We are living in a great civilisation that has been based on fossil fuels and taming the world around us. Arguably the peak of American (USA) civilisation was 1970 and since then the majority of americans have funded their declining standard of living on credit. Arguably we passed peak oil around 2000. We have exploited the earth, cutting down its forests and we can see the increasing size of the Shahara desert, the deforestation of the Amazon and the increasing salt levels in australian agricultural lands bought into production since the 1930s.

Any student of history will tell you that civilisations fall when they outgrow their food and fuel supply and their ability to transport food and water for their populations.

So yes it is the end of the world as we know it. Is the new world going to be a "user pays" "dog eat dog" affair or are we going to have a socialised approach to everyone sharing the remaining resources. I think a collective approach to solving this problem will suit me better than me becoming a survivalist farmer in an inaccessible off grid NSW coastal valley.

Obviously there is a deep psychological need for many people to envisage the world coming to an end in their time: and this explains many apocalyptic cults -- including early Christianity -- as well as the occasional stock market crash. But why? here are my conclusions:

1. Most of us feel small and worthless most of the time -- we have very little power to influence global affairs. Imminent disaster puts everyone else in the same boat: we take comfort from the belief that the great ones of this earth have just as little power and control over their future as we do.

2. It feels much better to be on the same side as everyone else; spreading apocalyptic hysteria is a great way to build up a close band of caring associates to provide you with emotional support.

What's the solution? Emotional maturity and a sense of perspective. As Mark Twain said: "I have been through terrible things in my life, some of which actually happened."

All that this essay does is draw together a series of ideas and opinions to "prove" a pre-existing presumption/assumption.

Readers of this forum are probably tired of my pointing to references by this author, but here I go again.
Please check out this reference which gives a completely different assessment of the state of Earth-kind altogether.

http://www.ispeace723.org/youthepeople4.html

The author points to a phrase from the Upanishads: Where there is an other---fear spontaneously arises.

He also poimts out that the moment you presume anything at all to be "other" you immediately seek to control or are at war with the "other", and eventually destroy the "other".

Western "culture" (in particular) is built on the presumption that we are always separate from the Divine, the World Process, and all sentients beings. Which means that we are always at war with the Divine, the world altogether, and all seemingly "other" sentient beings.

He also points out that this over 3000 years long hell-deep cultural script is NOW in its inevitable terminal phase.

Plus if anyone thinks that that recent Barnum & Bailey circus event in Sydney was the sign of a "renewal of culture", as the OZ would have us believe. Or even of the "vitality" of Christianity, then they have not done their homework.

I remember a line from Jefferson Airplane "the human name doesnt mean s--t to a tree" ---particularly a 2000 year old Redwood.

ALL of which Reagan & Co, and the "conservative" mind-set that informs such "conservatism" would have chopped down.

Speaking of Redwood trees, and what they have to teach us.
And even pigs for that matter, please check out this reference.

http://www.fearnomorezoo.org/trees/learn_tree.php

Really fine piece of exposition. I tend to agree with the author that we mythologise 'the end'. I can hear The Doors playing in the background as I write.

I'm not saying that at some time or other giant squid and jellyfish won't arise out of our spa-like oceans and eat us, but I figure we'll be long gone.

I don't subscribe to the end of the world narrative. I do believe that the media has certainly jumped on 'the end of the earth scenario' (which is not what scientists are saying) and there's no one like A Current Affair to do justice (and even anticipating) the end of you and me.

I very much liked the author's sense of humour, which has been so lacking in many climate articles (pro and con) in this forum.

Well written and, in my view, true.
Whilst I do not deny climate change, I have long held the view that to blame human activity for it to the exclusion of all else is simply another example of humankind arrogance. Two hundred years or so since the industrial revolution is nothing compared to the earthly timespan.
As I have said elsewhere in this forum, if we want to foul up our own tiny slice of biosphere with atmospheric pollution, fouled waterways, piles of poisonous industrial waste etc., that is our problem. The earth simply doesn't care.