Listen to this article: The world's two wealthiest people are fighting over the moon, which just says so much about where our species is at right now. Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos are in a dispute with NASA over whose private space exploration corporation will get the $2.9 billion US government contract to return to the moon. I gleaned this annoying piece of information by way of an obnoxiously sycophantic
I'd say Musk's proposition that exo-planetary exploration is nifty insurance against species-ending nuclear holocaust argues instead for a elegant test that we as a race either pass or fail. No species that's prone to wipe itself out for ultimately dumb nationalistic or monetary reasons deserves to flourish, any more than war crime-committing Israel is entitled to luxuriate in a US-guaranteed security. Some things really are this simple.
I have dedicated the last dozen years of my life to educating people about the foundational role that energy -- and particularly fossil fuels -- have played in the shaping of the modern world, and the crises we now face as a result of the exponential growth in resource consumption and pollution (including greenhouse gases) that they engendered, and our dependence on finite, depleting resources.
Hardly anyone -- including climate activists -- understand the energy predicament. So you can't imagine how my jaw dropped to the floor watching the first 15 minutes of the launch event for Bezos's space company, where Bezos is laying out all of these challenges -- including the limits of energy efficiency, etc. I couldn't believe how much the world's richest man (at the time) got it.
But then he gets to the turn: Because of these issues, we're faced with... god forbid........... rationing.
Oh. My. God. That's just unacceptable. We can't limit our "progress." So the only solution is to harvest the moon and put 1 TRILLION people in orbit around the earth. I'm not making this up. This is exactly what Bezos concludes, even though all of the energy limits he just got through outlining fundamentally preclude anything close to this vision.
It was an astonishing display of how existing belief systems will always trump information. Musk is just as paradoxically right and so incredibly delusional. And yet they are rewarded and feted for their insanity.
Well, the US GOVT neutered NASA. America 🇺🇸 has been anti-science, anti-intellectual for decades. And Because most of congress is owned by the plutocracy there could never be any meaningful policies instituted that would be a dent in transitioning to renewable energy. So, musk was only one who forced the hand of VW, GM, Ford and others to obviate the combustion engine. We had decades for governments to embrace change. The market forced their hand. Sorry you hate Musk, but I feel now at least have some semblance of a chance of changing the energy system we have. Everyone, is going to attack me and say ... but the Lithium mining... well, the new 4860 batteries are made of silicone Aka SAND ... a very bountiful resource. And the batteries come from Asian companies CATL, PANASONIC, and Korea. The next generation battery will be solid state tech. The Chinese have already decided they want to be the winners and have NIO, Xpeng, BYD, LI AUTO. I want these kids today to have a planet And so far the Paris Accords have accomplished nothing. Bernie Sanders would have been the only person to have made good on the GReen New Deal ... but, the plutocracy cock-blocked his campaign. Good ‘ol Obama got everyone to stand down ... he is on a leash too.
I've been launching deaf-ear landers on this topic for a long time. And some of my most intelligent friends can't hear it. The promise of having their cake runs so deep. Vertical farming??? Settling humans in enclave cities to let "nature" go unmolested?
I have wondered why scientists don't admit that manned deep space exploration is impossible and a waste of time. I think they know it, the reason they aren't in a hurry to make the relatively tiny steps of "going back to the moon" or exploring Mars is because they know anything truly meaningful is futile. We would have to figure out how to transform ourselves to something other than matter before we could consider leaving this planet for another permanent destination. The illusion we could do it though seems to be ingrained into our psyche, much like religion. Scientists are in the business of selling dreams and illusion just as much as your sideshow barker. They are going to leave it up to Musk and Bezos to finally put to rest the non-viability of travelling into deep space while I am certain if it was doable the US, Russia, China, and European Space Authority would have been leap-frogging each other to be the first.
Well, can't say Caitlin is "wrong", but neither is she "right". The "Megaproject" video on biosphere 2 was interesting. I think Caitlin posted it to prove that space colonization will never work because this experiment failed. But it didn't fail. It provided a lot of valuable information that can be used to figure out what doesn't work.
But, let's assume that Caitlin is right, that humanity will never leave this planet. Doesn't this practically guarantee humanities demise? Haven't we already arrived a a point where there are just too many people on this world? Don't state Natural Resources agencies manage wild animals: "harvesting" deer, "controlling" wolves?
Where is the UN "Soylent Green" agency tasked with ensuring the world's population of humans is brought under control?
I would rather we figure out how to pursue both options: reforming humanity's impact on this planet -and- figuring out how to get off this planet and go somewhere else.
Let us assume that Caitlin is completely correct in her thesis -- as with all the other articles written about how we are destroying our planet, there is no consideration of "what to do about it." Declaring that we have to stop polluting the planet is not a solution, it is merely a goal. It is like telling an obese person to just stop eating so much, when it has (supposedly) been proven over and over again that over 98% of such diets fail. Calling capitalism the source of the problem isn't exactly false, but it isn't true either -- not unless there is a path prescribed to establish an alternate economic system. IOW, Democratic-Socialism sounds good, how do we get there?
But we need not worry too much about there being too many humans. Once all of the resources have been consumed and the planet climate converted into something no one can survive in, the problem will take care of itself. It "might be nice", to have somewhere else to go.
Dear Ms Johnstone: Thank you both for creating and for making this beautiful essay available to read. Yours is an argument simple and artful.
I'd say Musk's proposition that exo-planetary exploration is nifty insurance against species-ending nuclear holocaust argues instead for a elegant test that we as a race either pass or fail. No species that's prone to wipe itself out for ultimately dumb nationalistic or monetary reasons deserves to flourish, any more than war crime-committing Israel is entitled to luxuriate in a US-guaranteed security. Some things really are this simple.
A great ode to Earth Day, which is in fact every day whether we choose to recognize that reality or not.
I have dedicated the last dozen years of my life to educating people about the foundational role that energy -- and particularly fossil fuels -- have played in the shaping of the modern world, and the crises we now face as a result of the exponential growth in resource consumption and pollution (including greenhouse gases) that they engendered, and our dependence on finite, depleting resources.
Hardly anyone -- including climate activists -- understand the energy predicament. So you can't imagine how my jaw dropped to the floor watching the first 15 minutes of the launch event for Bezos's space company, where Bezos is laying out all of these challenges -- including the limits of energy efficiency, etc. I couldn't believe how much the world's richest man (at the time) got it.
But then he gets to the turn: Because of these issues, we're faced with... god forbid........... rationing.
Oh. My. God. That's just unacceptable. We can't limit our "progress." So the only solution is to harvest the moon and put 1 TRILLION people in orbit around the earth. I'm not making this up. This is exactly what Bezos concludes, even though all of the energy limits he just got through outlining fundamentally preclude anything close to this vision.
It was an astonishing display of how existing belief systems will always trump information. Musk is just as paradoxically right and so incredibly delusional. And yet they are rewarded and feted for their insanity.
The hard truth. Thanks Caitlin.
So, no man has walked on the moon? If so, how did they get past those pesky Van Allen Radiation Belts?
Well, the US GOVT neutered NASA. America 🇺🇸 has been anti-science, anti-intellectual for decades. And Because most of congress is owned by the plutocracy there could never be any meaningful policies instituted that would be a dent in transitioning to renewable energy. So, musk was only one who forced the hand of VW, GM, Ford and others to obviate the combustion engine. We had decades for governments to embrace change. The market forced their hand. Sorry you hate Musk, but I feel now at least have some semblance of a chance of changing the energy system we have. Everyone, is going to attack me and say ... but the Lithium mining... well, the new 4860 batteries are made of silicone Aka SAND ... a very bountiful resource. And the batteries come from Asian companies CATL, PANASONIC, and Korea. The next generation battery will be solid state tech. The Chinese have already decided they want to be the winners and have NIO, Xpeng, BYD, LI AUTO. I want these kids today to have a planet And so far the Paris Accords have accomplished nothing. Bernie Sanders would have been the only person to have made good on the GReen New Deal ... but, the plutocracy cock-blocked his campaign. Good ‘ol Obama got everyone to stand down ... he is on a leash too.
I've been launching deaf-ear landers on this topic for a long time. And some of my most intelligent friends can't hear it. The promise of having their cake runs so deep. Vertical farming??? Settling humans in enclave cities to let "nature" go unmolested?
Rev. Billy: "Stop shopping."
People: "Wa Wa! I want my silver bullet!!"
I have wondered why scientists don't admit that manned deep space exploration is impossible and a waste of time. I think they know it, the reason they aren't in a hurry to make the relatively tiny steps of "going back to the moon" or exploring Mars is because they know anything truly meaningful is futile. We would have to figure out how to transform ourselves to something other than matter before we could consider leaving this planet for another permanent destination. The illusion we could do it though seems to be ingrained into our psyche, much like religion. Scientists are in the business of selling dreams and illusion just as much as your sideshow barker. They are going to leave it up to Musk and Bezos to finally put to rest the non-viability of travelling into deep space while I am certain if it was doable the US, Russia, China, and European Space Authority would have been leap-frogging each other to be the first.
Well, can't say Caitlin is "wrong", but neither is she "right". The "Megaproject" video on biosphere 2 was interesting. I think Caitlin posted it to prove that space colonization will never work because this experiment failed. But it didn't fail. It provided a lot of valuable information that can be used to figure out what doesn't work.
But, let's assume that Caitlin is right, that humanity will never leave this planet. Doesn't this practically guarantee humanities demise? Haven't we already arrived a a point where there are just too many people on this world? Don't state Natural Resources agencies manage wild animals: "harvesting" deer, "controlling" wolves?
Where is the UN "Soylent Green" agency tasked with ensuring the world's population of humans is brought under control?
I would rather we figure out how to pursue both options: reforming humanity's impact on this planet -and- figuring out how to get off this planet and go somewhere else.
Let us assume that Caitlin is completely correct in her thesis -- as with all the other articles written about how we are destroying our planet, there is no consideration of "what to do about it." Declaring that we have to stop polluting the planet is not a solution, it is merely a goal. It is like telling an obese person to just stop eating so much, when it has (supposedly) been proven over and over again that over 98% of such diets fail. Calling capitalism the source of the problem isn't exactly false, but it isn't true either -- not unless there is a path prescribed to establish an alternate economic system. IOW, Democratic-Socialism sounds good, how do we get there?
But we need not worry too much about there being too many humans. Once all of the resources have been consumed and the planet climate converted into something no one can survive in, the problem will take care of itself. It "might be nice", to have somewhere else to go.
Nice work Caitlin. When are you doing a podcast?!