Michael Tobis (aka Dr. Doom) is someone I have opposed frequently and vehemently across the climate blogosphere. Nonetheless, he has a post up now that is thought-worthy, if not noteworthy. Titled ‘The Seventieth Generation, he makes an impassioned plea for all of us to remember the effects of our actions and choices for generations far in the future.
In it Tobis writes, “In this secular way of thinking, we owe little to the distant future. The more distant in time our impacts, the less we need care about them. Our ancient obligation to carry the torch of civilization is invisible to this way of thinking. Our new obligation to leave the world viable at all for our distant descendants is considered actually beneath mention, a sort of contemptible hysteria.”
“…We are behaving insanely. Insanity is, above all, a failure of love. And we cannot muster the imagination to act from love for our descendants, or for what remains of the world in which they will live.
It’s not as if ethical constraints on economic activity themselves are unimaginable. We no longer tolerate slavery or murder, at least not at the scale they occurred in the past. Money is no object. There is no amount of compensation that (we suppose and hope) absolves a person of murder. We just don’t do that.”
Once again I find myself on the opposite side of the fence from Tobis. We are not given to know the future. Given the incredible amount of change we have experienced in just my lifetime, what I see as real arrogance is to presume we know what will happen in 30 years time, let alone 300. Facebook is 13 years old, Google is 20. The Worldwide Web as we use it today is 25. Mobile phones didn’t start being commonplace until 20 years ago. What with the daily news about drones, driverless cars, artificial intelligence, the internet of things, biogenomics and nanotechnology, anybody who can say what the world will be like in 50, even 30 years, is truly a new Nostradamus.
Tobis is of course writing of climate change and of course is condemning those who don’t adopt his vision of the future, a future where our ‘inaction’ in curbing the burning of fossil fuels creates a planetary hell.
He wants us to build for the future, a greener place unperturbed by human contributions to global warming. In exhorting us to do this he is ignoring the present–a present where renewable energy is set to increase by 33% over the next five years, according to the IEA, after growing 9% in 2015. Global emissions have plateaued for three years, again according to the IEA. These and other actions (the adoption of electric and hybrid vehicles, reforestation, etc.) have already rendered RCP 8.5 inoperative. We may not be doing enough to address climate change, depending on your point of view, but we are doing a lot.
To adopt his vision–building for a greener future for distant generations, we will have to make sacrifices. Well, not ‘we’–those who will pay the price will be those in the developed world who are poor, and those throughout the developing world. Tobis has insisted for most of this decade that we need to get to net zero emissions almost immediately. It is a draconian remedy, and one we are naturally reluctant to adopt without a clearer idea of what the future holds. Tobis doesn’t describe a future–not one based on our continuing in our evil ways, nor one where we successfully convert our entire way of living to satisfy his concerns.
But it is obvious that we will not have resources to build for a Utopian future with zero carbon emissions and address the clear and present environmental dangers we can see clearly by looking at the past. Those who have provided estimates for conversion to a green life have used figures in the tens of trillions of US dollars.
Here in America we can see that cities like Houston and Miami are vulnerable to hurricanes, and modest sea level rise coupled with large-scale subsidence makes them a ‘bowling pin for the gods.’ The same is true internationally, for cities like Manila, Havana and many more.
My very good friend and co-author Steve Mosher is enjoying a period of well-deserved recognition for his statement “We don’t even plan for the past.” And clearly we don’t.
But we could. Countries like the Netherlands and cities like Tokyo have addressed vulnerabilities highlighted by past storms or sea level rise and have managed to prosper despite these efforts. For a fraction of the money needed to eliminate fossil fuel emissions we could retrofit coastal cities (instead of rebuilding them in the same mindless manner we have rebuilt them before) and move people out of flood plains and river deltas (yes, even in Bangladesh).
We should build for the past–it is a far clearer guide to the dangers we will face than that provided by climate models and the fever dreams of those too long focused on the perils of CO2. After all, if the past is not there to learn from, why do we have a memory?
But we should remember the future. It exists and although it is uncertain, it should be a part of our planning.
We could prepare agriculture and agriculturists for the coming decades. We could build a safety margin in our construction to allow for sea level rise and higher temperatures, more violent storms and more frequent local flooding. Incorporating these into planning for future construction would be, again, an order of magnitude less expensive than tearing the planet apart and rebuilding it on an emissions-free model.
Michael Tobis is a terribly conflicted man. He is admirably concerned about the future of the planet, something that has caused him to make very poor choices in how he behaves in public discourse. We can admire his concern while lamenting his behavior. He is certainly not an optimist–so perhaps we can adopt the optimism on his behalf and remind him that not all is lost.
It isn’t even always all that serious.
The building of the great Cathedrials was during the MWP. It was a time of prosperity by the standards of the time, made possible by the mild climate and plenty of food.
MJE
Why is it that the USA produces so many doom predictors ? Is there something in the water ? Or the culture ? Bizarre.
Well, the benefits of relatively cheap and abundant energy and prosperity it affords, allows some to separate themselves from the present reality (think some of the Hollywood celebs) and, coupled with an ignorance or dismissal of the reality of the past, to conjecture that the future “will be really bad” unless we screw up the present reality.
We have that problem here in Oz..
Because a disproportionately large number of Yanks suffer delusions of grandeur.
They’re called progressives.
Is there a disproportionately large number of Yanks?
Those trying to yank our chains?
The world pays attention to our cranks.
Yours, well they just expect you to be cranky so no one notices.
There is also a market for scary stories. The green variety just cater to a different market than the fundamentalist scary stories, or the Feminist Campus Rape Epidemic scary stories.
The hippy, anti-war generation of the early 70’s finds itself struggling with meaning for their lives in their late 60’s and early 70’s now. And they have passed this albatross of guilt on to the Millennial generation that is still largely adrift having grown up with participation trophies, when the real purpose of life is the struggle, the conflict, and the competition for a reproductive mate and resources. Climate change seems to be their new crusade to give them meaning, like Al Gore struggling to find meaning to his pathetic existence and he settled on becoming the Climate Change messiah and the prophecies of James Hansen.
Yes… maybe mutated versions of manifest destiny or pre-destination.
“Apocalypse” was originally about how Good, despite terrible evil in the world, reveals himself and introduces a wonderful heaven on Earth.
Now we have so many death obsessed kooks spewing pseudo-scientific claptrap.
I see Malthus as sort if patient zero of this social disease.
Michael Tobis is behaving insanely and insisting that others behave insanely.
A) Predicting the future is impossible, unless one has an inside to omnipotence. Definitely, not the alarmists.
B) Look back in one’s own family for family members alive a hundred or even eighty years ago. Just what would you lecture them, that they should have done better so your personal world would be better.
With questions like that, they’ll be thinking of kids they should’ve skipped.
C) Find any real world purchaser seeking to buy the best available. Now convince them they should write their “request for solutions” to meet future conditions, even twenty years ahead.
That’s a quick way to get fired as engineers and superiors are expecting solutions to meet today’s needs, not imaginary possible future needs.
D) One thing is certain, corporate boards and senior executives will not allow spending money for uncertain needs of the future. They tend to be interested in what meets today’s needs, today!
Absurd!
The past is good for determining what the dangers we face today, but they are guidelines only. Nature frequently trumps the best man builds.
Take hurricane Michael recently. Michael hit a part of Florida that was commonly thought will avoid category 4 and 5 hurricanes.
Many of the homes built since 2001 were to withstand category 1 and 2 hurricanes.
In 2007, additional requirements were put in place; e.g. shatterproof windows.
How much will it cost to rebuild Florida’s Panhandle area to meet category 4 and 5 hurricanes?
Better materials, screws instead of nails, double and triply reinforced, roof anchored to walls, walls anchored to the building foundation, etc…
Likely two to three times higher in costs, at least.
Does North FLorida need to meet such severe storms?
Not that anyone knows just what is required for 100% of the buildings to survive a category 5 hurricane.
“Category Sustained Winds Types of Damage Due to Hurricane Winds
1 74-95 mph, 64-82 kt, 119-153 km/h
Very dangerous winds will produce some damage: Well-constructed frame homes could have damage to roof, shingles, vinyl siding and gutters. Large branches of trees will snap and shallowly rooted trees may be toppled. Extensive damage to power lines and poles likely will result in power outages that could last a few to several days.
2 96-110 mph, 83-95 kt, 154-177 km/h
Extremely dangerous winds will cause extensive damage: Well-constructed frame homes could sustain major roof and siding damage. Many shallowly rooted trees will be snapped or uprooted and block numerous roads. Near-total power loss is expected with outages that could last from several days to weeks.
3 (major) 111-129 mph, 96-112 kt, 178-208 km/h
Devastating damage will occur: Well-built framed homes may incur major damage or removal of roof decking and gable ends. Many trees will be snapped or uprooted, blocking numerous roads. Electricity and water will be unavailable for several days to weeks after the storm passes.
4 (major) 130-156 mph, 113-136 kt, 209-251 km/h
Catastrophic damage will occur: Well-built framed homes can sustain severe damage with loss of most of the roof structure and/or some exterior walls. Most trees will be snapped or uprooted and power poles downed. Fallen trees and power poles will isolate residential areas. Power outages will last weeks to possibly months. Most of the area will be uninhabitable for weeks or months.
5 (major) 157 mph or higher, 137 kt or higher, 252 km/h or higher
Catastrophic damage will occur: A high percentage of framed homes will be destroyed, with total roof failure and wall collapse. Fallen trees and power poles will isolate residential areas. Power outages will last for weeks to possibly months. Most of the area will be uninhabitable for weeks or months.”
Not a lot of wiggle room there. Just because a building is built to stricter building regulations is not a guarantee that they will survive major hurricanes or storm surges.
Yet the Michael Tobis’s of the distant future will be all too eager to sue someone who built a house eighty years ago, because they failed to meet the needs of eighty years in the future.
Precautionary principle madness.
“How much will it cost to rebuild Florida’s Panhandle area to meet category 4 and 5 hurricanes?”
http://fortune.com/2018/06/20/hurricane-proof-homes/
Since hurricanes aren’t getting any stronger, why should the building codes be upgraded?
$64,000 question.
Does Tobis actually believe what he says?
My vote goes on ‘no’.
A proper Marxist will say and do anything to achieve global revolution.
Like revolutionary Islam, its cool to lie to unbelievers.
I think they justify lying by thinking, from the perspective of my non-existent, alternative, future, I’m doing the right thing. Well, I guess you are, but so is an ISIS terrorist! It’s similar to the critique of instrumental reason (which also happens to be the title of a book by Frankfurt School founder Max Horkheimer. For example: I eat food to stay alive. We are 100% certain a balanced diet is necessary for life. Meat is a well-balanced food with essential amino-acids, iron, … It tastes good too; which is a sure sign that it’s good for me. That is very instrumental-reasoning. In contrast value-reasoning says: We need to save the planet, by cutting GHG emissions. Livestock emit GHGs. If I stop eating meat, it will cut GHGs. But one person’s effort is a trifle. Everyone must stop eating meat. That is the the opposite of instrumental reason, called value reasoning. The weakness of value reasoning is that one supposition leads to another and no supposition needs supporting, empirically derived, evidence. Practically speaking: instrumental reason arises from experience. Value reasoning must always arise from the perspective of an imaginary future. Imaginary futures devoid of evidence. It partly explains the contempt value-reasoners have for evidence too.
But so is an ISIS terrorist!
This worry is eliminated by justifying ones imaginary futures as better worlds for everyone. Everyone will be equal, poverty will not exist, people will have overcome human nature, so there will be no more sex discrimination, no races, no meat-eaters. This is why so many of these people make socialism a supposed ideal. Its very ‘utilitarianism‘ (from an imaginary POV). See what they did there? Nice trick. They call their philosophy ‘utilitarianism‘, despite it being practically useless.
Sorry. I meant
Its very ‘utilitarian‘
practically useless = having no utility.
If Dr. Doom needs a meaningful existential threat for which to advocate, he (and all who need a similar “meaning” in their lives) should be advocating for the US Government, indeed for all developed countries, to work on a practical method for diverting an incoming asteroid or comet. More likely humankind gets severely impacted (sorry) by that than rising CO2 levels, whatever their cause.
Younger Dryas was caused by an impact from space. The crater lies beneath a glacier in North West Greenland. If we care about the future, let’s put more resources into ensuring it does not happen again. Priorize life over the climate change death cult.
http://fortune.com/2018/06/20/hurricane-proof-homes/
ya no way to prepare for the past
I’ll tell this idiot what I will do. I will give some love and respect to the people of the past, and remind those reading these words in the future where their priorities should lie.
I forgive my ancestors for every single sin they ever committed ‘against the environment’. And much much more besides.
They lived hard lives. Nasty, brutal and short. A long history of unremitting and uneducated hard grind, poverty and violence. Punctuated by occasional terrible famines, plagues, and wars.
They did what they had to do to stay alive, and bring up the children at the same time, my ancestors. Ancestors who then did the same for countless generations. They burnt wood, then dug coal, and eventually mined oil and gas, to afford me my comforts of today. I am eternally grateful. Don’t throw it away on a whim, future people.
I don’t mind the industrial slagheaps and old quarries of the industrial revolution in England. They are now mostly greened-over and provide nice boating and rock-climbing facilities.
What I will do to honor the effort and sacrifices of my ancestors, is tell the green crazies who now think it all counted for nothing, to take a running fucking jump. And I urge all future generations who may one day read these words, to consider doing the same. They will understand and excuse my use of a rude word if they still have to put up with the same sort of people always bleating about the future while ignoring just how bad the past really was.
Michael Hart November 2018
Yay, go future!
Obviously Tobis’s essay presumes that climate change is happening, and that we can do something about it.
IF one accepts these axioms, there is a case for mitigation rather than (or in addition to) adaptation.
Most people tend to look at only the most obvious ways humans could be affected: greater coastal flooding, deadly heat waves, etc. What many people don’t take into account are the effects on ecosystems and biota. We simply aren’t used to thinking about human dependency on maintaining their health and function, and effects are often difficult to foresee and quantify in economic terms. Some may be beneficial, true, but generally ongoing, directional disturbance destabilizes ecosystems, even those adapted to a periodic or random disturbance regime.
This is an interesting page to explore:
https://www.epa.gov/climate-indicators/ecosystems
It shows some of the measurable ecosystem changes over time, most likely due to climate change. The shift in latitude and depth of marine species is just one effect that could have economic consequences. Since some species may be more likely/able to shift than others, there could be a change in productivity over time.
Decrease in pH cost the Pacific oyster industry in the northwest millions of dollars, and the costs of early warning and control are ongoing.
Wildfire is a natural and sometimes essential part of many forest ecosystems. It may not be possible to attribute wildfire directly to climate change simply because there can be multiple human and natural causes of wildfire, and because causes vary across time and space. If we assume that drought and high temperatures are conducive to wildfire, though, there could be a connection.
Temperatures in the southwestern U.S. are warming, on average. Droughts seem to in general be increasing in severity when they happen, though there is wide fluctuation over time.
This graph is just for 2000-2015, but it does suggest that there has been quite a lot of land affected by abnormally high drought.
One thing predicted by the models is that normally wet areas will get wetter, and dry areas, drier. This is to some extent shown in this map:
(Extreme precipitation events are also getting more common in the U.S.
)
My point is that there are a very wide array of observed and potential effects/indicators of climate change. Some of them we can adapt to, but there is no possible way we can adapt to all of them because we don’t control nature. What will happen if the world’s insect populations/diversity plummet, for instance, as has already been recorded in Europe and the Caribbean? Insects are absolutely vital to ecosystems in all sorts of ways.
People talk about the cost in human lives of CO2 mitigation in the developing world. But this assumes that the plan is to restrict people from getting energy, or take it away. This is a straw man argument. There are ways of planning that take into account all the relevant factors, and it makes far more sense to keep CO2 mitigation in mind as development proceeds than to try to change things afterwards. Why is this such an awful idea?
The U.S. has decreased emissions, and the economy is booming. Even China’s emissions have stopped growing as quickly as they were (and decreased in some years).
U.S. grid-connected battery storage increased 68% last year – it can be done.
https://www.pv-magazine.com/2018/09/04/us-grid-connected-battery-energy-capacity-grew-68-last-year/
See also
https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=34432
Then there is this
https://www.technologyreview.com/s/611683/the-25-trillion-reason-we-cant-rely-on-batteries-to-clean-up-the-grid/
…but there are other non-lithium ion batteries in development, so the title is misleading.
“[I]n 2015, lithium-ion batteries accounted for about 95% of deployed systems in the grid-scale battery market. Since that time, however, redox-flow and zinc-hybrid ion batteries have emerged as significant technologies in the market.”
https://www.energystoragenetworks.com/three-battery-types-work-grid-scale-energy-storage-systems/
There’s all sorts of interesting info about grid-capacity electricity storage out there.
It’s not a question of zero fossil fuel energy or do nothing. It’s a question of planning: how, where, and how much can we do to mitigate without causing undue hardship.
…But then, people who refuse to consider the idea that there are net negative impacts of climate change will choose to do nothing, regardless. It’s certainly easier to sit around insulting and making fun of those who think differently.
(This is all offered for the sake of argument. I don’t really give a rat’s arse what happens anymore. People’s houses got burned, too bad, they can “adapt” and go on denying the effects of climate change forever, for all I care.)
Many global warming and climate change alarmists, especially the “sheeple”, the followers, appear to have NO scientific education.
Here are some basics:
Global cooling occurred from ~1940 to 1977, even as fossil fuel consumption accelerated strongly. This observation adequately DISPROVES the “runaway global warming” hypothesis.
This ~37-year global cooling period was naturally-caused, and was NOT primarily driven by increasing atmospheric CO2, unless one believes (as some warmists do) that CO2 is the “demon molecule”, that can cause both global warming AND global cooling, etc., etc.
Furthermore, there is NO credible evidence of wilder weather in recent decades, despite increased atmospheric CO2.
Furthermore, there is NO credible evidence of catastrophic global warming over geologic time, when atmospheric CO2 concentrations were many times higher than they are today.
These are all very-scary-fairy stories, concocted by corrupt scientists to promote a profitable, self-serving political and financial agenda – at the great expense of the general public and especially the elderly and global poor.
Global warming and climate change alarmism is a corrupt and despicable agenda – it is the greatest scam, in dollar terms, in the history of humanity.
More on the Scientific Method:
RICHARD FEYNMAN ON THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD (1964)
https://youtu.be/0KmimDq4cSU
at 0:39/9:58: ”If it disagrees with experiment, it’s wrong.”
At 4:01/9:58: “You can always prove any definite theory wrong.”
At 6:09/9:58: “By having a vague theory, it’s possible to get either result.”
THIS IS THE “CLIMATE CHANGE” ALARMISTS’ KEY STRATEGY:
“By having a vague theory, it’s possible to get either result.” – Richard Feynman
“A theory that is not refutable by any conceivable event is non-scientific.” – Karl Popper.
The “Climate Change” hypothesis is so vague, and changes so often, that it is not falsifiable and not scientific. It should be rejected as unscientific nonsense.
The “Runaway Global Warming” hypothesis is at least falsifiable, and IT HAS BEEN ADEQUATELY FALSIFIED:
1. By the ~37-year global cooling period from ~1940 to 1977;
2. By “the Pause”, when temperature did not significantly increase for almost two decades, despite increasing atmospheric CO2 concentrations;
3. By the absence of runaway global warming over geologic time, despite much higher CO2 concentrations;
4. By the fact that equatorial Pacific sea surface temperatures have not increased significantly since ~1982, and corresponding air temperatures increased largely due to the dissipation of the cooling impact of two century-scale volcanoes – El Chichon in 1982 and Pinatubo in 1991+;
5. By the fact that CO2 trends lags temperature trends by ~9 months in the modern data record, and by ~~800 years in the ice core record, and the undeniable reality that the future cannot cause the past.
In summary, there is no real dangerous global warming or wilder weather crisis. In fact, increasing atmospheric CO2 certainly improves plant and crop yields, and may cause some mild global warming, which will be net-beneficial to humanity and the environment.
Regards, Allan
Global warming and climate change alarmism, in a few decades at most, will be regarded as a mass delusion, and its leaders and its followers will be widely regarded as scoundrels and imbeciles.
Quotations from the following text, written in 1841, will be cited in their epitaphs.
“EXTRAORDINARY POPULAR DELUSIONS AND THE MADNESS OF CROWDS”
Charles Mackay (1841)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extraordinary_Popular_Delusions_and_the_Madness_of_Crowds
Quotations:
“Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, and one by one.”
“Of all the offspring of Time, Error is the most ancient, and is so old and familiar an acquaintance, that Truth, when discovered, comes upon most of us like an intruder, and meets the intruder’s welcome.”
Nite to moderator,
Please correct the source name to “cliscep blig”
( https://cliscep.com/ )
Tom,
Michael Tobis is an irrational neurotic kook obsessed with apocalyptic claptrap. *No One* can make rational informed predictions about the ” 70th generation”.
And really, after all the failed predictions, the faux religious fervor for “climate change” is becoming tawdry.
Gov. Brown is now blaming “deniers” for forest fires in California that were the tragic, inevitable, predicted results of extremist green policies regarding forestry management.
So Brown is engaging in magical thinking, assigning guilt to those whose thoughts and beliefs are not only contrary to his but apparently cause fires.
What a pathetic parody of a leader he has become.
At his rate of devolution, Tobis will be calling for the burning of skeptics because our thoughts are so dangerous they are clearly causing fires.
What a pathetic parody of a concerned caring person Tobis has become.
“Gov. Brown is now blaming “deniers” for forest fires in California”
But… but… I thought we sceptics were such a tiny minority we’re not worth bothering about. How could WE have caused such things?
Deadly wildfires always follow letting greenies anywhere near bush management – both Ash Wednesday and Black Saturday in Australia can be traced directly to them gaining influence over practices in the bush.
The irony is, those little animals they see as so precious die in far greater numbers than even feral cats and dogs manage when the terrifying wildfires sweep through the trees, sterilising the ground 20 cm down and travelling at 100 km/h or more.
We should also the try to figure the consequences of things we never did. For example: the life-saving anti-cancer drug one never invented because, worried to death over AGW, one thought life hardly worth living. I call this idea the “throw precaution to the winds principle“. Or to keep it simple “The Pioneering Principle“.
Great discussion! I see Fuller’s article as a plea for adaptation and a rejection of mitigation. As for me, I say we have more than enough on our hands, let’s work on preserving our freedom and fighting poverty, starvation, disease, education, etc. Nature can take care of herself. We just need to give her a helping hand;, you know, thin the forests, clear the underbrush, build adequate sea walls, etc.
Should we not ALSO prepare for seas dropping, leaving ports and cities ‘stranded’ far from the waterways, and temperatures falling? Perhaps catastrophically?
At present this is far more likely than the incessant harping on about AGW and heat doom.
Already we have 20 years of static temps (except where adjusted) and the temps since the 15-16 el Nino are dropping rapidly.
The Sun is going quiet for decades, the Earth magnetic field strength is crashing and the solar system is moving into clear space out of the shielding supernova cloud that has been protecting us.
The LIA had only ONE of those factors – the Grand Solar Minimum and hundreds of thousands died.
We now have millions living where they had tens of thousands.
Michael Tobis … is not an optimist
________________________________________________
An optimist says the future is going to be terrible. We’re gonna make it.
A pessimist says everything will be alright. I hope we’re gonna make it.