Climate Change

[Hobbes' Choice]

Harold Lewis is Emeritus Professor of Physics at the University of California, Santa Barbara. Here is his letter of resignation to Curtis G. Callan Jr, Princeton University, President of the American Physical Society.
Anthony Watts describes it thus:
This is an important moment in science history. I would describe it as a letter on the scale of Martin Luther, nailing his 95 theses to the Wittenburg church door. It is worthy of repeating this letter in entirety on every blog that discusses science.
It's so utterly damning that I'm going to run it in full without further comment. (H/T GWPF, Richard Brearley).
Dear Curt:
When I first joined the American Physical Society sixty-seven years ago it was much smaller, much gentler, and as yet uncorrupted by the money flood (a threat against which Dwight Eisenhower warned a half-century ago). Indeed, the choice of physics as a profession was then a guarantor of a life of poverty and abstinence—it was World War II that changed all that. The prospect of worldly gain drove few physicists. As recently as thirty-five years ago, when I chaired the first APS study of a contentious social/scientific issue, The Reactor Safety Study, though there were zealots aplenty on the outside there was no hint of inordinate pressure on us as physicists. We were therefore able to produce what I believe was and is an honest appraisal of the situation at that time. We were further enabled by the presence of an oversight committee consisting of Pief Panofsky, Vicki Weisskopf, and Hans Bethe, all towering physicists beyond reproach. I was proud of what we did in a charged atmosphere. In the end the oversight committee, in its report to the APS President, noted the complete independence in which we did the job, and predicted that the report would be attacked from both sides. What greater tribute could there be?
How different it is now. The giants no longer walk the earth, and the money flood has become the raison d'être of much physics research, the vital sustenance of much more, and it provides the support for untold numbers of professional jobs. For reasons that will soon become clear my former pride at being an APS Fellow all these years has been turned into shame, and I am forced, with no pleasure at all, to offer you my resignation from the Society.
It is of course, the global warming scam, with the (literally) trillions of dollars driving it, that has corrupted so many scientists, and has carried APS before it like a rogue wave. It is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life as a physicist. Anyone who has the faintest doubt that this is so should force himself to read the ClimateGate documents, which lay it bare. (Montford's book organizes the facts very well.) I don't believe that any real physicist, nay scientist, can read that stuff without revulsion. I would almost make that revulsion a definition of the word scientist.
So what has the APS, as an organization, done in the face of this challenge? It has accepted the corruption as the norm, and gone along with it. For example:
1. About a year ago a few of us sent an e-mail on the subject to a fraction of the membership. APS ignored the issues, but the then President immediately launched a hostile investigation of where we got the e-mail addresses. In its better days, APS used to encourage discussion of important issues, and indeed the Constitution cites that as its principal purpose. No more. Everything that has been done in the last year has been designed to silence debate
2. The appallingly tendentious APS statement on Climate Change was apparently written in a hurry by a few people over lunch, and is certainly not representative of the talents of APS members as I have long known them. So a few of us petitioned the Council to reconsider it. One of the outstanding marks of (in)distinction in the Statement was the poison word incontrovertible, which describes few items in physics, certainly not this one. In response APS appointed a secret committee that never met, never troubled to speak to any skeptics, yet endorsed the Statement in its entirety. (They did admit that the tone was a bit strong, but amazingly kept the poison word incontrovertible to describe the evidence, a position supported by no one.) In the end, the Council kept the original statement, word for word, but approved a far longer "explanatory" screed, admitting that there were uncertainties, but brushing them aside to give blanket approval to the original. The original Statement, which still stands as the APS position, also contains what I consider pompous and asinine advice to all world governments, as if the APS were master of the universe. It is not, and I am embarrassed that our leaders seem to think it is. This is not fun and games, these are serious matters involving vast fractions of our national substance, and the reputation of the Society as a scientific society is at stake.
3. In the interim the ClimateGate scandal broke into the news, and the machinations of the principal alarmists were revealed to the world. It was a fraud on a scale I have never seen, and I lack the words to describe its enormity. Effect on the APS position: none. None at all. This is not science; other forces are at work.
4. So a few of us tried to bring science into the act (that is, after all, the alleged and historic purpose of APS), and collected the necessary 200+ signatures to bring to the Council a proposal for a Topical Group on Climate Science, thinking that open discussion of the scientific issues, in the best tradition of physics, would be beneficial to all, and also a contribution to the nation. I might note that it was not easy to collect the signatures, since you denied us the use of the APS membership list. We conformed in every way with the requirements of the APS Constitution, and described in great detail what we had in mind—simply to bring the subject into the open.<
5. To our amazement, Constitution be damned, you declined to accept our petition, but instead used your own control of the mailing list to run a poll on the members' interest in a TG on Climate and the Environment. You did ask the members if they would sign a petition to form a TG on your yet-to-be-defined subject, but provided no petition, and got lots of affirmative responses. (If you had asked about sex you would have gotten more expressions of interest.) There was of course no such petition or proposal, and you have now dropped the Environment part, so the whole matter is moot. (Any lawyer will tell you that you cannot collect signatures on a vague petition, and then fill in whatever you like.) The entire purpose of this exercise was to avoid your constitutional responsibility to take our petition to the Council.
6. As of now you have formed still another secret and stacked committee to organize your own TG, simply ignoring our lawful petition.
APS management has gamed the problem from the beginning, to suppress serious conversation about the merits of the climate change claims. Do you wonder that I have lost confidence in the organization?
I do feel the need to add one note, and this is conjecture, since it is always risky to discuss other people's motives. This scheming at APS HQ is so bizarre that there cannot be a simple explanation for it. Some have held that the physicists of today are not as smart as they used to be, but I don't think that is an issue. I think it is the money, exactly what Eisenhower warned about a half-century ago. There are indeed trillions of dollars involved, to say nothing of the fame and glory (and frequent trips to exotic islands) that go with being a member of the club. Your own Physics Department (of which you are chairman) would lose millions a year if the global warming bubble burst. When Penn State absolved Mike Mann of wrongdoing, and the University of East Anglia did the same for Phil Jones, they cannot have been unaware of the financial penalty for doing otherwise. As the old saying goes, you don't have to be a weatherman to know which way the wind is blowing. Since I am no philosopher, I'm not going to explore at just which point enlightened self-interest crosses the line into corruption, but a careful reading of the ClimateGate releases makes it clear that this is not an academic question.
I want no part of it, so please accept my resignation. APS no longer represents me, but I hope we are still friends.
Hal
Harold Lewis is Emeritus Professor of Physics, University of California, Santa Barbara, former Chairman; Former member Defense Science Board, chmn of Technology panel; Chairman DSB study on Nuclear Winter; Former member Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards; Former member, President's Nuclear Safety Oversight Committee; Chairman APS study on Nuclear Reactor Safety
Chairman Risk Assessment Review Group; Co-founder and former Chairman of JASON; Former member USAF Scientific Advisory Board; Served in US Navy in WW II; books: Technological Risk (about, surprise, technological risk) and Why Flip a Coin (about decision making)
Tags: American Physical Society, Hal Lewis, resignation

[WanderingLands]

Very good letter. Definitely needs to be read and heeded to.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

Actually the pseudo-science is from the global-warmers deniers. Are we supposed to bow down in awe of this person? Why?

[Hobbes' Choice]

No, climate change science is not an exact science. It's 10% observation and 90% speculation.
At this stage we can be sure enough that there is a current period of global warming.
But is seem to me that those that blame humans are the climate change deniers. They seem to think that the climate is supposed to say the same, and that it can only be humans that are able to change it.
Millions of years of life on earth tell a different story.

To what degree human action contributes to GW is an open question. And it is not helped by the fact that climate science is now highly politicised. Politics like snappy, easy to grasp sound bites. It needs a simple definition to the problem and a simple solution. But CO2 is unlikely to be a significant factor in GW.
The percentage of CO2 in the atmosphere has risen from 0.038% to 0.048% in the last 100 years. The increase is so small that a temperature rise claimed by the global warmers for CO2 cannot be demonstrated in laboratory conditions. There is no doubt that if you shine light on 2 or 3% Co2 you can show a temperature increase, But global rises in CO2 are too small to be significant.
After WW2, when the use of fossil fuels rocketed, we had a year by year measurable cooling of the planet, such that by the 1970s Scientists were warning of the coming of the NEW ICE AGE. This was no fringe group. This hit the media and was taken very seriously. The cooling cannot be explained by CO2 rises.
What else might we be doing to cause this GW? The amount of vegetation has dropped significantly with the destruction of the rain forests. Forests act as a Carbon sink. In times past this is how the coal measures were laid down, locking away carbon. Where is the outrage about this?
There are problems with the data. We could talk about the "hockey stick" fiasco. We could talk about the ice-core evidence which shows that GW causes an increase in CO2; NOT CO2 causing GW.

I'm not sure that letter is a new Copernicus, but one thing is for sure, the evidence that the sun goes round the earth looks about the same as the earth spinning. We need better, and more objective thinking on this. Right now the whole debate is based on BELIEF.

[Hobbes' Choice]

Actually the pseudo-science is from the global-warmers deniers. Are we supposed to bow down in awe of this person? Why?

You are not in a position to judge, he is.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

Actually the pseudo-science is from the global-warmers deniers. Are we supposed to bow down in awe of this person? Why?

You are not in a position to judge, he is.

Everyone who inhabits this planet is in a position to judge.

[SpheresOfBalance]

Harold Lewis is Emeritus Professor of Physics at the University of California, Santa Barbara. Here is his letter of resignation to Curtis G. Callan Jr, Princeton University, President of the American Physical Society.
Anthony Watts describes it thus:

...It is of course, the global warming scam,...

What a crock of shit. The planet is warming, and burning fossil fuels plays a large part.

"The previous message was funded by big oil, which is where the money grubbing really lies."

I just can't wait until those bastards burn, and they shall, if they keep it up. Unfortunately, so shall we all. If it could only be just them, that would be nice.

From January to March 2015, both as imports and exports, the number 1 cumulative commodity has been:

"Mineral fuels and mineral oils - Coal; Briquettes, Ovoids And Similar Solid Fuels Manufactured From Coal - Bituminous Coal"

The article even furnishes more proof. How?

Then, there was not much if any corruption due to money making opportunities.
Today, there is much corruption due to money making opportunities.

It's the cumulative affects of the human animal blinded by a glittering prize. And of course it shall only get worse.

Remember there is money on both sides of the equation. Lets see which is more probable.

The corruption of scientists, that seek the truth of the universe, that screen their hypothesis through empirical evidence.

OR

The corruption of capitalists that seek to keep their commodity at the top of the heep so they can make more money.

You US citizens:

Who was blamed for the 2008 recession that's kinda still going on?

"The U.S. Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission reported its findings in January 2011. It concluded that "the crisis was avoidable and was caused by: Widespread failures in financial regulation, including the Federal Reserve’s failure to stem the tide of toxic mortgages; Dramatic breakdowns in corporate governance including too many financial firms acting recklessly and taking on too much risk; An explosive mix of excessive borrowing and risk by households and Wall Street that put the financial system on a collision course with crisis; Key policy makers ill prepared for the crisis, lacking a full understanding of the financial system they oversaw; and systemic breaches in accountability and ethics at all levels.“"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causes_of_ ... _Recession

Capitalists my friends not scientists are the money grubbers, at least they are the largest ones.

So which is the most probable?

Is it more probable that the scientists are bearing false witness?

Or is it more probable that the, "Mineral fuels and mineral oils - Coal; Briquettes, Ovoids And Similar Solid Fuels Manufactured From Coal - Bituminous Coal," capitalists are liars?

All one really has to do is examine the nature of their professional lives to see who is and is not more capable of lying. Crap capitalists lie by design, that's all advertising is. Tell me, has your food item ever looked as large or as good as they do in a commercial?

Plus, at 57 years old I'm here to tell you, that with each passing year, it's definitely getting hotter, on average of course, than it has been in the past, and since CO2 has that effect on our planet, and burning fossil fuels adds to such a condition, it's a no brainer as to what we should be doing.

Of course both liars and deniers stories shall vary, as a conflict of monetary interests, shall do that to you.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

Harold Lewis is Emeritus Professor of Physics at the University of California, Santa Barbara. Here is his letter of resignation to Curtis G. Callan Jr, Princeton University, President of the American Physical Society.
Anthony Watts describes it thus:

...It is of course, the global warming scam,...

What a crock of shit. The planet is warming, and burning fossil fuels plays a large part.

"The previous message was funded by big oil, which is where the money grubbing really lies."

I just can't wait until those bastards burn, and they shall, if they keep it up. Unfortunately, so shall we all. If it could only be just them, that would be nice.

From January to March 2015, both as imports and exports, the number 1 cumulative commodity has been:

"Mineral fuels and mineral oils - Coal; Briquettes, Ovoids And Similar Solid Fuels Manufactured From Coal - Bituminous Coal"

The article even furnishes more proof. How?

Then, there was not much if any corruption due to money making opportunities.
Today, there is much corruption due to money making opportunities.

It's the cumulative affects of the human animal blinded by a glittering prize. And of course it shall only get worse.

Remember there is money on both sides of the equation. Lets see which is more probable.

The corruption of scientists, that seek the truth of the universe, that screen their hypothesis through empirical evidence.

OR

The corruption of capitalists that seek to keep their commodity at the top of the heep so they can make more money.

You US citizens:

Who was blamed for the 2008 recession that's kinda still going on?

"The U.S. Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission reported its findings in January 2011. It concluded that "the crisis was avoidable and was caused by: Widespread failures in financial regulation, including the Federal Reserve’s failure to stem the tide of toxic mortgages; Dramatic breakdowns in corporate governance including too many financial firms acting recklessly and taking on too much risk; An explosive mix of excessive borrowing and risk by households and Wall Street that put the financial system on a collision course with crisis; Key policy makers ill prepared for the crisis, lacking a full understanding of the financial system they oversaw; and systemic breaches in accountability and ethics at all levels.“"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causes_of_ ... _Recession

Capitalists my friends not scientists are the money grubbers, at least they are the largest ones.

So which is the most probable?

Is it more probable that the scientists are bearing false witness?

Or is it more probable that the, "Mineral fuels and mineral oils - Coal; Briquettes, Ovoids And Similar Solid Fuels Manufactured From Coal - Bituminous Coal," capitalists are liars?

All one really has to do is examine the nature of their professional lives to see who is and is not more capable of lying. Crap capitalists lie by design, that's all advertising is. Tell me, has your food item ever looked as large or as good as they do in a commercial?

Plus, at 57 years old I'm here to tell you, that with each passing year, it's definitely getting hotter, on average of course, than it has been in the past, and since CO2 has that effect on our planet, and burning fossil fuels adds to such a condition, it's a no brainer as to what we should be doing.

Of course both liars and deniers stories shall vary, as a conflict of monetary interests, shall do that to you.

Well said. I just don't understand the motives of global warming deniers. They either all have shares in fossil fuel companies, or they are simply morons.

[Ned]

Angry Planet

The snow has been falling, day after day,
night after night, without letup,
as the house disappeared under white slopes…
…black chimneys protruding like accusing fingers
blaming the world of humans,
huddled under an avenging avalanche.

When spring comes, it will drown us all
in meltdown deluge,
no god is needed for a flood…
…the planet can so easily do it
when it’s had enough of us.

The margins are so narrow:
the atmosphere barely saves us from death
by breathing the vacuum of infinite space;
an angry wind can blow us all away;
a volcano can petrify our charred bones;
an earthquake can bury us all;
an enraged virus can melt us down
into quivering jelly,
back to the primordial ooze.

We had warning after warning
from the planet getting fed up with us...
…we ignored them all,
escalating our abuse of the mother
who has been feeding us, protecting us,
saving us from self-annihilation…

At some point enough will be enough,
the planet doesn’t need us
and it can easily recover when we are gone.
Evolution will start again with a new experiment:
dolphins, cockroaches, crows waiting their turn
when we have crossed the line of no-return.

[Hobbes' Choice]

Angry Planet

The snow has been falling, day after day,
night after night, without letup,
as the house disappeared under white slopes…
…black chimneys protruding like accusing fingers
blaming the world of humans,
huddled under an avenging avalanche.

When spring comes, it will drown us all
in meltdown deluge,
no god is needed for a flood…
…the planet can so easily do it
when it’s had enough of us.

The margins are so narrow:
the atmosphere barely saves us from death
by breathing the vacuum of infinite space;
an angry wind can blow us all away;
a volcano can petrify our charred bones;
an earthquake can bury us all;
an enraged virus can melt us down
into quivering jelly,
back to the primordial ooze.

We had warning after warning
from the planet getting fed up with us...
…we ignored them all,
escalating our abuse of the mother
who has been feeding us, protecting us,
saving us from self-annihilation…

At some point enough will be enough,
the planet doesn’t need us
and it can easily recover when we are gone.
Evolution will start again with a new experiment:
dolphins, cockroaches, crows waiting their turn
when we have crossed the line of no-return.

I think you need a good burger inside you.

[Ned]

Climate Change

The climate is changing,
and we are changing too…
from ignorance we moved to denial…
…who could think of survival
in the middle of this plenty we see,
don’t ask us to be intelligent,
we are too arrogant to believe in science…
…we have our religion and our-faith-in-progress
for our guidance.

Our children, whom we value most in life,
are in for a nasty surprise
when the shit hits the fan
but that’s all right
because we don’ give a damn about
what comes after we are gone,
so long as we can have our fun
today.

[Ned]

Over 1,500 members of national, regional, and international science academies have signed the Warning. Sixtynine nations from all parts of Earth are represented, including each of the twelve most populous nations and the nineteen largest economic powers. The full list includes a majority of the Nobel laureates in the sciences.


World Scientists' Warning to Humanity
18 Nov, 1992.

Human beings and the natural world are on a collision course. Human activities inflict harsh and often irreversible damage on the environment and on critical resources. If not checked, many of our current practices put at serious risk the future that we wish for human society and the plant and animal kingdoms, and may so alter the living world that it will be unable to sustain life in the manner that we know. Fundamental changes are urgent if we are to avoid the collision our present course will bring about.

The Environment
The environment is suffering critical stress:

The Atmosphere
Stratospheric ozone depletion threatens us with enhanced ultra-violet radiation at the earth's surface, which can be damaging or lethal to many life forms. Air pollution near ground level, and acid precipitation, are already causing widespread injury to humans, forests and crops.

Water Resources
Heedless exploitation of depletable ground water supplies endangers food production and other essential human systems. Heavy demands on the world's surface waters have resulted in serious shortages in some 80 countries, containing 40% of the world's population. Pollution of rivers, lakes and ground water further limits the supply.

Oceans
Destructive pressure on the oceans is severe, particularly in the coastal regions which produce most of the world's food fish. The total marine catch is now at or above the estimated maximum sustainable yield. Some fisheries have already shown signs of collapse. Rivers carrying heavy burdens of eroded soil into the seas also carry industrial, municipal, agricultural, and livestock waste -- some of it toxic

Soil
Loss of soil productivity, which is causing extensive Land abandonment, is a widespread byproduct of current practices in agriculture and animal husbandry. Since 1945, 11% of the earth's vegetated surface has been degraded -- an area larger than India and China combined -- and per capita food production in many parts of the world is decreasing.

Forests
Tropical rain forests, as well as tropical and temperate dry forests, are being destroyed rapidly. At present rates, some critical forest types will be gone in a few years and most of the tropical rain forest will be gone before the end of the next century. With them will go large numbers of plant and animal species.

Living Species
The irreversible loss of species, which by 2100 may reach one third of all species now living, is especially serious. We are losing the potential they hold for providing medicinal and other benefits, and the contribution that genetic diversity of life forms gives to the robustness of the world's biological systems and to the astonishing beauty of the earth itself.

Much of this damage is irreversible on a scale of centuries or permanent. Other processes appear to pose additional threats. Increasing levels of gases in the atmosphere from human activities, including carbon dioxide released from fossil fuel burning and from deforestation, may alter climate on a global scale. Predictions of global warming are still uncertain -- with projected effects ranging from tolerable to very severe -- but the potential risks are very great.

Our massive tampering with the world's interdependent web of life -- coupled with the environmental damage inflicted by deforestation, species loss, and climate change -- could trigger widespread adverse effects, including unpredictable collapses of critical biological systems whose interactions and dynamics we only imperfectly understand.

Uncertainty over the extent of these effects cannot excuse complacency or delay in facing the threat.

Population
The earth is finite. Its ability to absorb wastes and destructive effluent is finite. Its ability to provide food and energy is finite. Its ability to provide for growing numbers of people is finite. And we are fast approaching many of the earth's limits. Current economic practices which damage the environment, in both developed and underdeveloped nations, cannot be continued without the risk that vital global systems will be damaged beyond repair.

Pressures resulting from unrestrained population growth put demands on the natural world that can overwhelm any efforts to achieve a sustainable future. If we are to halt the destruction of our environment, we must accept limits to that growth. A World Bank estimate indicates that world population will not stabilize at less than 12.4 billion, while the United Nations concludes that the eventual total could reach 14 billion, a near tripling of today's 5.4 billion. But, even at this moment, one person in five lives in absolute poverty without enough to eat, and one in ten suffers serious malnutrition.

No more than one or a few decades remain before the chance to avert the threats we now confront will be lost and the prospects for humanity immeasurably diminished.

Warning
We the undersigned, senior members of the world's scientific community, hereby warn all humanity of what lies ahead. A great change in our stewardship of the earth and the life on it, is required, if vast human misery is to be avoided and our global home on this planet is not to be irretrievably mutilated.

What we must do
Five inextricably linked areas must be addressed simultaneously:

1. We must bring environmentally damaging activities under control to restore and protect the integrity of the earth's systems we depend on.

We must, for example, move away from fossil fuels to more benign, inexhaustible energy sources to cut greenhouse gas emissions and the pollution of our air and water. Priority must be given to the development of energy sources matched to third world needs small scale and relatively easy to implement.

We must halt deforestation, injury to and loss of agricultural land, and the loss of terrestrial and marine plant and animal species.

2. We must manage resources crucial to human welfare more effectively.

We must give high priority to efficient use of energy, water, and other materials, including expansion of conservation and recycling.

3. We must stabilize population. This will be possible only if all nations recognize that it requires improved social and economic conditions, and the adoption of effective, voluntary family planning.

4. We must reduce and eventually eliminate poverty.

5. We must ensure sexual equality, and guarantee women control over their own reproductive decisions.

The developed nations are the largest polluters in the world today. They must greatly reduce their overconsumption, if we are to reduce pressures on resources and the global environment. The developed nations have the obligation to provide aid and support to developing nations, because only the developed nations have the financial resources and the technical skills for these tasks.

Acting on this recognition is not altruism, but enlightened self-interest: whether industrialized or not, we all have but one lifeboat. No nation can escape from injury when global biological systems are damaged. No nation can escape from conflicts over increasingly scarce resources. In addition, environmental and economic instabilities will cause mass migrations with incalculable consequences for developed and undeveloped nations alike.

Developing nations must realize that environmental damage is one of the gravest threats they face, and that attempts to blunt it will be overwhelmed if their populations go unchecked. The greatest peril is to become trapped in spirals of environmental decline, poverty, and unrest, leading to social, economic and environmental collapse.

Success in this global endeavor will require a great reduction in violence and war. Resources now devoted to the preparation and conduct of war -- amounting to over $1 trillion annually -- will be badly needed in the new tasks and should be diverted to the new challenges.

A new ethic is required -- a new attitude towards discharging our responsibility for caring for ourselves and for the earth. We must recognize the earth's limited capacity to provide for us. We must recognize its fragility. We must no longer allow it to be ravaged. This ethic must motivate a great movement, convince reluctant leaders and reluctant governments and reluctant peoples themselves to effect the needed changes.

The scientists issuing this warning hope that our message will reach and affect people everywhere. We need the help of many.

We require the help of the world community of scientists -- natural, social, economic, political;

We require the help of the world's business and industrial leaders;

We require the help of the worlds religious leaders; and

We require the help of the world's peoples.

We call on all to join us in this task.

See full article and list of signatories at http://www.worldtrans.org/whole/warning.html

[SpheresOfBalance]

Angry Planet

The snow has been falling, day after day,
night after night, without letup,
as the house disappeared under white slopes…
…black chimneys protruding like accusing fingers
blaming the world of humans,
huddled under an avenging avalanche.

When spring comes, it will drown us all
in meltdown deluge,
no god is needed for a flood…
…the planet can so easily do it
when it’s had enough of us.

The margins are so narrow:
the atmosphere barely saves us from death
by breathing the vacuum of infinite space;
an angry wind can blow us all away;
a volcano can petrify our charred bones;
an earthquake can bury us all;
an enraged virus can melt us down
into quivering jelly,
back to the primordial ooze.

We had warning after warning
from the planet getting fed up with us...
…we ignored them all,
escalating our abuse of the mother
who has been feeding us, protecting us,
saving us from self-annihilation…

At some point enough will be enough,
the planet doesn’t need us
and it can easily recover when we are gone.
Evolution will start again with a new experiment:
dolphins, cockroaches, crows waiting their turn
when we have crossed the line of no-return.

I think you need a good burger inside you.

No I think you should go out and jump into your BMW. So, what is it's gas mileage anyway. My Yamaha gets 40 MPG.

[Ned]

Failed experiment

The wind and rain were fierce,
hammering on windows,
screaming down chimneys,
filling my mind with images
of climate change, here to stay,
ignoring the naysayers,
fulfilling prophecies
made by mocked,
disbelieved scientists…

…exacting vengeance by the planet
on a destructive species
too blind to see, too stupid to believe,
too complacent to care,
too greedy to let go, too mad to live
in harmony with nature
that gave it life…

…we would rather smite
countless species
into suffering, decline, extinction
than curb our limitless appetite
for more ‘fun’, more distraction,
and hell with the torpedoes…

…a small price to pay: destruction
of all that’s healthy, beautiful and sane,
we are the dominant race
on this lonely piece of rock
in this infinite universe,
and when we are gone,
it will be the end of this failed experiment:
of tragic, blind human sentience.

[thedoc]

No I think you should go out and jump into your BMW. So, what is it's gas mileage anyway. My Yamaha gets 40 MPG.

I think some of the newer BMW's get pretty reasonable gas mileage, over 30. If your Yamaha is a motor cycle, 40 is pretty crappy MPG, better bikes could do a lot better. I wouldn't ride one of those death traps for less than 100 MPG.