would love to stop paying for gasoline, that’s for sure (I use my car maybe 4 times a week). But, I’m worried about the numbers that are needed. How many people need to make these kinds of sacrifices?

    Their website’s pretty slick. And I like the idea that comedy can be used to change the world (although that’s always a tough gig). If our timeline is as tight as you think, this doesn’t sound like the time to wallow in despair.

    I had an interesting conversation last night about ‘tempering the despots’ (he’s in a “History of Aid and Development” course right now). He said there have been very few successful ways stopping the elite from exploiting a population or country. But, one that has had some success is to make the economic system of a country so increasingly complicated and intricate that it cannot be controlled by a centralized power. It creates a potentially dangerous interdependency (like today) and it also creates tension (government/banking/trade) because groups do still try to control and monopolize of course.

    But of course, it is always going to require a lot of social engineering to get the wealthy and the elite under control…

  2. I know this is a tough one to tackle, which is why I am quite sure we (as a human species) will not revert and make the changes needed to not allow the temperature to sky-rocket in the next 50 – 100 years. The world already ended in ‘ice’, now we may have to face one that ends in ‘fire’.

    Regardless, I do take the message quite seriously and will try my best to adhere to policies that make this a better planet.

  3. thing about life is that no one gets out alive. yet we haven’t been very good stewards of the world for future generations. many want to deny the fact of global warming, or argue the minute details, or delay change until we really figure out what the silver bullet is. rubbish and poppycock!

    maybe Catholic dogma is right on… when talking about Noah’s Ark, the tradition states that the world will never be destroyed like it was through water, as that was God’s promise. but God never promised not to keep us from destroying the world or from destroying it by some other means. and being a tradition heavy on dualists, many theologians claim that since water was used the first time, fire will be the next. and to think, people think religion offers nothing to the world! here’s another way that religion has arrive at the answer waaay before science got around to it. (and all the more reason we need both).

  4. and being a tradition heavy on dualists, many theologians claim that since water was used the first time, fire will be the next. and to think, people think religion offers nothing to the world!

    It offers us a non sequitur.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s