On Jan 17, 5:00*pm, "Jonathan" wrote:
Please look at the following two 'versions' of Earth.
One is our past and ...future.

Earth 18,000 years ago http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/la...cial_max..html

Earth present day http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/pr...erglacial.html

A Brief History of Ice Ages and Warming

"Except for two relatively brief interglacial episodes, one peaking
about 125,000 years ago (Eemian Interglacial), and the other
beginning about 18,000 years ago (Present Interglacial), the
Earth has been under siege of ice for the last 160,000 years."

The reigning climate pattern is where the Earth spends
roughly 100,000 years in a deep ice age, followed by
a brief period of some 15 or 20 thousand warmer years
where life explodes.

The last ice age ended some.....18,000 years ago....btw.

As far as I know, there's no good explanation for this
ice age cycle. Which would imply....strongly imply..
the cause is some as yet unknown astronomical change.

So when this occurs some century soon, humanity needs
to be ready, and have the ability to quickly and effectively
respond...one way of the other. *Regardless if the future
is too warm, or too cold.

This leads me to what might seem like a contradiction.
I don't believe the current climate change is such a
menace to our future, all things considered. But I do
agree that the world should collectively begin
gaining the ability to manage the biosphere.

Which requires the nations of the world to be able
to manage..themselves..first. The answer to
climate change is...social change.
World-wide freedom and democracy!

Climate change will cause the extinction of
the ...dictatorships of the world.

And to our great benefit!

Imho!

Jonathan

Global Warming a Chilling Perspective http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/ice_ages.html

That's actually a good way of putting a positive spin on GW and AGW.

A little further down the road of GW and AGW as well as a global
failing biodiversity, there's also the demise of affordable
hydrocarbons that's going to change the mindsets and priorities of
those intent on surviving.

Remaining world reserves of natural gas, oil and even coal are not
going to be easy nor cheap to obtain without continued environmental
risk (including collateral damage to property, humans and the global
biodiversity that’s currently failing us). Expect another energy
speculation frenzy unless newer technology gives us viable
alternatives for obtaining more hydrocarbons from existing fields plus
uncovering new ones, as well as the world utilizing less per person at
the same time (good luck with accomplishing that lat one). The good
news is that natural gas reserves will likely outlast oil reserves by
a few decades at best, but then what?

Global reserves of natural gas: 250e12 m3
Natural gas consumption is roughly at 3.25e12 m3
250e12/3.25e12 = 77 years

So as always, better technology has to locate and extract more natural
gas, or else, because 77 years is not exactly out of sight. No doubt
going deeper and drilling thousands of additional wells (many of which
having to seismic fracture the Earth and contaminate ground water)
should keep us going for perhaps at best another couple centuries,
though we’re talking spendy and environmentally risky. However, as
the oil runs out is when the consumption of natural gas will surge and
it’s reserves will suddenly vanish in as little as half the time
unless some other form of energy becomes the norm instead of
hydrocarbons via natural gas, oil or synfuel from coal. Food will
have become too valuable for large scale biofuel usage, so that’s not
exactly offering any long-term solution unless we all start eating
less and wasting little or nothing, including recycled poop as topsoil
instead of continued ocean dumping.

Switching everything over to non-hydrocarbons (as having been
suggested by William Mook and even Steven Chu for more than the past
decade), and mostly because of those existing Big Energy cabals and
cartels is most likely going to keep it pendy as well as less
convenient for obtaining, distribution and end-use. In other words,
expect the unexpected and always be prepared to pay dearly for it.
Even Mook’s solar derived hydrogen plus other secondary elements isn’t
likely to come at half as cheap as Mook keeps suggesting, but even at
ten fold the price per energy unit is still going to be better than
nothing, and at least Mook energy is going to be environmentally
friendly. Of course we could have stretched our conventional
hydrocarbon energy up to ten fold by simply creating and using h2o2
from solar and other renewable surplus energy, plus using only a
little of that precious hydrocarbon fuel, because this too would have
been environmentally friendly and otherwise offering an extremely high
density form of liquid oxidizer and fuel, as well as providing
terrific battery density or rather fuel-cell alternatives.

Global reserves of oil: Possibly at best 2.5e12 barrels (not
including oil that takes nearly as much energy to extract as it’s
worth, because there’s lots of that sandy muck or complex shale
alternatives that are not hardly worth the effort at little better
than energy breakeven by the time everything is taken into
consideration). At the current increase in global consumption, that’s
offering us a good 64 years worth (possibly a century with extreme
conservation measures due mostly to its much higher cost), and
otherwise there’s synfuel from coal that may not add a century because
of global consumption of coal that’s currently exceeding 8 billion
tonnes per year isn’t going to subside any time soon, whereas instead
the all-inclusive consumption of coal will likely increase at double
the pace of world population growth that’s expanding at greater than a
percent per year, plus the growing population of older folks don’t
like to be cold or without many other benefits that take energy in
order to sustain.

Future wars are also likely to consume and/or destroy up to half of
whatever’s left, and conventional nuclear energy isn’t going to become
suddenly failsafe unless it switches over to thorium. Extracting
coal, dealing with its messy processing and consumption or conversions
into synfuel isn’t going to buy us more than another century at best
(after that it’ll just become too spendy and/or too bloody). In other
words, like Usenet/newsgroup contributor “Warhol” and other doom and
gloom messengers having said, essentially it’s only a matter of time
that’s quickly running out before the have-nots (many of them Muslim)
take matters into their own hands in order to survive, especially when
our puppet governments are unable to command their own national
hydrocarbon reserves and the general public is being extorted by Big
Energy that has other plans which do not necessarily include looking
after the lower 99%.

Adding 220,000 new humans to feed per day is also going to push this
food thing over the edge. Even if population growth were 0.1%/year is
still 19,000 per day more than current supplies can manage to feed
without undesirable consequences.

Perhaps a global culling of humanity isn't too far fetched, as those
Georgia Guidestones suggested the need for having a maximum global
population of less than 500 million. With failed crops, millions of
dead fish plus thousands of tonnes worth of other unusable seafood,
plus seeing large numbers of cows dropping like flies, perhaps
something has to give, especially when the stormy wrath of nature is
taking a greater bite out of productive land and later fresh water
resources being limited or nonexistent when crops and livestock need
it worse than ever.

Myself , William Mook and Steven Chu have offered a few valid
solutions, as I’m certain the proven perseverance of Muslims and Moors
have had their traditional methods of surviving without dependence on
commercial hydrocarbons. However, if we procrastinate by waiting long
enough, perhaps it will not hardly matter when there's hardly enough
of anything left to go around, and perhaps if I were a god of Earth,
I'd be very angry at those responsible for neglecting this global need
for affordably clean energy that has been technically doable.

Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”