Encephalon

I am not suggesting that humans as they are wired now can ever come to grips with the broader shores of reality or even understand the machinations of power that govern our planet, but I believe we have tools at our immediate disposal that can reduce our predilection for delusion and deception. I believe that intellectual humility (Occam's razor), critical thinking, and the scientific method are sound principles for investigating the world and that they are frequently jettisoned in deference to emotionalism and superstition well before they've been adequately employed. I dropped out of high school after my sophomore year and didn't pursue college until 36 years of age. I subscribed to plenty of metaphysical notions, but I don't ever recall rejecting plausible scientific theories in order to feel better about the future. I entertained half-baked notions of being rescued by a benevolent race of ETs but I never imagined that I had an adequate scientific base to reject legitimate theories. Having spent a decade climbing the academic ladder, I can still only see the bottom of the next ladder, but that's all I ever thought I could see (except perhaps when I was a teenager, the age when we all know everything). A few hours later - I just wanted to add what K and I were discussing in another thread. From my own educational evolution (as a geography major) I've learned that the world is far more comprehensible than my very active imagination first lead me to believe. Before I got around to taking the academic plunge I was convinced that the mysteries of the world were basically impenetrable, and that all ideas, whether it is was about electromagnetism or The Virgin Birth, were all ultimately unfathomable to the same degree. And the greatest joy I experienced was shedding false notions and assumptions and replacing them with more sensible explanations. It certainly made me feel less gullible, impressionable, and less vulnerable to authority. That was just one of the psychological advantages I witnessed as an older student. So, my angst with the anti-intellectualism I see championed in this forum has more to do with recognizing the price I paid in subscribing to notions that were false and misleading, even though I may have found them comforting. Blah blah blah?

Fair enough. You and I will always disagree about where we draw the line between the knowable and the unknowable, but I've always respected your ethical integrity, perhaps even more than my own. I was coming off another night of poor sleep and what do I find but yet another person, whom I actually thought was kind of interesting given his amazing account of his Peruvian journey, being what I think is far too quick and dismissive of what Michael Ruppert is saying; Ruppert's track record is extraordinary and his grasp of the impending energy debt is completely consistent with thousands of others in the peak oil/geology community. He's not a basketcase because he grieves on camera, nor is he merely projecting his own personal impoverishment onto the world so a film crew can catch it for posterity's sake. All this hit me after I've already heard several others in this forum (a forum not noted for its scientific literacy, btw) admonishing each other to not fret, the energy fairy will bless the planet with new sources and we'll be spared the ravages of our own gluttony and shortsightedness, as if we could simply project our energy utilization history of the Industrial Revolution into perpetuity - "Oh, we've always found energy, therefore we always will". So yeah, in that moment, I dishonored all the meditations and affirmations I have made over my many months to not be so belligerent online and hammered Jetsun for not having his doctorate in petroleum geology and subscribing to what is considered in many scientific circles to be wishful thinking on a global scale, to our ultimate detriment. Here's lookin' at Step 4, Scott

The man is crying because he's alarmed at the unfortunate destiny we seem to be creating for ourselves out of our failure to adapt to the reality of depleted oil supplies. If you've paid any attention to the subject at all you know that shale petroleum is a false promise. It's only been three years since the banking crisis, the economy is not getting better, we're likely headed for a double dip recession, and petroleum doesn't simply stop getting pumped; it gets too expensive to acquire or buy. That's not something that happens overnight. My joke about Ayahuasca is that people have the ability to take their subjective drug experiences more seriously than a real, demonstrable phenomenon. It would seem that denial is for many people the preferred means of dealing with painful realities.

Did you actually watch the movie, or is the Ayahuasca still playing reruns in your head?

NAILED IT!!

That depends on the individual. An intro to phys. geog. will be extremely rewarding to people who have nurtured their natural curiosity. Once you introduce the element of location into your mental universe, connections between divergent bodies of data you've accumulated will create new patterns of understanding. You can also go straight to human ecology and bone up with this - http://www.amazon.com/Human-Ecology-Gerald-G-Marten/dp/1853837148/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1320808895&sr=1-1

Might I humbly suggest an alternative? Geography is the study of the earth. It also happens to be one of most hyphenated sciences out there - physcial, cultural, population, environmental, marxist, feminist... you name it. Modern geographical studies borrows and steals from virtually every other academic subject to answer specific questions such as "Why is This happening Here? What accounts for the location of this phenomena?" But it also makes use of Global Studies and human ecology to study the earth as a whole. It's an elegant subject, with vast explanatory power, very Buddhist/Taoist in its Systems Theory approach, and it doesn't take a Phd to enjoy it. Even lower-division classes at the local junior college are enough to blow your mind at just how comprehensible the world can be, depending on the professor, of course. "In regards to the reduced risk of energy problems I mentioned earlier in this thread, I made this decision based on the knowledge that there are trillions of gallons of oil waiting to be tapped within the U.S. alone, once we're able to reach them in an economically viable fashion. Also we're already tapping the Bakken Play, which holds an estimated 100 billion gallons of oil. That oil should make it to market in 5 years or so. My estimates regarding how (un-)dire the situation is, comes from listening to both sides and determining whose agenda seems more nefarious." I don't know how you managed to scrounge up this data, Aaron, but it's grossly in error. The amount of energy required to release oil from shale requires an amount of energy equal to or greater than the energy you'd end up with, not to mention having to drain Lake superior to get enough fresh water to steam clean the oil out of the sand. The only reason this story continues to have viability is because the oil companies are positioning themselves for the go ahead... as long as the extraction costs are borne by the public treasury. The profits, of course would be privatized. http://www.theoildrum.com/ Oildrum

K does bring up a valid point, though. Aldo Leopold once said that "to live with an ecological education is to live in world of wounds." Not everyone gets a chance to filter certain truths through the prism of corporately-owned commercial media and propaganda. The threat of global ecological collapse is every bit as urgent as our economic collapse but the average consumer of commercial news would have no way of independently ascertaining the gravity of the problem. I personally subscribe to the Buddhist philosopher David Loy who argues that in this age of global interdependency, to speak of pursuing enlightenment in the absence of ecological awareness is a failure of ethical imagination, but electronic propaganda can kill it in its tracks.

I believe you are referring to what we geographers call Demographic Transition Model - where a given pop. goes through periods of industrialization and urbanization and brith/death rates stabilize due to technological improvements in hygiene, health care, better diet, etc. This is not a perfect model and is not applicable when taking into account a worldwide breach in the planet's carrying capacity. The impact of running out of our primary fuel to grow food - petroleum - is also not factored into your assessment. The overpopulation problem that "scares" us is real and is already happening. Granted, the global consumer class could lower their eco-footprint a bit by driving less Hummers and eating less cattle, but the sheer number of people living in poverty (3+ billion living on the equivalent of $2/day) is a separate challenge.

Wow. In terms of sheer volume of misinformation, half-baked premises and aggressive ignorance, this post wins awards up and down the spectrum. At least you had enough sense to frame it as your "opinion" rather than attempting to couch it in any factual support. What had me scraping my jaw off the floor was where you asked if any of us had ever researched the subject. It's a bitter testament to the utter failure of public education that you could appeal to so many themes of modern life - media, politics, business - and still fail to even grasp some elementary truths about how many of your fellow human beings can actually live on a planet this size. Yeah, Mr. Everything, some of us went to college and have an ecological education. College is a wonderful privilege, but you don't need a degree in order to read a scientifically-supported article on the state of the earth.

I've written in here before that my sense of a hardy community resilient enough to make it through the next bottleneck will be a hybrid model of ancient Taoist village/modern ecovillage; contemporary permaculture design, appropriate technology, etc, combined with communal practice of traditional Taoist healing and martial arts. The ancient Taoists were the village librarians, craftsmen, warriors, and doctors, so I tend to attach a little romanticism to my pragmatism. I've tried to launch a similar thread several times before but it hasn't caught on. Many people here think the next messiah is beaming down from the mothership any day now, rather than actually taking their Taoist practice to the next level. Have you ever checked out http://www.earthaven.org/ ? They're in N. Carolina. I met Diane Christiansen at an ecovillage symposium; she wrote "Creating a Life Together, Practical Tools to Grow Ecovillages and Intentional Communities." It's a primer for the movement, and it's remarkably Taoist in its orientation. I've lived in barracks, at sea, 10,000 ft. in the Rockies, college dorms, co-ops, youth hostels and apartment buildings. Soundproofing, or the lack theoreof, has frequently been the deciding factor in how well people who need solitude can live in proximity to others. that's why we're going for rammed-earth construction, but also to maximize insulation and minimize firewood. I think we can build the brick machine that's depicted here. http://opensourceecology.org/ Christiansen says emotional maturity is the most important criteria for selecting community members. Skills are important, but they can be taught and learned. Kunstler makes this point too in Long Emergency; the days of indulging in our own private psycho-dramas will be eclipsed by the need to harvest the crops and feed the livestock.

It's under the couch.

There are those who believe that all phenomena that washes over the globe can be explained through the partisan pettiness that characterizes the American political spectrum, which today has become about as long as the average penis, but not quite as useful.

Interpreting global phenomena through the narrow prism of American partisan politics requires a level of stupidity that can only be achieved with regular and consistent practice.

I just wanted to squeeze in that "manageable" in an ecological sense just means that the population does not exceed the carrying capacity of a given ecosystem. 6.2 still seems a little high and I think it assumes no disruptions in oil and resource flows. Non-oil carrying capacity for a planet this size, assuming total topsoil salvage (no desertification, salination) and access to water is about 2 billion. That's enough to party with on Friday night, isn't it?

Modern science knows exactly what happened here: acidic rainwater bore holes through the alkaline limestone formation from which the entire Yucatan Peninsula is made. Our pool guy has enough knowledge of Ph chemistry to figure that out. Don't knock science 'til you've tried it. It actually makes you a smarter, more interesting person!

Glad to hear from you. Nice to know I can count on your support and enthusiasm. I'd like to use the format that we've used in LA at the Buddhist 12 step groups - "We admitted we were powerless over our addiction - that our lives had become unmanageable." Regarding your point in your second paragraph - I understand the value of the ecumenical approach but I'd like to stick with Buddhism for the reason I mentioned - Of all the world's religions, it is Buddhism alone which trains its tools of analysis specifically on the human propensity for craving, for desire, for addiction. This gives it a certain advantage that is not immediately obvious but could actually wash out if we threw too many ingredients into the pot. This is why I posted this in the Buddhist section. That being said, nothing dissolved my addictive stress, self-loathing, and stinking thinking like my Taoist Nei Kung practice, but that's another subject.

You got the third line right, but the rest is

Effective, long-term solutions to overpopulation haven't changed. Poverty eradication is the best, cost-effective solution; insuring that people have access to adequate food and water, clothing, shelter, and medical care and the means to a dignified way of life (I'm almost quoting the UN Charter of Human Rights here). The cost up front has always been a fraction of the price paid in human carnage, but the planet is still under Darwinian rule, so don't expect any massive changes soon. I fail to see how criminalizing childbirth beyond a one-child policy is not a measure of a police state. A well organized global police state could solve a lot of problems, including overpopulation, but it is unlikely that anyone except for authoritarian personalities swoons over the prospect of global dystopias.

Well, I'm with you in spirit, and there's no question that hemp will be a huge crop in a post-industrial society, but there are enormous forces, political and economic, aligned against the utilization of hemp, some of them in unison with an anti-marijuana agenda. People, 21st century competition for the remaining resources is going to be a game of "The Lst Man Standing" and will make all previous resource wars look like minor skirmishes. There has been talk for decades about simply bribing the energy and chemical companies with monopolies in solar power, sustainable agriculture, water desalinization and the like in the hopes that they don't take down the rest of the planet with them. They ain't interested.

Yep. And not so infrequently, the solution is hitting the reset button and mass extinction. There have been nine of them since life first appeared on earth 500+ billion years ago, and we're working our butts off for #10.

It's not really a "solution," but the depletion of the petroleum supply in the next 1 to 2 decades means an end to industrial agriculture. Even with quality topsoil (which is disappearing by the tons every day) available to turn oil into food,the limit of this planet's carrying capacity is around 2 billion, 5 billion less than what we have now. It would seem that our era of rapacious industrial capitalism comes with its own self-destruct device. Hafta hand it to God... her poetic irony is breathtaking.

Howdy - I wish I could be more optimistic but from my perspective as a lowly geographer the future will not be kind to us social science and behavioral science majors. I sort of carved out my own brand of "End Times" geographical studies, based mostly on post-petroleum realities that many author/scientists have forecast, and some gigs are definitely better than others. As the depletion of oil reserves forces a world-wide economic contraction, the scale of human enterprise is projected to get much smaller, almost neo-tribal, with food production becoming the most important industry. Any person who has well-honed agricultural skills, animal husbandry, permaculture, as well as 1850s-level craft skills will do fine. If the US were ever to wake up out of its oil-dependent consumer fog it could begin with local food production, revitalization of the the railroad system, and reconstruction of housing stock with super-insulated construction techniques. That would put millions of people back to work instantly, providing we could swing another run of the printing presses, but there would still be very little use for social science intellectuals like you and me. I would harvest as much life sciences classes as possible and try to get into a medical program such as EMT/paramedic. They will always have meaningful work, and tribes of the future will treat them kindly. I'm joining an ecovillage in 2014 and am boning up on my former medic skills combined with medical chi kung. But I'll always be able to teach if that luxury avails itself. I still need to learn how to dress a freshly shot elk. Best of luck!