Nicely done, Squeers! But, I think you've been way too easy on the energy junkies. How easy they find it to divorce their proposition from the emerging global context. An holistic view? Don't think so.

It may be great if there can be another fossil fuel source, but only if it can be utilised safely and more efficiently to reduce demand on coal and oil, and even then, only if it can be utilised within the context of a sustainable world environment. How easily some forget the environment, and the current atmospheric debate, in the name of a headlong rush to maintain the GDP/development push, irrespective of the ultimate costs. Once again the focus is on advancing First World supremacy and consumerism.

All the hurrah's will be of little significance when we wake up to accelerated species extinction and irreversible environmental destruction. Can't happen? It is happening now, and accelerating. What is going to change that? Not another fuel source, but an honest and objective overall review of energy consumption and of the increasingly heavy footprint of consumerism on this fragile planet.

This so-called "find" can unfortunately only delay requisite attention and action to address the very real issue of limiting the exploitation of this planet's most essential resources to within absolutely sustainable levels.

Third World deprivation and conflict? All too busy patting one another on the back to give a care. Green energy? What me worry?

Time to rethink what's really important.

Saltpetre,
I'm glad we're in tune.

Spindoc:
"Are we not entitled to develop in every human domain, to improve the lot of all, to achieve equality and justice for everyone, to be the best we can be at everything we can imagine, create and develop?"

Yes please, go right ahead! ..when does it start?

Anyway, I'm only sideshow entertainment here. Much better off going to the main pavilions, and can we have some rigour please along the lines Graham suggests? I'm ready to be converted; I'm a sucker for solid argument and evidence..

Squeers, a bedtime story.

Within the next galactic “blink” our sun will consume all its planets.

In the meantime our planet is exposed to various possible destinies. Mother Nature may throw a big rock at us which could reduce us to a patch of deep frozen solar gravel.

Our fertile planet has produced some 4.2 million biological variants, one of which is us. We too have the capacity to destroy our species and many others. That is also one of our possible destinies.

We have awareness and rudimentary intellect, enough it seems to recognize that we do have a destiny.

Our species came with an ever expanding range of physical and cognitive skills that we can use to develop solutions to progress to that destiny if uninterrupted.

Matt Ridley is simply trying to open this debate to options and to interrogate one such option. That is until Squeers and Co try to strangle the debate and choke off any technological solutions they don’t like.

What is it about progressive pseudo-intellectuals and nihilists that drive them to impose their prohibitions on possible solutions that humanity might need to fully explore?

Is it their Godlike omnipotence that causes them to raise threats formed from within their own fear, uncertainty and doubt, then impose their prejudices on others by insisting that we take heed of their “objections” or else?

It has now reached the stage where progressives have collectively put most human options on someone’s prohibition list, the “knockers list”.

Do the inhabitants of planet Squeers have any intention to “positively” contribute anything? Or is it just a matter of mindlessly working your way through the Knockers List?

spindoc,
that is arrant nonsense, and offensive in as much as you impute any of it to me.
We're all aware of the contingent nature of life on planet Earth, so how you infer a human "destiny" from your geological and evolutionary musings is beyond me. But I'll take that as meaning that humans are driven to transcend the cruelties and delimitations imposed upon them by un-tamed nature. In that event, we're in agreement; I'm only arguing that we undertake the project in a considered, inclusive, sustainable and humane way, while preferably maximising opportunities "now" to live in a dignified and equitable manner that's "worthy" of preservation. We are surely at the point in our evolution where we can take charge of our own human destiny by securing the present and protecting our future prospects (at least from our own folly) first, and then embarking upon whatever we conceive to be our "destiny". What Ridley is proposing is "more" reckless abandon, lop-sided expansion by whatever means and for its own sake, following the juvenile logic that there's money to be made, that more is always better and that it'll all come good in the end. Sheer economic determinism--subservience to the uncompromising growth-demands of the market. We don't need Ridley's "optimism", the will of the market shall be done!

"Matt Ridley is simply trying to open this debate to options and to interrogate one such option. That is until Squeers and Co try to strangle the debate and choke off any technological solutions they don’t like".
What utter crap!
I'm not trying to "strangle debate", I'm a dissenting voice. Please feel free to ignore me. If you have anything compelling to say in favour of Ridley's "great expectations" for the world, I'm eager to be converted as I've said. But as in the novel, his great expectations are a delusion, though his delusion is far more destructive and selfish than Pip's was!

spin/doc...""We have awareness and rudimentary intellect,..enough
it seems to recognize...that we do have a destiny.""

fine words

""Our species came with an ever expanding
range of physical and cognitive skills..that we can use
to develop solutions..to progress..to that destiny

*if uninterrupted.""
]
the question begs reply
interupted by whome?



""Matt Ridley is simply trying to open this debate
to options and to interrogate...one such option.""

""That is until Squeers and Co
try to strangle the debate and choke off
any technological solutions they don’t like.""

let squeers reply

""spindoc,
that is arrant nonsense,
and offensive in as much..as you impute any of it..to me.

..""how you infer a human "destiny"
from your geological and evolutionary musings is beyond me.""

[i lked it]
didnt agree
but liked it

""But I'll take that as meaning
that humans are driven to transcend
the cruelties and delimitations imposed upon them by un-tamed nature. """

i would say rather pathetic natures
[nothing to dowith mother's 'nurture/nature'

"I'm only arguing that we undertake the project in a considered, inclusive, sustainable and humane way, while preferably maximising opportunities "now" to live in a dignified and equitable manner that's "worthy" of preservation.""'

im with him

""We are surely at the point in our evolution
where we can take charge of our own human destiny
by securing the present and protecting our future prospects (at least from our own folly) first,""

i agree

""and then embarking upon whatever
*we conceive to be our "destiny". ""

to conciously sustainably/faily is to be

""What Ridley is proposing is "more" reckless abandon, lop-sided expansion by whatever means and for its own sake, following the juvenile logic that there's money to be made, that more is always better and that it'll all come good in the end.""

more of the same?

thats insane!

""Sheer economic determinism--subservience to the uncompromising growth-demands of the market...""

been there
done that

HI spindoc,
I do like that - “Within the next galactic “blink” our sun will consume all its planets”.
AND
“In the meantime our planet is exposed to various possible destinies. Mother Nature may throw a big rock at us which could reduce us to a patch of deep frozen solar gravel.”

Physicists; astromoners are finding these issues interesting .

Firstly the Issue of black holes and dark matter is now attracting a great deal of scientific interest of how this weird “matter” imight enter the solar system in the distant future and do what is shown in some science fiction .

Secondly, Physicists and astromoners and astronouts in space, have been scanning the solar sytem for objects in the asteroid belt between Mars and Jupiter and found 32,000 asteroids many of which if knocked from there current orbits in collisions with other asteroids and the gravitation fields of Jupiter, Saturn and their moons some of which are a big as the earths moon.

Apart from that there are 100,000s more asteroids much further out at the edge of the solar system in irregular orbits that may cannon into one another, change orbit and in time impact the earth. The Astromoners also detected 20 new comets. NASA websites discuss these possibilities.

Several time in the earths history the course of animal evolution changed due large asteroids hitting the earth. Due to the foresight of the Russian scientiist /general in charge of Russian space program, the US miltary became interested, NASA got funding and has been doing the research into earth impacts. A most interesting one was building a gun to fire bullets at 3,000 km per second and simulate asteroid, earth impacts on different surfaces.

The International Space stations, the Hubble telescope several space probes
are backing up the ground based telescopes of several kinds. Light , Radar, Xrays.
and new super computers using new scanning techniques.

The Asteroid threat is real and global warming or cooling could be made much worse. By a much smaller asteroid than the large number of earth killer asteroids in the solar system.