Quote of the Week – Finally, some real certainty

Willis Eschenbach sends us this story from the HuffngtonPost, where the subtitle on their COP21 story is one of certainty, and of course as we predicted earlier in the week, also one of pure hilarity.

“It’s time to get out of this negotiation rhetoric and focus on solutions, otherwise, in a hundred years, we’ll all be dead.”

Who knew? …

The average human lifespan is increasing, maybe by then we’ll all be immortal if the trend keeps up.

Life_Expectancy_at_Birth_by_Region_1950-2050[1]

Note: edits were made to this story to correct spelling errors

 

0 0 votes
Article Rating
120 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
PaulH
December 1, 2015 6:01 am

Yup, the science is settled. 🙂

Bloke down the pub
December 1, 2015 6:04 am

Well at least our emissions will have dropped to zero, so that should make them happy.

Jimbo
Reply to  Bloke down the pub
December 1, 2015 6:48 am

Why stop and nearly halved emissions?
What about world hunger “dropped to 795 million — 216 million fewer than in 1990-92” [UN]?
What about global record cereal production in 2014 [FAO]?
What about the rising middle class, and declining poverty worldwide?
IT’S WORSE THAN I EVER THOUGHT. They almost fooled me! Now where are those island atoll folks?

Jimbo
Reply to  Jimbo
December 1, 2015 6:51 am

Where are the 50million (MISSING) ‘climate change refugees’? Some claimed up to 200 million according to the some.

Guardian – 12 October 2005
50m environmental refugees by end of decade, UN warns
====
United Nations General Assembly – 8 July 2008
….it had been estimated that there would be between 50 million and 200 million environmental migrants by 2010…..

Jimbo
Reply to  Jimbo
December 1, 2015 6:52 am

TYPO: I meant
“Why stop at nearly halved emissions? “

Gloateus Maximus
Reply to  Jimbo
December 1, 2015 6:59 am

Instead there are refugees from war and poverty, both unrelated to so-called “climate change”.

cirby
Reply to  Jimbo
December 1, 2015 7:35 am

One of the Climate Disaster articles I read this week claimed that grain production has been dropping 4% per year since 1982. Which is almost right, except they got the sign wrong.

bit chilly
Reply to  Jimbo
December 1, 2015 4:23 pm

the island atoll folks are on the bbc news at the moment . talking in grant aid speak as usual.

Steve Garcia
Reply to  Jimbo
December 3, 2015 1:00 am

Thanks for the good news. Seriously. It gives me fodder for telling doomsayers that they need to update their information from the days when Paul Ehrlich was leading the world down the Malthusian Highway.

george e. smith
Reply to  Bloke down the pub
December 1, 2015 1:10 pm

Well I heard on the news, that the first person to live to 150 years old, is already over 50, and the first person to live 1,000 years, has already been born.
g

D.J. Hawkins
Reply to  george e. smith
December 1, 2015 1:32 pm

I remember reading an Analog article years ago that discussed human longevity. For any given cohort, the fraction remaining at the end of any year is a linear semi-log relationship. There are likely some kind of end effects, but for a large enough cohort, you could have a Methuselah with little effort.

Steve Garcia
Reply to  george e. smith
December 3, 2015 1:13 am

george e. smith – Great! I believe it. At least that it is a real possibility. Over 20 countries now have lie expectancies 80 or above (the USA is not yet one of them). In 1800 not one country was above 36 years life expectancy. In 1900 none was above 55 years. Right now, only Afghanistan is below 45. That is out of 192 countries. [Source: Hans Rosling’s Gapminder software, compiled from countries’ demographic data.]
So, with Japanese only having to live 16 years above average to reach 100, 150 seems doable. Add in the research on geriatrics, and it may take only one or two breakthroughs to jump us all up by decades.
Centuries? Once we know how to reverse certain destructive bodily processes and add a decade or four, the groundwork will have been laid for much longer extensions.

Steve Garcia
Reply to  george e. smith
December 3, 2015 1:26 am

And BTW, the real jumps in life expectancy came after World War I, with the great improvements in medical care. The USA average was only 49 in 1900. It was 55 by 1920, 60 by 1930, and 65 by 1941. That was a 16-year jump in only 41 years, with 10 of those coming in the last 21 years or so. Medical care is only one avenue, though. Once stem cell treatments are really developed, it’s going to be Katy Bar the Door.
I have a friend, over 60, who had two very bad knees. One had no cartilage, no MCL, no ACL. The other had no ACL or MCL. A doctor outside St Louis treated her in 2011 with her own stem cells taken from her bone marrow, using ultrasound to guide him and precisely place the stem cells. Within less than a month, her cartilage was back, and her ACLs and MCLs had been re-grown. She was walking and then jogging before she knew it. She had the knees of a 25-year-old. In less than a month. Cost? $1900 per knee. Outpatient treatment.
That is hardly the tip of the iceberg. EXPECT much more.

Mark Gilbert
December 1, 2015 6:08 am

Huffpo. Should rename it Pravda

Bruce Cobb
December 1, 2015 6:16 am

Just as predicted, the histrionics, crocodile tears, and Appeals to Emotion have already begun:

Alan Robertson
Reply to  Bruce Cobb
December 1, 2015 6:36 am

That’s from COP19, 2013. Doesn’t matter, there’ll still be plenty of weepy hands outstretched @ COP21.

Reply to  Bruce Cobb
December 1, 2015 6:13 pm

you are insensitive. that time, typhoon Hayain, which left more than 6000 dead in the Philippines and killed at least 3 of that persons relatives at the time he was making this speech. I too am a climate skeptic but I don’t make fun out of the tragedy of others.

Lewis P Buckingham
Reply to  winterscurse
December 1, 2015 9:40 pm

It was this typhoon which was slated to be caused by climate change, that reinforced the Phillipines and their catholic Bishops to call on nations to cut CO2 production.
This led to the papal Encyclical laudato Si
Many in our parish in Sydney were affected.
The greatest failure has been the approach that cutting or limiting CO2 will make a difference to climate by taming it, so preventing such cyclones.
Money would be better spent on adaptation to the inevitable.
Some good may come from this Conference if new technologies, cheaper than coal and fossil fuel emerge.
In the meanwhile fossil fuels are the best bet for the poor.

Bernie McCune
December 1, 2015 6:17 am

But as we warm up, our life expectancy goes up. Maybe 2 degrees C = 100. See it’s not all bad! Or is it?
Bernie

JustSteve
Reply to  Bernie McCune
December 1, 2015 6:56 am

Yes, that’s bad. The movers and shakers of the war mist movement skew toward Malthusian thinking…we have WAY too many people for their tastes.

JustSteve
Reply to  JustSteve
December 1, 2015 6:57 am

Warmist…stupid auto correct.

TonyL
Reply to  JustSteve
December 1, 2015 7:22 am

@JustSteve

the war mist movement

Did you somehow mean “the fog of war”?
Your comment still does not make any sense. In any event, is the “war mist” a movement? I do not think I have heard of it.
This is fascinating: Is there something about this “auto correct” thing that is so compelling that you must use it?
Or are you incapable of proofreading?

Michael 2
Reply to  JustSteve
December 1, 2015 7:35 am

Scary auto correct that has “war mist” in its dictionary!

Reply to  JustSteve
December 1, 2015 7:59 am

@JustSteve – Mist is the German word for manure so mebbe autocorrect was onto something after all …
Pointman

JustSteve
Reply to  JustSteve
December 1, 2015 9:05 am

I’m using my phone while working. Samsung has some strange auto corrects…and I thought I had used warmist enough for it to be in the “approved” file so I didn’t catch it.

Reply to  Bernie McCune
December 1, 2015 6:59 am

Wow, that is some powerful feedback. Warming increases life expectancy increases population increases CO2 emissions increases warming increases life expectancy …
See you by the pool on Baffin Island in 2515.

Reply to  Michael Palmer
December 1, 2015 8:49 am

I kind of like sitting outside and enjoying the breeze – which by then will consist of nothing but CO2, of course.

Pamela Gray
Reply to  Michael Palmer
December 2, 2015 6:29 am

Wonder what climate change grant that got funded with.

observa
Reply to  Bernie McCune
December 1, 2015 7:02 am

Yeah I was kinda wondering where all the early deaths from global warming cum climate change cum extreme weather were hiding in those statistical graphs. Maybe they don’t count deaths in the deep oceans and they’re hidden and just waiting to be uncovered? Either that or the sign’s wrong with the proxy component variables or some such and they need homogenizing and pasteurizing or whatever you do with these things.

Alan Robertson
December 1, 2015 6:19 am

Poor Willis, keeping an eye on HuffPo. It’s a dirty job, but somebody else should watch SKS or RC (yes, they’re back) for other humorous doses. It would be too much to ask of one man.

Oldseadog
December 1, 2015 6:24 am

Never been to HuffPost before but had a look just now.
Lots of quotable quotes.
Also a poll at the bottom of the paper. I took it to see what would happen.
I said I was an environmentalist and apparently am 1 of over 300.
I didn’t offer to sign the petition.
I said I did not believe in COP21 and what it is trying to do and was told I was 1 of 151, and was thanked for being a “supporter”. This puzzled me, since I didn’t say I supported anything, so went back and did it twice more, so now am 1 of 152 and 1 of 153. Both times I was thanked for being a supporter.
If I had time I could have a ball skewing their poll but am too busy.
It would be interesting to see what the result is, though, always supposing they publish it.

jpatrick
December 1, 2015 6:25 am

“Hufkington Post”.? Surely that’s a typo

Mumbles McGuirck
Reply to  jpatrick
December 1, 2015 6:45 am

Yes, he apparently left out a “uc”.

Reply to  jpatrick
December 1, 2015 7:07 am

If Fun Thong?
Fight Of Nun?
Fun Of Night?

Leo Smith
Reply to  Michael Palmer
December 1, 2015 8:03 am

‘Nuff! Nothing!

CaligulaJones
Reply to  jpatrick
December 1, 2015 8:56 am

Well, its better known as HuffPo or HuffBlow, which seems more accurate.
The scary thing is, the actually pay their “writers”.

Reply to  jpatrick
December 1, 2015 9:27 am

I always refer to it as the Puffington Host. I used to think it was as far left as The Communist Manifesto or Mao’s Little Red Book. Then I ran across sites like vox, mic, slate… They all think the Puffington Host is too open minded and namby-pamby about the whole thing and go full-on propaganda mode.

December 1, 2015 6:27 am

Of course when you mention the national debt, about $700,000/worker in the U.S. (if you use non-governmental accounting rules) these same people will dismiss it with the misapplied quote of Keynes, “In the long run we’re all dead”.
This isn’t off topic as they plan on spending an enormous amount of government cash on this fiasco while simultaneously ruining our economies ability to generate it.
Also this isn’t based on dubious models that have shown a poor track record, this is simple arithmetic and history of every other country thats gone down this road.

Jason Calley
Reply to  tomcourt
December 1, 2015 12:31 pm

“In the long run we’re all dead”.
That really is one of the more unethical views that a person can have. In the long run, I am dead, you are dead, each of us is dead, but “we” lives on in our offspring and all others who still live. ““In the long run we’re all dead” is the ethos of a three year old whose favorite words are “me, me, me!”

bit chilly
Reply to  Jason Calley
December 1, 2015 4:30 pm

not really. the alternate view is some people have over inflated ideas about the importance of individual homo sapiens .we will indeed all end up back in the carbon cycle.

JohnWho
December 1, 2015 6:27 am

I suspect a large number of us will be dead before 2100.
Probably.
Mostly.

phil cartier
Reply to  JohnWho
December 1, 2015 12:28 pm

I’ll only be 152

H.R.
Reply to  phil cartier
December 1, 2015 3:24 pm

@ phil,
152? Just a pup!

Reply to  JohnWho
December 1, 2015 5:13 pm

Unless they invent a regeneration process for humans, I sure hope I don’t see 2100.

Steve Garcia
Reply to  ATheoK
December 3, 2015 1:32 am

In a way, they HAVE. It’s called stem cells. See my comment above at http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/12/01/quote-of-the-week-finally-some-real-certainty/comment-page-1/#comment-2085793
Give them time, and that is going to do some freaking AMAZING things. Regenerating knee cartilage and ACLs and MCLs is one HELLUVA great accomplishment.

Reply to  ATheoK
December 8, 2015 3:29 pm

Some “…freaking amazing things…”
That is not regeneration for humans. At best it is hope for freaking things replacements; some of which are already occurring.
They are very far from consistently replacing critical organs like the heart and brain. At this point in time, they are excited by a few cells taking hold; repeatability is not their strong suit.
My comment or observation, if you will, stands.

Steve Garcia
Reply to  ATheoK
December 8, 2015 3:40 pm

Hey, no problem. In 1880 no one had invented a carburetor, so the internal combustion engine was an impossibility. Until someone did invent it, in 1882.
You apparently assume – like Malthusians always have – that human ingenuity will stop at its present level. As we all know, we ran out of gas sometime in the 1980s or so, iron in before ~2000, etc. Oops! That didn’t actually happen, did it?
But let’s shut down the U.S. Patent Office again, like we did back in those same 1880s on the instigation of some pessimistic congressman. Oh? We didn’t shut down the Patent Office?
So, does that mean that, like then, progress will be allowed to continue? Or do they need your permission? Or does your “standing on your comment” stop the world?
My favorite, though, has to be computers for darned near everyone who wanted one. That will never happen. It hadn’t happened by 1970, so obviously it was never going to happen.
And the cure for polio, etc……

Steve Garcia
Reply to  ATheoK
December 8, 2015 3:43 pm

Oh, and the one I myself will stand by is my observation that my friend has knees again. In only the first 15 years of stem cells, someone found out a way to regrow cartilage and ligaments – instead of replacing human parts with mechanical parts, even! And at 1/10th the cost, no less!
If you think that THAT doesn’t offer lots of help and hope, well, then just stand there on your previous comment…

Admin
December 1, 2015 6:28 am

There’s a good chance serious longevity treatments will be available within a few decades.
Computers are doubling in power every 18 months. As a serious IT specialist who has experimented with artificial intelligence, my expert opinion is the problems of artificial intelligence are solvable, and will fall before a combination of AI research and rising computational power. You’ve never seen anything as strange as watching software you created crawling towards solving an AI problem – its like watching a tree grow, like watching something living, not like normal software at all.
The original genome project took over a decade to sequence human DNA. Nowadays this is a routine process which takes a few weeks. The difference – the mind-blowing increase in computation power available, in just the last few years. Its not just DNA – computers are increasingly capable of modelling what the DNA does, they are slowly piecing together the mechanics of life. Medical immortality is the prize – and the wait will not be long.

Reply to  Eric Worrall
December 1, 2015 7:02 am

I’ve told my kids for years, they will likely be able to live forever, I figure what we know and learn over the next 20 years or so, will get you 20 to 50 more years, which those will get them another big chunk, and by then we’ll likely have nanotech and will be able to restore a body to like new as long as you don’t break it too bad.

ferdberple
Reply to  micro6500
December 1, 2015 9:46 am

Death is natures great invention. Immortality for the individual means extinction for the species. Knowing you could live forever if you avoided injury or disease, many would never leave the house.

Reply to  ferdberple
December 1, 2015 10:01 am

I have the novelty seeking gene, I’d go ride my motorcycle.

Reply to  micro6500
December 1, 2015 10:08 am

Lots of great SciFi exploring this. Asimov’s detective series is a good one.

Reply to  Jeff in Calgary
December 1, 2015 10:12 am

I enjoyed those a lot, but had Lazarus Long more in mind.

MarkW
Reply to  micro6500
December 1, 2015 11:21 am

Immortality would probably mean the end of scientific and technological advancement.

Reply to  MarkW
December 1, 2015 12:16 pm

I suppose at some point we will know everything, but until then curiosity should keep science moving forward.

Reply to  micro6500
December 1, 2015 7:57 pm

No death, no turnover of generations, no evolution.

Leo Morgan
Reply to  Eric Worrall
December 1, 2015 7:15 am

Eric, I’d like to agree, but I don’t.
Firstly, I fear we technological optimists are suffering from the Dunning Kruger effect. There’s still many problems awaiting us that we don’t yet know exist.
Secondly, i fear we’re inappropriately extrapolating exponential curves. I’m reminded of a Professor who told me Rene Descartes was so impressed by the advancement of medical knowledge he had seen, that he predicted medical immortality in his lifetime.
Robert Heinlein, a very savvy prognosticator indeed, wrongly extrapolated the exponentially accelerating speeds of his time to faster than light travel by the year 2000. Admittedly, we’ve achieved it, in a sense, with two quantum-entangled electrons… but we’re clearly well short of the intent of the forecast.
Certainly the Malthusians have always been wrong about exponentials.
Thirdly, the issue of medical immortality includes solving protein folding, which gains an order of complexity with each additional atom included in our calculations. The number of transistors per chip still seems to be accelerating per Moore’s Law, but the exponential increase in chip speed has slowed.
The problem could be solved with quantum computing, of course, but each additional qbit adds an order of complexity to the construction of the system.
Probably the second greatest threat is that we will also have to fight the regulators, the precautionary principle proclaimers, and the science by consensus bureaucrats to reach the goal.
Finally, it is the Capitalist system that allocates the most funding to scientific research. Much of the world is anti-capitalist, and the forthcoming collapse of the Western economies caused by the financial fecklessness our socialist politicians have perpetrated will be widely proclaimed to be an inherent fault of capitalism. I fear medical immortality is centuries, not decades away.

Reply to  Leo Morgan
December 1, 2015 7:50 am

Eric, I’d like to agree, but I don’t.

Leo, this is the IMO the likely other side of the coin, we’re standing on the edge of getting off this planet and breaking the bounds of a limited lifespan, or not.
I figured we had until fossil fuels spiked in cost for us to have replaced the bulk of that with nuclear, originally 2050 or so.
We found Natural gas under our feet, but we also now have all of the AGW nonsense. We’re so close, but the mideast is melting down, and we need a better economy, plus all of the modern Luddites. Curiously learning to live in space, will teach us the environmental technologies to resolve any of the issues with pollution, plus we might be able to do the mining and manufacturing in space, stop digging up the planet.
But if the coin comes up tails, it could easily be centuries, a lot will depend on the availability of energy.
What I want to leave to my grand kid’s, are immortality and the stars.

Ex-expat Colin
Reply to  Eric Worrall
December 1, 2015 7:47 am

Power stations Eric…power stations! The ones the cr*p heads in Paris are trying to kill off.
And if any more fake batteries get into the UK we’ll be truly screwed. Thats apart from fake fertilisers and face make up etc.

Steve Garcia
Reply to  Ex-expat Colin
December 3, 2015 1:39 am

Thorium LFTR reactors use 150 times more of the available energy than light water reactors. Less than 1% waste versus over 99% waste. Non-proliferatable, too. And no China syndromes. China and India have hundreds of scientists and even more engineers working on getting production reactors up and running before 2030.
With LFTRs, you can hold all your lifetime’s energy in the palm of your hand – with space left over. A PEA-sized ball of thorium is one year’s energy for one person.

Reply to  Eric Worrall
December 1, 2015 8:01 am

The advance in sequencing is not solely due to computing power, but also to some ingenious advancements of the actual sequencing technology.
We are a looooooong way off “modelling what DNA does.” The cell is tiny, but it is full of surprises. Maybe Sherlock Holmes could rely on computing power only to model a whole crime scene cum perpetrator and motif from a tiny red fibre glued to a slipper with dog poo, but the real world doesn’t work that way.

george e. smith
Reply to  Eric Worrall
December 1, 2015 1:17 pm

Does AI programming comply with Smith’s First Law of Software ??
” Before you do anything, it is always necessary to do something else first !! ”
Corollary: ” No matter where you start. “

CalUKGR
December 1, 2015 6:37 am

From that HuffPo story:
“…Naoko reiterated the Global Environment Facility is formulating a gender equality action plan and hopes to see funding opportunities coming out of the Paris talks.”
See, this is what you’ve got to watch for – the actual reason so many tens of thousands of bottom-feeders are troughing up in Paris for the next two weeks. Climate has nothing at all do with any of it. This about political agendas and getting hold of the benjamins to put them in ‘action’ (a word much-beloved of the liberal left).
The global heist continues.

Randy in Ridgecrest
December 1, 2015 6:42 am

Back in 1985 I remember a fellow, he was our resident scientist at Exotic Materials, that with the advances going on then say “that if you live 20 more years you will live forever”. I’ve heard that a lot since, makes for news fodder.

Marcus
December 1, 2015 6:42 am

HufkngtonfPost……..Should that be HuffingtonPost ???????

Eustace Cranch
Reply to  Marcus
December 1, 2015 7:00 am

I think Willis is deliberately taking a little jab at HP.

December 1, 2015 6:43 am

To state the obvious re: “…. in a hundred years, we’ll all be dead.” The last I checked the Human mortality rate is 100%. So even if we “manage” the climate, none of us will be alive to witness it.

Mumbles McGuirck
Reply to  Gilbert K. Arnold
December 1, 2015 6:55 am

Except for Elijah, who once said, “Hey, save me a place at the table.”

Reply to  Mumbles McGuirck
December 1, 2015 7:24 am

Enoch and Elijah did not die.
Enoch walked with God and he was no more.
Elijah left earth in a chariot of fire.
Even Lazarus whom Jesus brought back to life ended up dying when Jesus wasn’t there to save him the second time he died…I guess it was okay with Jesus for him to go ahead and die the second time.

David L. Hagen
Reply to  Mumbles McGuirck
December 1, 2015 8:10 am

Mikerestin. Good point. However,

Just as people are destined to die once, and after that to face judgment,

Hebrews 9:27.
There will be two prophetic witnesses who will die then visibly rise. These are often interpreted as being Elijah and Enoch since they had not yet died. See:
Revelation 11:3-13

Marcus
December 1, 2015 6:55 am

In 100 years ?? Hopefully , in ten years , all these looney left wing zealots will be in jail for Crimes Against Humanity ” !

Reply to  Marcus
December 1, 2015 5:19 pm

What!?
Spend all of tax monies on fools who’ll believe they should live coddled imprisonments?
We should save a raft of cash and farm out the imprisonment to the Syrians or the Turkish. Or perhaps one of those post cannibalistic tribes.

jjs
December 1, 2015 7:14 am

The sense I get is that the life expectancy graph is what really makes many on the left angry and they are on a mission to bend the curve down (with the exception for themselves of course).They will continue to demand the best life government elitism can buy, by reducing the standard of living of everyone else. If they get their way it will not end well.

RD
December 1, 2015 7:18 am

This is certain. Nothing Obama agrees to in Paris is binding in the US, since a treaty requires a 2/3 vote in the Senate. Never gonna happen.

Reply to  RD
December 1, 2015 8:07 am

Obama put pressure on the French not to call anything that’s agreed a treaty, thus avoiding the two thirds requirement. He’s of course living in cuckoo land if he thinks Congress would let him get away with that wheeze.
Pointman

Reply to  Pointman
December 1, 2015 12:35 pm

He was in cuckoo land before he was elected. He’s now nearing the edge of the flat earth he grew up on. btw, flat earth theory is anti-science.

Sun Spot
December 1, 2015 7:21 am

I’m sure at least 7.3 billion people will perish in the next 100 years and I’m sure some nutter will claim it’s all from Climate Change.

Reply to  Sun Spot
December 1, 2015 7:26 am

+100

barryjo
Reply to  Sun Spot
December 1, 2015 7:42 am

No, it is from eating carrots. My conclusion comes from the fact that 100% of the people who ate carrots in 1861-1877 are now dead.

barryjo
Reply to  barryjo
December 1, 2015 7:44 am

Note to self: always read the entire comment section before commenting.

Bear
Reply to  barryjo
December 1, 2015 11:02 am

Consider that water is the most addicting substance known. If you have ever drunk it you can’t stop without dying and the effects of withdrawal are very painful. If you overdose you die. Though if you drink it long enough you’ll die anyway.

December 1, 2015 7:36 am

You don’t need to go to HuffPo to find comedy gold and lies. The Associated
Press does enough of it in pure “News.”
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/C/CLIMATE_COUNTDOWN?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2015-12-01-08-44-16

Latitude
December 1, 2015 7:36 am

in a hundred years, we’ll all be dead….
Dead broke way before then…..this little tea party cost us over $2 million

December 1, 2015 7:37 am

I really laughed out loud!
These people are hilarious.

Goldrider
Reply to  Eyal Porat
December 1, 2015 7:47 am

Educated beyond their intelligence, without a doubt!

Gary Pearse
December 1, 2015 7:38 am

““It’s time to get out of this negotiation rhetoric and focus on solutions, otherwise, in a hundred years, we’ll all be dead.”
And probably better off for it. The new living population will have 100years of hindsight to see how crazy we were.

higley7
December 1, 2015 7:40 am

That quote goes perfectly with one I personally love,
“Did you know that everyone who ate green peas during the Civil War died?”

Leo Smith
Reply to  higley7
December 1, 2015 8:07 am

And the sequel :
“Well, I haven’t had a pea for 60 years!”
“Man the pumps and call the fire brigade”.

David L. Hagen
December 1, 2015 8:14 am

Odds of living to 100?

Japan 3.43 per 10,000
France 2.70 per 10,000
United Kingdom 1.95 per 10,000
Sweden 1.92 per 10,000
United States 1.73 per 10,000

Prognosis of death? 99.999,999,999% (so far except Elijah and Enoch – barring the rapture).

John M
Reply to  David L. Hagen
December 1, 2015 10:01 am

Kinda makes 97% look wimpy.

Steve Garcia
Reply to  David L. Hagen
December 3, 2015 1:42 am

Don’t forget Melchizidek

David L. Hagen
Reply to  Steve Garcia
December 3, 2015 6:52 am

Thanks: A fascinating symbolic life. Hebrews 7:1-3.

indefatigablefrog
December 1, 2015 9:44 am

The rate at which people die has increased in almost exact correlation to the rate of increase of CO2.
People were dying in very small numbers until about 1750, whereupon, as we all now know, climate change started – and since then more and more people have died per year, year on year.
At this rate everyone currently alive will certainly be dead within 100 years or so.
Children just aren’t going to know what being alive is…
(May contain sarc.)

Reply to  indefatigablefrog
December 1, 2015 10:47 am

Are we going to name this the copulatory corollary?

mebbe
Reply to  indefatigablefrog
December 1, 2015 7:32 pm

Irony detected but no sarcasm

michael hart
December 1, 2015 10:52 am

What was that famous quote about the two certainties in life? “Death”, and… something else I can’t quite remember at the moment. I think that’s what they’re working on in Paris.

johnbuk
December 1, 2015 10:54 am

Yep, being born is fatal.

Juan Slayton
December 1, 2015 10:58 am

How much of the increased lifespan is due to reduced infant mortality? The maximum lifespan may be increasing, but not nearly so much as the averaged figures suggest.

Dipchip
December 1, 2015 11:11 am

My qute of the week.
Anyone that would overlook the slaughter of 130 innocent people after only 2 weeks and less than a mile from where he is speaking is not fit to lead. While trying to back it down he has already shown no sympathy to the victims, their families, or anyone other than himself. His speech blows like extreme bad breath into faces of the intelligent and disappointed people of France.

Dipchip
Reply to  Dipchip
December 1, 2015 11:14 am

My qute of the week. On mass killings only occur in the USA.

PMT
December 1, 2015 11:20 am

Ah, the ludi-crass Huff-Po hasn’t realised that Cop21 is the new Secular Games.
Wiki:-
“The Secular Games (Latin Ludi Saeculares) was a Roman religious celebration, involving sacrifices and theatrical performances, held in ancient Rome for three days and nights to mark the end of a saeculum and the beginning of the next. A saeculum, supposedly the longest possible length of human life, was considered as either 100 or 110 years in length.”

Spiderman
December 1, 2015 1:24 pm

It’s already happening! Even though the temperature has gone up by less than 1C over the last hundred years, billions have died!

Reply to  Spiderman
December 1, 2015 5:04 pm

It’s worse than we thought.

James Fosser
December 1, 2015 1:49 pm

ferdberple December 1, 2015 at 9:46 am
Dear ferdberple. Actuary tables would disagree with you about living forever. These things say that if “Immortality” came along plus cures for all diseases, then -living a normal everyday life but not having children -fifty percent of the population will be gone by 600 years then fifty percent of the remainder after a further 600 years etc etc. Then there is the Copernican Conundrum chasing furiously after the ones who stubbornly insist on remaining in the remainder.

Paul Penrose
December 1, 2015 6:32 pm

And if we all do as they say we must (give up all carbon based energy sources), we’ll all be dead a lot sooner than 2100.

Walter Sobchak
December 1, 2015 6:39 pm

Well:
Volume 62, Number 7, January 6, 2014, National Vital Statistics Reports
National Vital Statistics System of the National Center for Health Statistics of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention of the U.S. Department of Health and Human services
United States Life Tables, 2009
Table 1. Life table for the total population: United States, 2009
Out of 100,000 children born, 2,056 will survive their 100th birthday at which time they will have a life expectancy of 2.3 years.
So, almost all of us. Certainly, I will not survive 100 more years. Almost nobody lives past 115. There are a few documented cases of people living longer than that. I believe that longest document life was Jeanne Calment of France who died in 1997 at the age of 122 years & 164 days.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oldest_people

Steve Garcia
Reply to  Walter Sobchak
December 3, 2015 1:57 am

In life expectancy, the past is prologue. In 1900 the average expectancy in the USA was 49. Now it is 79. By 2100 hundred will it be 109? And the USA has not increased as rapidly as many other countries. There now are 28 countries with life expectancies of 80 or more. And the USA is not one of them (79) – ranking 37th.
Don’t go by what we see in the USA. The real stories are elsewhere.
A Japanese (84) only needs to live 16 years past average to be 100. Women only need 13 years beyond average to get to 100. Up from 83 ten years ago. In 1950 Japan was at 59. In 65 years they’ve gone up 25 years.
Spain is only a year behind Japan, at 83 overall and 86 for women.
Mexico was at 28 in 1900, at 49 in 1950, and is now at 76. Up 48 years in 115 years – about 5 additional months per year lived.

December 1, 2015 6:56 pm

I think it was Isaac Asimov who said that if we achieved individual immortality, the average lifespan would be about 800 years, because of accidents. Now of course some might live much longer, and some much less, but all things considered, I’d be happier with 800 years than I am with my current prospects.
/Mr Lynn

Reply to  L. E. Joiner
December 1, 2015 8:26 pm

Well, as and enthusiastic deep and steep skier, horse enthusiast and past motorcycle rider, heart attack survivor, cancer survivor and radiation poisoning survivor and survivor of a whole pile of accidents, I am already well past my best before date so I don’t object to my eventual disposition. My body would never last 120 years never mind 800 – it’s too damaged to last much longer and though I signed a donor card, I am thinking they might just want to use it to show medical students how not to treat a body (I signed off on that too). Nevertheless, I plan to keep on skiing and riding horses till that expiry date comes around (and maybe even buy another motorcycle to take a last tour around the continent before the legs and arms stop working). Geez, who’d want to live 800 years anyway? Gotta make room for my grand kids and go visit all my old friends who left the planet before me. Threads across the Universe.

Joe Schmoe
December 1, 2015 8:07 pm

Life expectancy is not increasing ( or very little, compared to conventional wisdom) Infant mortality rates are decreasing. Those numbers are added into the average and gives the impression that everyone is living longer. Not entirely true. Dig up some statistics that show life expectancy at age 50, after disease and accidents and stupidity have been filtered out, and you’ll see that life expectancy has only increased a few years.

Patrick Peake
December 2, 2015 12:15 am

The ABC (Australian) news this morning said that the Pacific Ocean island nations were complaining because “they had been left high and dry” at the Paris conference. Funny but I thought that was their intention – rather than going under water.

Pamela Gray
December 2, 2015 6:07 am

“If we don’t do something about [taxes; regulations; politics; whatever] causing climate change, in a hundred years we will all be out of a job.” There. I fixed it for you.

bill
December 2, 2015 6:51 am

OT: Sorry to ask here, but I don’t know where else to post. Does anyone know when we’ll get the next value on the length of the pause? Shouldn’t it be soon? I’m on pins and needles.

Reply to  bill
December 3, 2015 2:26 pm

UAH Update for November
UAH for November showed a drop of 0.1 from October. I knew that UAH could not reach second place before this. However a huge upward spike in November could have made it interesting. But with a drop, reaching second place it totally out of the question. It is stuck in third.
This is the warmest November on the UAH6.0beta4 record. However it seems as if the El Ninos just fail to produce high November anomalies. For example, the first 10 months of 1998 all beat 0.33. As well, the first 9 months of 2010 beat or tied 0.33.
The pause for UAH remains at 18 years and 6 months. It is just shifted over by a month so now it starts in June 1997 and ends on November 2015.
RSS Update for November
RSS for November came in at 0.426, a slight drop from the October value of 0.447. While it is the warmest November on record for RSS, the anomaly of 0.426 was beaten in the first 10 months of 1998 and the first 9 months of 2010. 2015 is in third place now and there is no way it can even reach second in 2015.
The pause remains at 18 years and 9 months, however it is shifted by one month. So it is no longer from February 1997 to October 2015, but rather from March 1997 to November 2015.

Reply to  Werner Brozek
December 3, 2015 2:54 pm

This is a chart of the average daily derivative of temperature for surface stations over the whole planet.comment image?w=696
You can see the 97 El Nino, which shows how the surface temp went up a lot (as the warm tropical air moved inland). But it didn’t last long, look at the downward spike that followed, the tropical air doesn’t enhance warming, it just takes some time to cool off (consider the kinetic energy carried by the millions of gallons of water poleward).

bill
December 2, 2015 8:55 am

Thanks Dean. I to find it amazing no one has heard of it. The Climate Depot folks have calculated, by least-squares, 18 years 9 months looking at RSS data through Oct. The Oct value was the highest it’s been since 2010. I was wondering when we’ll get Nov numbers, as I was hoping Nov might not be any higher.

Bob in Castlemaine
December 3, 2015 12:57 am

The Huff must have been channelling Woody Allen?

“I don’t want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve immortality through not dying. I don’t want to live on in the hearts of my countrymen; I want to live on in my apartment.”

Woody Allen

%d bloggers like this: