What if the conventional narrative of ever expanding unlimited growth is entirely unsustainable.
http://www.nottwoispeace.org/excerpt-two-is-not-peace

An essay on the nature of the now world dominant Western mind.
http://www.beezone.com/beezones-main-stack/ontranscendingtheinsubordinatemind.html

Three references on our dreadful sanity
http://www.beezone.com/whats-new
http://www.beezone.com/beezones-main-stack/stresschemistry.html
http://www.beezone.com/adida/reality_message.html

A related references from a site which is about the non-human inhabitants of this mostly non-human world
http://fearnomore.vision/human/what-man-represents

I for one would prefer less atmospheric CO2. By the author's reasoning if a modest amount of something is benign then doubling it can't be a problem. Tell that to a traffic cop if you blow .08 gee officer that's really no worse than .04.

The world was warmer 50m years ago. But we didn't have 8bn humans all depending upon just in time supply of food and water. If one region became inhospitable the inhabitants simply relocated. They weren't obliged to stay within boundaries plus there were plenty of vacant areas.

A second reason to decarbonise apart from climate dramas is that fossil fuels will become less affordable as they deplete. The International Energy Agency says oil and gas or cheap substitutes will peak this decade. Thus any country that builds new coal stations is making things difficult for all of us. Therefore CO2 should be decreased as soon as practicable.

The geologist Ian Plimer says that Australia is already at net zero
and indeed the world is at net zero.
I think the current program on global warming will at some time fall
apart. When it is realised by the public that it was not a hoax but
just simple politician and scientific blunder there will be hell to pay.
Think of all the $billions, indeed $Trillions wasted over the years.
The oil companies are planning on how to exit the oil industry.
In fact, crude oil peaked in 2005 ! Nb I said crude oil.
Fracking has been holding our hands since then but is reaching its limit.
There are signs of public exhaustion on the global warming nagging.
Once the blackouts start there will be a big increase in CO2 argument.
The undercurrent argument should be how do we replace the energy of
the oil system ? Electricity cannot do it all.
None of those normally on here have any idea except nuclear will help.

The undercurrent argument should be how do we replace the energy of
the oil system ? Electricity cannot do it all.
Bezza,
Don’t confuse them even more. But, rather well stated.