Today’s guest post by Preston Howard discusses an issue central to our overshoot predicament that is often ignored: The Maximum Power Principle (MPP). The MPP states that life optimizes for maximize power, not maximum efficiency, and implies that life does not look forward in time to consider the consequences of maximizing power today.
While preparing an initial report for Florida’s first Area of Critical State Concern1 in 1972, I had the immense good fortune to spend time with Howard T. Odum, an environmental engineering scientist who directed the Wetlands Center at the University of Florida. The area of state concern was the Big Cypress Preserve adjacent to the Florida Everglades. Dr Odum and several of his graduate students had ongoing studies in the area. In informal conversations, Dr Odum explained the Maximum Power Principle as described below. I believe it presents Humanity’s current situation better than anything I have seen about global warming, overshoot, or climate collapse. However, to my knowledge no one has mentioned it in any serious article except Gail Tverberg in her articles about resource consumption.
To understand the Maximum Power Principle2, let us imagine a square island, barren of any vegetation. As happened many times in Florida, suppose our island was created by fill where a shipping channel had been deepened. Situated close to the seaport, someone intended to build something on the new island, but permitting requirements and other administrative delays where taking “forever.” (These details provide a “context” for the discussion.)
The barren island does not remain barren for long, as plants soon begin to grow on it. The solar energy that bathes the island provides abundant energy for the early pioneer plants. Seeds blow in on the wind. Some may wash ashore. Birds drop some. Those initial plants found a world filled with more (solar) energy than they could use. In this bounty they made their best efforts to use as much as they could and to grow as fast as possible, even at the expense of wasting energy by not using it efficiently.
Point 1: The Maximum Power Principle states when energy is abundant, those organisms survive best that maximize their use of energy, even if they are wasteful in how they use it (because the supply of available energy is “infinite” in a relative sense).
Weeds grow quickly, and they soon cover most of our imaginary island. The fact that weeds are wasteful in how they use available energy does not matter, because there is plenty of solar energy for all the plants.
Slower growing, but more efficient, plants also germinate, but they compete poorly because higher foliage from the faster growing weeds blocks energy-rich sunlight from the young trees and shrubs. Perhaps by chance some of these seeds fall on a higher elevation where weeds cannot easily block them from the sun. Or, perhaps they are near the shoreline, where the water provides weed-free access to adequate solar energy along the water’s edge. If these more efficient shrubs and tree seedlings find niches to assist their growth, they can survive even though they cannot compete well against the weeds directly.
In time, vegetation covers our imaginary island. Now the situation changes dramatically concerning the Maximum Power Principle.
Point 2: When the energy supply is limited, those organisms compete best that maximize the efficient use of the energy available to them.
Now every plant on our island has neighbors nearby, pushing leafy branches where a plant wants its own leaves to collect sunlight. Plants no longer have access to unlimited energy where growth is maximized even if excess energy is wasted. Soon there is no energy to waste. Plants find it difficult to obtain all the energy they desire, and the increasing competition with other plants for available energy adversely affects their growth.
In this new environment the struggling tree seedlings and shrubs have an advantage because they use available energy more efficiently than the weeds. Over time these changes allow shrubs to win out against the inefficient weeds, just as the trees will — in time — overpower the shrubs.
Examples of the Maximum Power Principle
As a general rule, all biological life embraces the Maximum Power Principle. If a life form confronts an energy source it can use, it succeeds best if it uses it as the Maximum Power Principle indicates. To understand the Maximum Power Principle as it impacts the real world, let’s look at a few examples.
Example 1: Paramecium in petri dish3. Paramecium are single-cell organisms that live in water and consume a variety of foods, including yeast. Here, we examine where we put several paramecium in a petri dish with an abundance of yeast. The buffet has been served, and the paramecium begin to consume the yeast. The paramecium flourish, reproducing more and more paramecium as the yeast is slowly consumed. Until… until there is no more yeast to consume, at which time the (now many) paramecium all die of starvation. Unfortunately, there is no natural system to suggest to the paramecium problems they may encounter if they eat all the yeast as fast as they can.
Sometimes events occur that regulate unrestrained growth that otherwise harms an organism in the long run. For example, if yeast gets down to 10% of the initial amount, suppose a lab assistant regularly restores it to 25% of the initial amount. In this situation the paramecium population fluctuates with the availability of yeast.
Example 2: Deer on the Kaibab Plateau4. The Kaibab Plateau is a relatively inaccessible area on the north side of the Grand Canyon comprised of approximately 700,000 acres. In 1907 there were an estimated 4,000 deer resident on the plateau, in addition to pumas and wolves, which were predators of the deer. The predators and the prey maintained a relative balance with one another. Between 1907 and 1923 a successful effort removed most of the predators, allowing the deer population to increase. By 1925 the deer population grew to more than 100,000, which was far in excess of the carrying capacity of the vegetation available on the plateau. All vegetation was consumed. Over 40% of the herd died in two successive winters, and the deer population plummeted to around 10,000. There it stabilized because of the significantly compromised vegetation available for food. (Earlier estimates suggested the Plateau could originally support 30,000 deer).
Example 3: Deer on St Matthew Island5. St Matthew Island is a remote island in the Bering Sea, north of the Aleutian Island chain in Alaska. During World War 2, the United States needed to know whether or not Japan attacked the island. The US Coast Guard established a radio navigational system on the island. It was understood that the 19-member team on St Matthew could never defend the island, but before capture the team could alert HQ by radio in the event it was invaded by Japanese soldiers. Because the island is so remote, the military was unsure whether it could provide regular supplies. As a backup food source, the US relocated 29 reindeer to the island so the radio team would not starve. For the deer, the buffet had just been served! St Matthew is 32 miles long and 4 miles wide, and it was covered with lichen, a favorite food of reindeer.
When World War 2 ended, the radio team left the island, but the reindeer remained. In 1957 Dr David Klein, (then) a professor at the University of Alaska Fairbanks, visited the island with a graduate student. They determined that the 29 original reindeer had grown to a population of 1,300. When Dr Klein returned a second time, in 1963, the reindeer population had grown to 6,000, or almost 50 reindeer per square mile. Just like the paramecium, this did not look good for the reindeer. Due to overconsumption, lichen was increasingly scarce. The winter of 1963-64 was one of the worst on record for that part of Alaska. In 1966 Dr Klein returned to St Matthew Island to find just 42 reindeer, including only one male. It had deformed antlers and probably could not reproduce. All the St Matthew Island deer perished during the next decade.
The Maximum Power Principle lesson: If resources allow, the organism should use the resources to grow as the tried-and-true way to survive best over the long run. Ecologically, there were no checks and balances to suggest that 600 reindeer could live on St Matthew Island, but 6,000 could not. This is important.
How Humanity Embraced the Maximum Power Principle
No animate life form is exempt from the Maximum Power Principle, not even Humans. Starting in the 1700s, Humans began using coal to power an increasingly industrialized Western society, starting primarily in Great Britain. Around 1850 oil was discovered in open ponds in Pennsylvania. Humanity soon found oil worked as well, and perhaps better, than coal. For the next 175 years Humanity (at least parts of it) had access to these energy-rich resources. And, just as the Maximum Power Principle dictates, Humanity used as much of these resources as it could get. Simply put, in 300 years Humanity harnessed the power of lightning and taught sand (silicon) to think6. Humanity electronically connected most of its 8 billion inhabitants and extended its presence into outer space. Humanity has no predator to threaten its dominance in any corner of the globe.
One might think Humanity’s success is guaranteed, except for a few things: First, the increasing scarcity of oil and coal and natural gas suddenly threatens to remove the punch-bowl from which Humanity has been feeding. Second, the carrying capacity of the Earth is far less than 8 billion humans unless we continue to supplement with increasingly scarce resources. And, last, our centuries-long party has now broken the Earth in ways Humanity cannot repair.
All the King’s horses and all the Queen’s men, will never restore this spherical jewel, regardless of what we do. We have transitioned from a “grow as much as you can quickly” environment to a “use remaining energy resources as efficiently as possible” environment, but we refuse to notice. As increasing numbers suffer because we do not adapt, those with power and authority choose to continue as before because it enriches them. Except in small, cosmetic steps, we do not even try to save one another. Instead countries say to one another, “you go first,” and “no, you go first.” But, that’s how money talks in the United States, where corporations are declared to be people under law. The job of corporate citizens is to enrich their shareholders, not to act in concert with environmental constraints.
Humanity’s Future Foretold
Nonetheless, one can take heart. Humanity is right where it is supposed to be. We will continue to use energy that remains available to us to build electric cars and windmills and nuclear weapons as we now increasingly compete against one another. And, just like the deer and the paramecium, we are certain to collapse as critical resources dwindle. The Maximum Power Principle is deeply embedded in all life, and — like it or not — we are no exception.
We are foolish if we think we can escape7 the Maximum Power Principle. As fast as scientists tell us of the need to address looming dangers (starting with global population concerns in the 1960s), and as fast as people far and wide demand global change, and as carefully as the United Nations forces all countries to accept the need for step-by-step remediation, it will never happen. We will continue to burn more coal when oil is scarce. And we will continue to drill for increasingly hard-to-extract oil until our electronic interconnected house of cards crumbles around us. This behavior is hard-wired at the cellular level, allowing us little choice concerning whether or not to embrace the Maximum Power Principle.
One might ask when this catastrophe will occur. Don’t look now, but it is occurring before your very eyes. Regardless of whatever we do at this point, we have broken the World, and we cannot fix it. Our actions cause extinction of hundreds of living organisms8 every month. Human activity warmed the globe to the point that arable land is less available, decreasing the global food supply. Actions with unintended effects melt polar and glacial ice, and yet have not kept seawater temperatures from increasing. We now discover fish cannot live in the warmer ocean water. Rising ocean water and weather extremes adversely impact Human settlement across every corner of the globe. Unfortunately the Maximum Power Principle does not allow do-overs.
The Earth suffers from a runaway infestation of Humanity. Just like the paramecium, as necessary resources increasingly become unavailable Homo sapiens will join the long list of extinct flora and fauna previously unable to survive a changing world. But the Earth will not die. After Humanity’s demise, the Earth will heal itself. This could happen quickly. Perhaps in less than an eon (2250 years), a “blink of the eye” in planetary time. It would be nice to think Humanity might recognize its bleak future, and would attempt to facilitate the successful transition of whatever life manifests itself after Humanity’s exit. That, however, is not likely because of the Maximum Power Principle.
If I knew today was Humanity’s final day to exist, I would most want to plant a tree.9
Addendum
I would be remiss not to call attention to the single situation I know where Humanity acted contrary to the Maximum Power Principle and instead chose to minimize present energy use in return for greater resource bounty in the future. American “First Peoples” — at least some of them — chose to plant corn from larger husks while instead eating only corn from the smaller husks. Over time, this gave them a larger harvest.
While this may seem “obvious” to someone today, it embraces action directly contrary to that expected by the Maximum Power Principle. Somewhere in their historic past someone in those tribes stood before others and suggested they eat less now in return for the promise of more food in the future. I expect whoever it was, she probably convinced the other women (who tended the plants) and never mentioned it to the men who were perhaps out hunting.
Sources and Notes
1Howard, P. (1974) “The use of vegetation in the design of regulations pertaining to coastal development of the Big Cypress critical area.” Proceedings of the First Annual Conference on Restoration of Coastal Vegetation in Florida (Tampa, Florida: p. 16).
2Odum, H. T. and Odum, E. C., (1976) Energy Basis for Man and Nature. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company (pp. 39-40). [Co-author E. C. Odum was Howard Odum’s wife and research partner. Not to be confused with Eugene Odum, below.]
also
2Lotka, A. J. (1956) Elements of mathematical biology. New York: Dover Publications, Inc. (p. 357). [Here described as the Law of Evolution.]
3Lotka, A. J. (1956) again. [Here described using bacteria, while noting, “… a man, for example, may be regarded as a population of cells.” (Lotka’s emphasis.)]
4Odum, E. P. (1959) Fundamentals of Ecology. Philadelphia: W. B. Saunders Company (pp. 239-240). [This was the first college-level textbook to include the word “Ecology” in its title. Eugene Odum wrote this book “with” Howard Odum, who provided an energy basis for nature.]
5Klein, D. R. (1968) “The introduction, increase, and crash of reindeer on St. Matthew Island. J. Wildlife Management 32: 350-367. Source: https://www.geo.arizona.edu/Antevs/nats104/00lect21reindeer.html on 28-Jul-2023. [Retrieved on 28-Jul-2023.]
6Lesser, H. G. (1984) “Microprocessor pioneer and industry mover.” Computer Accessories and Peripherals, 1:5 (p. 69+) [Quoting Harold Lee: “One good way to look at our (computer) industry is that, literally, within the last three hundred years, we’ve harnessed lightning and used it to teach sand how to think.”]
7Schalatek, L. (2021) “Broken Promises – Developed countries fail to keep their 100 billion dollar climate pledge.” Source: https://us.boell.org/en/2021/10/25/broken-promises-developed-countries-fail-keep-their-100-billion-dollar-climate-pledge. [Retrieved on 7-Aug-2023, as just one example of many available.]
8Pope, K. (2020) “Plant and animal species at risk of extinction.” Source: https://yaleclimateconnections.org/2020/03/plant-and-animal-species-at-risk-of-extinction/ [Retrieved on: 8-Aug-2023, although many references address this issue.]
9Merwin, W. S. (quote) “On the last day of the world I would want to plant a tree.” [Apologies to Merwin (1927-2019), a Pulitzer Prize winner and United States poet laureate, for my alteration.]
About the Author
Preston Howard has a Masters degree is in geography and retired in 2011 after a wide-ranging career in data management. In 1972 he developed a simulation of seaport growth, the first of his many national and international publications and presentations. Today he lives in a log cabin in one of the more successful intentional communities in the United States.
Rob here again.
I do not know what Preston thinks of Dr. Ajit Varki’s Mind Over Reality Transition (MORT) theory however I believe that the MPP and MORT theories are both true and together are the primary cause of human overshoot.
The MPP governs biology just as the laws of thermodynamics govern the universe. Nothing in the universe may violate the laws of thermodynamics and no life may violate the MPP. How could it be otherwise given that life at its core is chemical replicators evolving to compete for finite energy and resources?
Assuming that the MPP governs all life and cannot be overridden, how is it possible for an intelligence to exist in the universe that is smart enough to understand that behaving in accordance with the MPP will destroy itself and all that it cares about?
A solution that evolution discovered on this planet, and perhaps the only solution possible on any planet, is to prevent high intelligence from emerging unless it simultaneously evolves a tendency to deny unpleasant realities, like for example, the fact that it is in overshoot. Otherwise the intelligence might override the MPP to reduce suffering and possible extinction, and the replicators that created the intelligence won’t permit that.
Apparently it’s quite improbable and/or difficult to simultaneously evolve high intelligence with denial because it has occurred only once on this planet, despite the obvious fitness advantages of high intelligence.
The MPP and MORT together explain why we seem to have no free will to do anything wise about overshoot. They also explain why an honest assessment of our responses to overshoot symptoms would conclude we are doing the opposite of what a wise intelligent species with free will should do.
Despite this bleak assessment I’ll continue to push awareness of MORT and population reduction, just in case I’m wrong and there is a way to override denial and MPP, because our existence on this planet is so rare and precious, and because there is much suffering coming soon that could be reduced.
It’s possible that Preston disagrees with my opinions on MORT. That’s OK because even if I’m wrong, Preston’s points about the MPP are still probably correct.
Rob, Preston Howard here. Many thanx for the many stimulating posts from your un-deniers. I wanted to follow up on a recent post you tagged as somewhat “religious.” I hope my perspective adds light, not heat, to the discussion.
Gaia Gardener started an earlier post saying she was “to explain the Law of One and the best summary [she could] give, is that we are ultimately all connected, there is only one of us…”
Absolutely correct.
Like Gaia, I am a different individual who, like Gaia, also finds myself standing before the proverbial elephant. However, for those un-denial readers more anchored in science and its related tools, I recommend the following:
In closing, I confess an inability to understand an existence beyond (instead of) our 3-D world of Time and Space. Einstein told us: “Time and Space are MODES by which we THINK, and not CONDITIONS in which we LIVE.” I chew on that comment as I march forward to my own extinction in the spacetime world I know.
— Preston
Hi Preston, yowser you touched on a bunch of big topics in one comment!
No worries about heat here. I envy people who obtain comfort from spiritual beliefs and often wish I belonged to some spiritual community. There are many good reasons that religions emerged simultaneous with behaviorally modern humans a hundred thousand years ago. I was curious about the Law of One because I saw that some smart overshoot aware people belong to it and wondered if it might be the one for me.
I have no doubt space, time, and matter are not fundamental. My understanding is that we cannot probe for a deeper understanding because it takes more energy than we are able to apply to do so. This uncertainty does not bother me because the models we already have are plenty accurate enough to predict anything that might interest us at the scale we inhabit. I did find several lectures by Arkani-Hamed and will watch them to see if I’m missing something.
I have read a portion of Hoffman’s Case Against Reality but quit because I thought he was stating the obvious and tried to make how our imperfect senses and brain model reality into something more important than it is. Les Fridman does excellent interviews so I’ll listen to his Hoffman episode to see if I short changed his book.
I’ve read a lot of books on consciousness trying to understand what is “the hard problem”. I still don’t understand why it is hard. I don’t even understand what the problem is. For me, consciousness is what emerges when many nerve cells collaborate to sense and make decisions in support of us executing the Maximum Power Principle. Why is that hard? Why is that a problem? It is what it is.
I do know that if I put a plastic bag over my head so that my mitochondria are prevented from oxidizing the food I ate for lunch, everything will go dark like I’m asleep or dead, and therefore my consciousness must be constructed from matter.
On near death experiences I’m sure they are real. If you crash a brain, say with insufficient oxygen or a psychedelic drug, that brain may produce all kinds of strange senses and stories. I remember smoking some weed spiked with an unknown hard drug in high school and the world literally changed speed into slow motion and no one could convince me otherwise.
I’m looking forward to watching the info you recommended because a lot of people agree with you so I wonder if I’m missing something important.
I’m with you, Rob. “This uncertainty does not bother me because the models we already have are plenty accurate enough to predict anything that might interest us at the scale we inhabit.” Indeed, we can only use space, time and matter to probe that which might be outside those, so are unlikely to gain any useful insights into it.
We already are able to probe far more than is useful to our lives. This kind of thought also applies to a god; does it matter to us whether such a being exists? If so, why? Humans got by for hundreds of thousands of years without, as far as we know, such beliefs, just as all other species did, and do.
I keep a list of supplies to buy when risks escalate.
I just returned from filling the list.
Anyone else worried?
Always worried.
AND constantly think that my next purchase of anything might be my last. Anytime I think about collapse I figure we are 10 minutes away from Putin dropping the big one on us (NATO countries) to retaliate for the U.S. launching “tactical” nukes from Poland/Romania at Russian positions in the Donbass.
AJ
Looks like the US government has something to distract their voter’s attention away from another lost war so maybe they won’t need to escalate Ukraine to save face.
I am worried that Israel’s fury might cause the middle east to escalate. Wouldn’t take much to disrupt the world’s supply of diesel.
Yeah, I’m worried. I don’t have a list but I am slowly getting in hand tools that may be useful and now starting to think again about a manual water pump for our bore. But one of the things that slows me down on preps is the thought that when the shit hits the fan, so many people are going to be struggling to survive that any preps I make will be overwhelmed by the need to help as many others as possible and by those who try to take as much as they can from others to survive. Still, slowly preparing.
Headline news this morning that processed/fast food companies are worried about declining sales because so many Americans are eating less because they’re injecting Ozempic.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semaglutide
Given that 40% of American adults are obese, Americans eating less in not necessarily bad thing.
For sure, I just find it astonishing that people would inject a dodgy drug with many side effects rather than cutting carbs.
People have gotta have their supernormal stimuli.
https://www.stuartmcmillen.com/comic/supernormal-stimuli/
Is anyone familiar with this guy who writes on medium under the name of honest sorcerer?
He very much understands all of the predicaments and where are going to end up and is very articulate in his articles. Really good stuff!!
Yes he is good. He’s fairly new and I do not know anything about him.
He has disclosed very little personal information. From what he mentioned in an article he is around 41, lives in Central Europe, works as an engineer and is married with kids. What I find remarkable is that up until 2019 he believed the myth of endless progress, eternal growth and was invested in the civilization as any other average guy. In just a year or two he seems to have completely overcome his denial and see the reality of how this all ends.
The reason I find it interesting is because of the contrast with my friend who is around the same age and is married with kids. He saw the truth for a short while and then went into complete denial and now believes ChatGPT will solve fusion!!
I first thought that being invested in civilization predisposes you to deny reality but now I am not sure because their circumstances are identical- married with kids and in a great job.
I know this is a tough one but why is it that some people are able to overcome denial and most people cling to it harder and harder. Is it some deviation in brain chemistry?
I suspect the variance in denial is caused by genetic variation in the population.
In our past the small percentage of people with mental disorders like schizophrenia became our Shamans.
And the small percentage of people with defective denial genes were probably considered to be depressed and struggled to survive as outcasts.
Yes, genetic variation may be the explanation for the anomalous behavior. But this would also mean that sites such as these and books which shed light on our predicament are targeting a very small section of the population. What would be interesting to know is if environmental factors can influence this variation. When I say environment factors I don’t mean education because lets be real the math and physics needed to understand the present situation is 8th or 9th grade at the very best and I have seen renowned physicists and even Nobel laureates say mind-numbingly stupid things like covering Sahara with solar panels.
Just a thought. Perhaps those who think they aren’t in denial about reality really are in denial but manage to persuade themselves that they aren’t? This occurs to me because there are many who seem to know what’s going on but remain invested in civilisation, doing very little to alter their lifestyles in a way that might be more compatible with reality. I include myself in that. I sometimes think I’m doing far more than others but, if I think it through, I’m still not doing everything I could, not by a long way, so am as much a part of the problem as others.
I share a great deal with B (40 years old, electrical engineer, middle europe, married with kids), but it’s the same for me with “denying un-denial”.
We are like a group of skydivers who have forgotten the parachute. If you’re the only one who notices, what good is it? Shortly before the end, everyone panics, but the chance to change something would have been before the jump – it’s long gone. Enjoy the flight – and bang, it’s over.
On Substack and Medium.
The Man Who Killed Millions and Saved Billions
Interesting history of nitrogen fertilizer and Fritz Bosch who co-invented the Haber-Bosch process that converts natural gas into ammonia and is the main reason 8 instead of 2 billion people are alive today.
I also wrote about it here:
https://un-denial.com/2016/01/29/we-owe-our-existence-to-haber-bosch/
and here:
https://un-denial.com/2016/02/03/book-review-the-alchemy-of-air-by-thomas-hager/
Hello Rob and friends,
Hope all are well and thank you all for the stimulating conversation as always. I thought i would slip this entry into here as the turmoil in the Middle East has just rocketed into the stratosphere. Lots has happened for our family in just the past few weeks which accounts for my relative absence from this forum but still every day I check in for my sanity break. Many times I wished to contribute a usual Gaia length response but I am now extremely pressed for time and energy. Long story short, after our surprisingly delightful and smooth mother/daughter holiday, my mother has decided she wants to sell her home and relocate to our property there (this will involve a house build on the block) for consolidation of resources reasons, and although this is a very rational decision and would have had to be done sooner or later anyway (if we even have a later), making it happen will be an immense undertaking and yours truly will have the brunt of this responsibility. What a time to be thrust into this endeavour! It is just surreal to me now that I am organising a project that will see even more abuse of resources (like a crane eventually lifting a modular home trucked in 1500km to site). It may not even eventuate into fruition but it is my duty to try and do my best, and in a way it is keeping me somewhat more grounded in the day to day tasks when I am reeling in the doomsphere.
And with every second ticking, our current every day life and expectations are being eroded away as surely as the massive glacier calving events. This morning we awoke to news that WW3 has continued on another front, what fresh hell but this turmoil is just another bite of the bitter fruit of our sowing that we have to reap and eat. If we didn’t think in superlatives before of our human predicament, this latest game play should surely jolt us into submission that the life as we know it are most definitely numbered. I think we are in for a really interesting turn of events now, it’s like everything that has happened is a build up for the main show, we’ve been just climbing to the top of the roller coaster and now it’s going to let go and rip.
With every opportunity, I would like to send my goodwill and best to you all and thank you for being a part of my journey at this time of times which defines our humanity. I feel so blessed to have this community which shares a congenial understanding of what it means to have lived as a member of this species and extend that consciousness into our own personal meaning and fulfilment. Thank and bless you for being here and for your singularly unique contribution to the sum total of everything.
Rob, I was to explain the Law of One and the best summary I can give, is that we are ultimately all connected, there is only one of us in the room (the room is just infinitely large!) Everything that seems to define our individualism and separateness is an illusion (they call it distortion) so the One can experience the infiniteness of possibilities, another term for Life, really. Love is the force that furthers the realisation and seeking of our Oneness, and Light is the wisdom (sum knowledge and experience, which can be most enlightening when viewed in relation to another) that guides us to that state of realising Oneness. At some stage in each individualisation of the whole’s (as in a human being on this planet) development there comes a choice when the entity decides whether to lead a life in serving itself or others (altruistic). Interestingly, both paths will eventually lead to a realisation of Oneness and there is no judgment of either. In fact, one possibility cannot exist without the opposite as a foil, to provide a referential framework of the experience. You cannot know or feel true happiness without suffering and sadness also existing, for example. There’s a lot more about how our experiential universe is constructed (fractally is the best way of describing it) and how everything eventually progresses through ever higher densities (or levels if you will, in octaves) to eventually return to the One. Our planetary consciousness is now currently between third and fourth densities, just getting to the point of choosing a definite path of service to ourselves (which has led to the current state) or others (becoming more aware of our connectedness). There are decidedly woowoo details of how this got channelled through from what is claimed a sixth density thoughtform calling themselves Ra, they’ve already progressed through the physical manifestations and now are Borglike in being a collective, not needing physical existence. Maybe it’s like AI? Anyway, Ra itself keeps saying that their story isn’t important and those details which seem so pertinent and interesting to us cannot be revealed as it may interfere with our choice (like the prime directive in Star Trek). The main thing is we are all coming to realise that it is all One and the whole universe as we know it is only a small construct in which to experience that through choice. I can understand if I’ve really done your head in with all that, but that’s my in a nutshell understanding of this particular cosmic view.
Esoteric aside, and you may think the above is absolutely batshit crazy but here’s another piece of news that I found today that leaves me agog with disbelief. At first I thought it was a parody and an attempt at comic relief considering the dire news of the moment but unbelievably it’s true that there are many humans today who still think the answer to all our problems is still out there (literally) and achievable. I almost gagged on my own spit (generated by laughing) when I read the part that “under so and so convention, no-one owns the asteroid” Well, then, it’s for our taking and although its net worth is still speculative, it could very well be the solution to our mining shortfalls. Yay! If only we could find a way to lasso it into Earth, but as we know, that’s only a pesky engineering problem. It’s good to have a laugh in every day and not take any of this too seriously, we may not have too long to worry about it all any way.
All the best, everyone. May every day bring you as much joy and wonder as you can find, and through that may you know peace and a sense of resolution and meaning.
Namaste.
Mea culpa.
I forgot to post that news link about mining a metal asteroid.
Read it and weep with laughter and incredulity. We’re a funny species, truly.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2023-10-08/nasa-psyche-explainer-asteroid-journey/102885864
Good luck with the house build/move, Gaia. I feel your pain, having done something similar, though as the parent, rather than the child. We built a home (and actually built it, with some help from friends) for our son and his family, then had a home for my wife and myself built at a factory and had it moved onto the site. Luckily, someone else did most of the work on the second home but I had to deal a lot with unreasonable planning rules, which delayed us for quite a while, spending more than a year and a half in a rented portable cabin (which wasn’t really designed for a long residence).
Anyway, I hope it goes reasonably smoothly.
Hi there Mike,
Thank you so much for your well wishes, they mean a lot to me and add motivation to the task before me. I am so glad for you and your family that you are on the other side of this transition now and you have had time to enjoy your new stage of life together. I can totally understand what you said in an earlier post about just wanting a few more years of peace and stability to continue this longer, I wish it so, too.
I also appreciate all your comments about our genetic propensity for denial and if MORT is just an aftereffect of our species’ natural evolution as a species or an a priori turn that led to the full development of our species as Dr Varki surmises. Am I understanding you (and Rob) correctly?
A thought came to me just yesterday breaking through the morass of tedium relating to our current situation. That is, we here seem to think we didn’t inherit the denial gene because we are able to see the full reality when it comes to human overshoot. But I reckon all of us were once blissfully ignorant of our overshoot predicament just as the other 99.9% of our species until something happened, however and whatever, that flipped the switch and caused our brains to view the same picture completely differently. That means none of us were born without the denial gene actively working in tandem with the pre-programming of our culture that makes true free will impossible (as least according to great minds like Sapolsky). We all have the same inherent genetic tendency which causes us to lean towards MPP and groupspeak and tribalism and above all, denial of unpleasant realities, all which enabled and enhanced our survival. That is our default state and having broken free is like an enzyme being activated, or turning on a promoter codon that starts a new genetic material to be read and produced. We are an anomaly, like a cancer to the original organism. The beginnings of an undenial tendency (doubts, feelings of unease, questioning and even changing habits) are usually stamped out earlier on by any number of pre-conditionings which can be likened to the system’s immune response to rogue cells. For example, Kira’s friend who seemed overshoot aware but then re-converted once married with kids and a mortgage. It’s just easier to not think of doom when you have bills to pay and children to finish raising. Once the house is paid off and children are grown, or if we are fortunate enough to have the resources to prepare another way of life, then it becomes more possible to entertain another view. I’m not saying that is how it is for all of those who are reality aware, but it is a usual prerequisite that the shackles of modern society are thrown off one way or another.
I know I’m not saying anything new here at all, just musing out loud at how impossibly intricately interwoven our existence is, and whether or not we are more part of a whole than individuals pursuing our own experience. If the whole history of humanity can be seen in light of a total organism with us as generations of cells replacing one after another, our spectacular growth and peaking in dominance is part of that life trajectory. Now we are reaching our allotted span (no matter it is self induced) and our senescence and all the decrepitude that may entail is well underway. Naturally then the human species will diminish and may even extinguish. But on the main, the earth will rebalance itself after a distinct period of time, and life will continue to life. It will not be for us to determine or judge whether or not one life form deserves longevity over another, just as the universe has no preference. I guess that’s a very Gaia like view for one who chooses Gaia for her avatar!
I hope everyone is finding their own balance through these shattering days of knowing we have turned another page of our story that seems determined to reach some climatic ending. I for one do not believe for an instant that this latest chess board move was anything but a predetermined gamble to draw even more defined geopolitical lines. Every country and their cultures and religions are under existential threat now with total collapse and climate emergency certain, and for some it will be seen as a do or die situation to make their first and/or final move. We can still be kind, generous and of service with our thoughts, words, and actions through the end, and in this I absolutely believe we have free will.
Go well and make that peace, beauty and joy.
Namaste.
Hi Gaia, it will be good to have your family close by when long distance travel soon becomes more difficult. Good luck with with your construction project.
Very sad what’s going on in the middle east. I expect a lot of suffering as Israeli revenge is usually an order of magnitude higher than the original offense.
Thanks for explaining the Law of One. I carefully read your words but they kind of washed over me without being absorbed. I guess that’s why I’m an atheist.
I assume the Law of One has a founding book as most religions do. Do you know who wrote it and what the story is on that person? I’m wondering if s/he is a L. Ron Hubbard desciple?
Also, can you confirm the Law of One believes in some form of life after death? If we ever find a religion that doesn’t it might be evidence that MORT is wrong.
Hello there Rob,
A heartfelt thank you for your encouragement for my current endeavour–it seems less likely with every passing hour that it will eventuate but I still have to try as if it may. That’s the power of suppressing my un-denial trait for you!
I just posted a usual Gaia length ramble in response to Mike, but really with thoughts for everyone to comment on in relation to our on-going conversation about denial and MORT. I see how MORT is our default state but no-one will recognise it, just as fish cannot really know what water is because there’s nothing else it has any experience of except water. Only a very few and given certain circumstances will ever be able to have the opportunity to adopt another way of seeing, no matter how educated or otherwise rational they may be. Thus your ever growing list of polymaths in denial, they are examples of our species with more CPU capacity but otherwise standard inclusions.
I can understand why my description of the Law of One may have stymied you; thank you for trying to digest what I tried to convey. It shows your open mind and also highlights the wide range of perceptions as human beings. For me, I can intuitively grasp the general tenets of this particular world and cosmic view but as with other religions, the details of who and where and what that seem to define one belief from another are not important to me. If there be any truth for any of us, it has to be something that resonates with our personal view. The core message that I take away from the Law of One is we are all connected and thus it follows we are to treat one another as such. Basically, this is the message I glean from all major world religions and all the other trappings that come with them do not add any more relevance to it. Nor does the promise of everlasting life change for me the rightness, beauty and truth of being kind and compassionate as we can in the life that we know and live now. I first realised this as a teenager and that was when my previous core beliefs of Christianity became stories to me, and I became open to all religions whilst not professing to follow any. I can sum up Christianity in three words that ring more true to me than all the theology output for the past several millennia–Love one another.
But to answer your questions, the backstory on the Law of One is quite intriguing. The Ra entity (originally from the planet we know as Venus) that supposedly channelled this information did so in a format of questions and answers sessions through a young woman named Carla Rueckert (deceased) between 1981-1984 and this was collated into a series of 5 volumes called The Ra Material. I do not think there is any connection with Scientology. At the core, Law of One purports that beings transition through different densities or levels, so that implies reincarnation. At some point, physical beings become a collective consciousness as they progress further into realisation of Oneness. So definitely a belief that there is a continuation of consciousness, if not physical being, after death.
If you are interested in anything more, I can direct you to the original material and there are several dedicated websites.
I am thinking that a religious experience for you is walking in the forest and feeling the awe of being alive. When will you have the chance to worship so devoutly in this way again? I hope you can get in another camping trip before it turns too cold. By now the leaves around you should be at peak colour, oh how the trees know to go out in a blaze of glory, but at the same time also gently letting go. We can honour and learn from our arboreal friends through all the seasons of our lives.
Namaste.
Best of luck in your project. This sounds like the right thing to do now before it is not possible any more (at least at this scale).
Thank you Charles for your well wishes. I am trying to keep an open mind and heart to all possibilities of good things that may come from our family’s united intentions to support and care for one another. This is a gift we can still choose to give and receive, no matter what the final material outcome. I am in humble awe of everyone’s courage, especially the young, to keep boldly on their path even though the way forward is so uncertain, and it is with comfort that I trust a child shall lead us. I know you will be well and grateful in all things because of your family’s great love for one another. Sending you and your family all the best, with special admiration for Rachel.
I am envisioning a bountiful autumn harvest for you in fruits of the trees and of the spirit.
Namaste.
In a sense, all life is connected but remember that all life-forms have to eat other life-forms (or deceased life-forms, or the waste of life-forms) to survive. We’re definitely connected in that way but, given that all life-foms ultimately evolved from a common ancestor, I place no particular importance on my species. Any theory of some other plane of existence must apply equally to all other life-forms, which is where most religions fall down, seeing humans as somehow special.
Nice simple summary of the known possible causes of the recent temperature spike.
h/t Panopticon
https://inews.co.uk/opinion/climate-expert-planet-doomed-2666469
It’s perhaps another example of MORT?
Since, if 1.5°C is understood to be a danger threshold, why agree to ignore that and aim, instead, to limit warming to well below 2°C?
Yes. And then agree to CO2 reductions that you have zero chance of achieving. It’s denial top to bottom.
Mike, just wanted to let you know I found a reasonably priced source of plain unsweetened Kefir at Costco ($3 per liter).
The last few days I’ve been back to my normal routine of walking 6 km with almost no pain. I’m not 100% but much better.
Lots of moving parts. In addition to drinking Kefir every day for a couple weeks I also started taking Glucosamine Sulfate about a month ago and have avoided physical activity that probably caused the injury in the first place. So not sure if Kefir gets the credit but I am going to continue drinking some every day.
Thanks for the tip.
That’s great. $3 per litre sounds good. After currency exchange rates, that’s close to the price I make it for myself. I’ve tried tablets containing glucosamine but haven’t had any benefit from them. A cure/treatment for arthritic hands is the one diet change I’m missing. Fortunately, it’s not too bad and doesn’t stop me from doing anything, though some things are a bit more painful than I’d like!
Nate Hagens again explains how complex our overshoot predicament is.
My response: It’s not complex. Population reduction is the only good path and genetic reality denial blocks it.
But until overshoot is recognised, no population reduction strategies will even surface.
That’s why I said the only good path is blocked by genetic reality denial.
I think overshoot aware people can be placed into 2 groups:
The first group, which I believe you belong to, thinks nothing can be done to make the future less bad.
The second group, which Nate Hagens belongs to, believes we can and should do something to make the future less bad. My point is directed at the second group. They are wasting their time unless they focus on population reduction and trying to find a way to override MORT. I’m not saying it’s possible, I’m just saying it’s the only thing that might help.
Right. I’d expand on the first group. Though I could think of ways to ease into a painful future and make it less bad, I can’t see a way that can happen, as humans are a species.
I respect your view that there is nothing that can be done because we are an animal governed by evolved behaviors. You might be right. I’d appreciate it if you didn’t tell me I was wrong every time I suggest to people who think that something can be done that MORT is the key. You agreed that MORT explains why intelligence does not override MPP. Can MORT be overridden? I’d say probably not, but it’s worth trying because there is no alternative. After all, we stopped burning witches when we understood epilepsy was a health disorder and not a demonic possession.
Yeah, it would be worth trying; what have we got to lose?
By the way, I didn’t so much agree that MORT provides that explanation as state that MORT itself can be explained by our being a species.
[…] [1] See this recent article for a summary of the Maximum Power Principle that is behind this assertion. Also see this one by Erik Michaels. […]
How do they not see the silver lining of population decline? Kurzgesagt is run by intelligent people, but yet they remain in denial about this critical issue.
I see it a lot. It’s troubling. More polymaths in denial I guess.
el gato malo weighs in today on the pharma fraud…
https://boriquagato.substack.com/p/did-the-pfizer-vaccine-even-really
Dr. John Campbell studied the mRNA clinical trials, decided to be vaccinated, and became a leading advocate for mRNA.
About a year ago he became aware of much evidence that our leaders are lying about the safety and effectiveness of mRNA, publicly admitted he was wrong, and has since fought against covid policies.
Yesterday he learned that he was bait & switched into injecting an mRNA substance that was different than what was used in the clinical studies.
I’ll go one step further with this hypothesis. Some extremely powerful individuals (most probably unknown to the public) would like humanity to go on at all cost. They figured out the only way to do that would be to greatly reduce its numbers.
Why do I say that? Because I thought that’s probably the project I had started, if I had lots of power, around 2012, when confronted with information about NTHE. At that time, I even thought, it could be done with some virus (which I now believe is naïve: humans are kind of tough).
Remember law one of robotics in Isaac Asimov (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Laws_of_Robotics)?
[code lang=text]
A robot may not harm a human being.
[/code]
Well, there was some book were it was extended with law 0:
[code lang=text]
A robot may not harm humanity, or, by inaction, allow humanity to come to harm.
[/code]
So if you have a lots of power, see what’s coming and do nothing, you allow humanity to come to harm.
I would propose then that it’s possible to entertain such ideas without feeling like a villain. It just seems like a rational, necessary sacrifice for the survival of the species. Anybody who identifies with humanity as a whole rather than individuals and has machine-like hyper-rationality could decide this.
(To reassure you, I do not entertain these ideas any more, primarily because I now see the duality humanity/rest of life as a very limited way of framing reality)
Now, there are elements which do not totally fit my hypothesis:
– why not stop oil flowing? (maybe the powerful individuals want to keep their powers and industrial civilisation)
– why not unleash a more powerful virus? (maybe it didn’t work as planned, or maybe for the same reason as the previous question it has to be done gradually)
– why not simply ration the economy? (maybe because it would meet a lot of opposition so it can’t be done openly)
– is it really possible that some individuals would possess such powers without being known? Isn’t it paranoid to think that?
And how do we test the hypothesis?
I will be honest, I believe Bret Weinstein’s and my hypotheses are both extremely unlikely. These ideas are dangerous too. They can be exploited to angry public sentiment, start the next movement and decapitate some people (this maybe is unavoidable at this point, though).
I am more of Nate’s sentiment, that the world is a complex place, there are several powerful entities with different agendas. Somehow, history is made by the balance of powers. It’s an emerging organic collective behaviour. Mistakes (lot’s of them) were made, greed and lust for power are real forces. Sometimes, the interests of several entities match.
At least, there is material for a nice sci-fi book 🙂
You make a very interesting thought experiment.
I go back and forth on my beliefs. Some days I agree with Nate Hagens that no one is driving the bus and we are simply observing the super-organism at work. Other days I believe that money explains everything as Jikkyleaks says: “pharma money controls government and government money funds pharma.” Other days what I see is so evil that it can’t be explained by aggressive CEO’s maximizing growth (who I have worked with in the past so have some insight) and that there must be some other agenda in play by a few powerful people.
I hope to figure it out before I die.
Thank you. I hesitated before sharing, because it’s a lot of speculation, not many facts.
Maybe, it’s just how reaching the limits to growth feels. It seems like a covert war, but it is simply the effect of the ironclad invisible hand of our new collective circumstances. A limited space filled with arrogant humans and depleting resources. Nobody is ready to voluntarily abandon its turf, whatever the size. So there is some friction.
Anyway, if you ever find your answer, please let us know!
As for me, I believe I lack the intellectual tools to reason soundly at this scale. Maybe we should first precisely state what we want to know. And then we could go and interrogate a history scholar with integrity, or an investigative journalist… But maybe we would just learn more about the process of writing history and story-telling rather than truth. Ah ah ah 🙂
LOL. You’re right. Truth is elusive.
I still want to figure it out why the health care systems in rich democratic countries were used to harm rather than protect people and why most citizens don’t care.
I agree with your point about limits to growth creating stresses. People are going crazy or getting angry everywhere. I feel it myself.
This morning the news was a major escalation of violence between the Palestinians and Israelis. I’ve been there several times. Few talk about it but the core issue is there is not enough land and water for the number of people that want to live there. Perhaps a preview of what we can expect at home with scarcity and degrowth.
https://www.moonofalabama.org/2023/10/palestine-strikes-back.html
Dr. Robert Malone, the inventor of mRNA who should have received the Nobel prize but did not because he opposes how the technology was used for covid, today explains why the mRNA invention that did receive the Nobel prize should not have been approved for use in billions of people.
https://rwmalonemd.substack.com/p/pseudouridine-what-is-it-and-why
There’s no problem if you hide the data.
There is something almost spooky about covid. It’s layer upon layer upon layer of things that do not make sense.
Skip ahead to 21:30 for an analysis by Dr. Bret Weinstein of the recent Nobel prize awarded for the covid mRNA substance.
The award relates to an invention that increases the longevity of mRNA in the body before it is broken down. When the inventor is asked about long term safety he replies that it is safe because mRNA is transient, meaning it does not last long in the body.
Also discussed are the possible implications of the recent discovery of DNA contamination in a large sample of saved mRNA vials. This might explain the turbo cancers that have been observed by a pathologist who may now lose his license for speaking up.
The small scale manufacturing method used for the clinical trials did not have DNA contamination. When they geared up after approval they changed the manufacturing method which introduced DNA contamination. In other words, no testing was done on the substance that was injected into billions of people.
Much more is revealed in this discussion about how what we are being told does not make sense.
Today’s interview of Luke Gromen by Nate Hagens is the best discussion of the relationships between energy, monetary systems, the economy, and world affairs that I’ve ever heard.
Too much to absorb in one go. I will be listening to this several times over the coming month.
A couple initial observations.
Very interesting comment with a possible link to the covid mystery at 59:00. Gromen thinks one of the energy productivity miracles that could save us is:
Lots of awareness and discussion about peak cheap oil but very little discussion about the probability and implications of much less energy due to financial collapse. Is this an example of Gromen’s denial circuit at work in that it’s ok to discuss inflation and higher prices but not ok to discuss scarcity?
I agree with the thing that worries Gromen the most:
Examples for me include putting weapons on the border of Russia, preventing Ukraine from negotiating a peace with Russia, and blowing up Nordstream.
Only a Supervillain could stop climate change.
https://indi.ca/only-a-supervillain-could-stop-climate-change/
Very nice find! I like Indrajit Samarajiva’s style of writing very much. Just scratched the surface but he’s prolific (almost an essay a day) and seems quite aware, bright, and witty. Have added him to my info feed.
Or perhaps leaders in 1972 wise enough to ban debt backed fractional reserve monetary systems.
He’s right that it’s too late today. Now I think it’s all about reducing suffering, avoiding nuclear war, and trying to keep a few of our most valuable accomplishments.
Here’s another recent essay by Samarajiva on Ukraine.
https://indi.ca/nato-has-failed-in-ukraine/
Amen brother.
And another, this time discussing and expanding on a recent essay by Dr. Tom Murphy.
https://indi.ca/the-long-road-to-ruin/
Samarajiva today.
https://indi.ca/ukraine-has-actually-lost-ground-in-its-counter-offensive/
Debt backed fractional reserve monetary systems are essentially legalized Ponzi Schemes. Ponzi schemes are inherently unsustainable because they depend on perpetual exponential growth to remain solvent.
I agree. My point was there are effective leverage points that could be applied to reduce overshoot, if we actually wanted to do something about it, which of course we don’t.
We can’t grow our way out of our debt predicament. Nate Hagens predicts that the U.S. economy will shrink by 30%. https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/stagflationary-economic-financial-and-debt-crisis-by-nouriel-roubini-2022-12
Nate Hagens appears to have predicted a 30% GDP drop May 30 2022 on a Planet: Critical YouTube video
The link above does not mention Nate or 30%.
Arizona governor moves to end farming deal with Saudi company.
Reminds me of an ex-dairy farm I worked on a few years ago. Back in the 70’s it was the biggest dairy farm in British Columbia despite growing very little hay. Diesel was cheap enough that they could truck in hay from Oregon and still make a profit. That model of course does not work today.
The US will need to reinstate the draft to fight Russia and China, but there’s a problem:
This interesting read by Simplicius the Thinker lists many other things that the US must do to get ready for a real fight. Odd that the west is pushing so hard to escalate when they are not ready. You really get the sense that our leaders are incompetent.
https://simplicius76.substack.com/p/army-war-college-report-predicts
bootcamp can fix that 😛
What about the thousands of migrants at the southern border trying to get into the U.S.? What a perfect demographic to recruit. A problem in search of a solution. Offer them U.S. citizenship in return for military service. Lots of eager warm bodies to feed into the grist-mill.
The most important talk you will ever hear, Warning it is very info dense so you might need to take notes, look things up, listen to it many times, but this is the only thing left that matters;
Thank you, I saw this when it was released. I left the following comment on YouTube:
As usual, not one person spoke up and said, you’re right.
Maybe he doesn’t mention it because there is no acceptable way to achieve it and because population reduction alone doesn’t fix the problem, even though it’s a prerequisite.
sigh
He is looking for an answer just so that he can present it because he believes he is the smartest man in the room. It is still going to take him years to understand the meaning of the word predicament. Personally I think that Daniel takes mental masturbation to a new level.
I agree!
I finally remember who he reminds me of, this absolute snake from the self-help world:
so true!
I’m going to sound kinda bitchy here, but I just don’t like this guy. He doesn’t say anything very useful or profound.
There’s just something off about him. Lots of talky talky, no idea how he gets his money money. He seems very impressed with himself, like he’s enjoying posing as a thought leader.
Maybe I’m just too far down the doomer rabbit hole to enjoy these 101 people anymore…..
You’re right. I guess I tend to ignore “off” characteristics because I assume everyone that’s overshoot aware is a little crazy.
David Martin is a strange bird and difficult to figure out. He’s definitely smart, and as I’ve commented in the past, has a core expertise in intellectual property patents which makes him skilled at tracing the technology history of covid.
https://un-denial.com/2021/07/20/dr-david-martin-covid-is-a-manufactured-illusion
But is he legit, or crazy, or both?
In a 90 minute interview a few days ago he presents evidence that the covid virus and mRNA resulted from bioweapons research and that the pandemic was deliberately initiated.
https://rumble.com/v3lflua-episode-8-silenced-with-tommy-robinson-dr-david-martin.html
Martin makes a very good point that those of us who oppose the official covid story made a strategic error by referring to mRNA as a vaccine. This has polarized society because most of us grew up trusting traditional vaccines. We could have united more people in opposition to mRNA by calling it what it is, a novel untested gene therapy technology.
So far so good. Then Martin goes a step further and claims that covid is a plan by the elites to reduce the population.
I’ve speculated on this idea in the past because every covid decision made has been the opposite of what one would do if public health was the top priority. Especially injecting mRNA into children starting at 6 months of age when the child and society receive zero benefit, and the child is exposed to a lifetime of serious health risks.
https://un-denial.com/2022/06/29/the-great-reset-an-alternate-theory/
I concluded then that while the core of people around Fauci are no doubt evil profit seekers, most of our leaders are simply brain-dead stupid and there is no population reduction plan in play.
In the interview, Martin discloses that he denies overshoot by claiming:
– The earth can easily support billions more people.
– Climate change is not caused by human activity but rather is caused by fluctuating magnetic fields in the universe that are causing the earth’s iron core to heat up which in turn is warming the oceans. This is easily debunked here: https://skepticalscience.com/underground-temperatures-control-climate.htm
– Martin thinks the elites are using mRNA for population reduction because they hold Malthusian beliefs and are worried their opulent lifestyles will be threatened if the population is not reduced. He says Bill Gates is at the center of this plan.
You can see Martin’s denial circuit doing back flips here. He sees evidence for a population reduction plan, but because he denies overshoot, is forced to assume evil intent.
Is there any possibility that there is a population reduction plan in play, but without the evil intent that Martin assumes?
I know that:
– Gates is well versed on the reality and implications of peak oil. He knows billions will suffer and perish when fossil energy soon depletes.
– Gates invested in fusion research with the goal of finding a solution to peak oil but it has not panned out. He now knows fusion will not save the day.
– Gates wants to do something useful for humanity with his billions before he dies.
I wonder if Gates read Jack Alpert’s plan? Food for thought.
http://www.skil.org/
https://www.youtube.com/@RapidPopDecline/videos
Throughout the entire c19 overture many players rose to the limelight. They all come with their own symphony.
Their thematic orchestrations either spoke to you or they didn’t. Perhaps some had motifs your could relate to or understand, resonate with yet not really connecting too. Martin was one of those guys for me. Something was just off. He may very well be 100% legit but he doesn’t present that way.
The truth is out there somewhere but who cares………………………………? depressing really.
I’d like to figure out what happened and see justice before I die.
Geopolitical mysteries like JFK & 9/11 don’t interest me because of course the elite play power games.
But the fact that pharma (or some other powerful force) could influence the health minister and most of the doctors in my province to ignore data and implement policies that harm and kill people is a mystery worth understanding.
Worse still, they don’t care and they’ve learned nothing, which means this clusterf*ck could repeat.
Dear Rob,
I am under the impression that you are a very nice person who values human life and wellbeing above all.
Maybe our “leaders/owners” share your values, maybe not.
If they do, the road to hell is paved with good intentions. People like Bill Gates may see themselves as saviors. Saviors may be the worse of all.
Maybe they don’t, and it was just business as usual. There is a long thread of scandals in the history of pharma, involving politicians. It was not the first, it won’t be the last.
Maybe the only difference was the scale of the act: we saw the consequence of a hyper centralized empire at work. Everybody dancing in synchronisation.
There are previous examples in history showing some (most?) humans are ready to use others like tools: world war I was a trauma for a whole generation.
One thing seems for sure to me: at the start of the “pandemic” there was a need for some excuse to issue more debt.
Another thing is for sure to me: if we have started travelling down the slope of collapse, this must manifest in some concrete events. There are probably going to be more insane moments. After all, it seems to me covid didn’t have such a huge immediate impact on world population (maybe more on the longer term dynamic though?).
(It’s nice I don’t have to apologize for being the bearer of bad news: un-denial is really a space of freedom 🙂
Thanks Charles.
As you say there have been many pharma frauds that have fooled doctors in the past. Statins continue to fool doctors today. Covid was different. It was not just about an unsafe drug. It was everything from blocking safe and effective early treatments, to not advising people on how to protect themselves, to harming children for no reason. One can forgive the high emotions of the early days but now that things have calmed down they still have not admitted mistakes or adjusted policies in the light of new evidence. Hell, they haven’t even taken steps to prevent more gain of function research and another lab leak.
It seems to me given the continued emergence of new variants and no lessons learned we are on a path to repeating our mistakes.
I agree we can expect many more insane moments as things collapse. I expected the once respected Canadian health care system to become rationed and less available with time, but I did not expect it to deliberately harm people.
Love Ray McGovern.
The power of the people behind covid is breathtaking.
I hope the winners get regular boosters.
https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/medicine/2023/press-release/
And they gave the prize to the wrong person.
[…] By Preston Howard: The Maximum Power Principle and Why It Underscores the Certainty of Human Extinct… […]
“You can’t taper a ponzi economy.” – Max Keiser
Every time I look at interest rates I have to re-think the whole thing. It’s not intuitive.
Listening to the news you would be led to believe that 10 year interest rates are going up because the Fed is fighting inflation by raising short term interest rates. That’s wrong.
10 year interest rates are going up because the businesses that loan money are worried about inflation and want to make a profit when they they are repaid with inflated money.
The reason inflation is high is because central banks printed a gazillion dollars using covid as an excuse to keep the banking system from collapsing because we’ve hit overshoot limits to growth.
What about this? Interest rates are ‘energy return on investment predications’ pulled back and forward through time.
LOL, not sure I understand but it sounds good.
I wrote this spin a while ago. Interest in this context means the real interest rate with inflation netted out.
Very good! I like it
I missed this video by John Titus when he released it 2 years ago. It’s a must watch explanation of why inflation is high today. Titus shows how the pandemic was used as cover for a titanic shift in monetary policy. For the first time central banks pushed their magic money into the retail channels. This was a documented plan proposed by Blackrock to the Fed just a few months before covid began.
Titus thinks this was a plan by the elite to enrich themselves and to increase their power via digital currencies. While no doubt partially true, he seems to be overshoot blind and thus does not understand that growth is over and we do need fundamental changes to the system, although if we had intelligent ethical leaders this should have been done in manner that did not double the wealth of billionaires.
Skip ahead to 48:20 for the summary if you’re short of time but the whole thing is a superb and is an easy to understand primer on how the monetary system works.
I’ve listed in the past dozens of things our leaders got wrong on covid. In fact, I make the claim that they got 100% of things wrong which can’t be explained with stupidity because they would have done better deciding with a coin toss.
This latest issue on DNA contamination has been bubbling for a while and I haven’t paid too close attention because I wanted time for the wheat to sift from the chaff.
Today’s detailed essay by Dr. Ah Kahn Syed seems to be a good introduction to yet another thing our “leaders” screwed up on.
https://arkmedic.substack.com/p/5-ways-to-skin-a-genetically-modified
Kurt Cobb with a different way to think about renewable energy.
http://resourceinsights.blogspot.com/2023/10/the-clean-energy-economy-turns-out-to.html
Dr. John Campbell is lost for words to explain why both government and opposition members are unwilling to debate excess death data despite compelling evidence that we have a big problem.
He obviously doesn’t know about MORT.
This video of representatives standing up and walking out rather than listening to and discussing the evidence is possibly the best example of our genetic tendency to deny unpleasant realties that I’ve seen. To admit that you were duped into harming yourself and your own children, plus all the people you were elected to represent, is too painful to accept. So they deny reality.
I also saw it in family and friends who took strong positions without evidence and then held those positions as evidence emerged that they were wrong.
MORT is very powerful.
Another debate on excess deaths has been granted for October 20 in the UK. Lets watch to see if they behave any different then.
Flooding in NYC.
That can’t be right. I thought NYC’s problem was too many illegal immigrants.
This is Superstorm Sandy all over again. NYC is a sea of concrete and asphalt, nowhere for the water to go (except into the subway stations). There are neighborhoods on Staten Island that were permanently abandoned and allowed to return to nature after Sandy. More of NYC will have to be allowed to return to the wild going forward…
Speaking of denial, no diesel, no problem.
The Monarch MK-V is an electric autonomous tractor that will make farming sustainable and profitable.
John Titus only creates a few videos a year but usually has something interesting to say.
I’d rate today’s video a must watch.
Titus explains that the Fed plans to deal with exploding unrepayable debt and rising interest rates by creating a lot more inflation, and that this plan will end in disaster.
I like that Titus compares leaders of today with those 75 years ago and concludes, as have I, that the former are much stupider than the latter.
Note what a lucky coincidence covid was for solving a financial crisis that had built up in the few months preceding the release of the engineered Wuhan virus.
I don’t think Titus is overshoot aware so we need to extrapolate his analysis to obtain a full understanding of what’s going on and why.
The latest from Dr. Geert Vanden Bossche who is another expert voice with integrity that is ignored. Note that our “leaders” do not engage with Bossche in a scientific debate to point out where he is wrong, rather they simply deny what he is saying.
For those unfamiliar with Bossche, his track record on predictions is pretty good, although as with peak oil predictors, he was early:
1) Bossche predicted that mass vaccinating in the middle of a pandemic with a leaky vaccine would create variants. – True
2) Bossche predicted that variants would evolve to become more contagious for vaccinated people. – True
3) Bossche predicted that variants would then evolve to become more virulent for vaccinated people. – Waiting for validation
https://voiceforscienceandsolidarity.substack.com/p/how-many-more-times-will-i-have-to
Dr. Tim Morgan today with a different but excellent spin on MPP and denial, although I doubt he knows that’s what he’s talking about.
https://surplusenergyeconomics.wordpress.com/2023/09/30/262-the-elixir-of-alternative/
Friend Panopticon is back from a break with doozy of a climate news roundup.
https://climateandeconomy.com/2023/09/30/30th-september-2023-todays-round-up-of-climate-news/
Today’s essay by Doug Noland on the history of excess debt and bailouts that created the current global pressures building for a deflationary event is very good.
http://creditbubblebulletin.blogspot.com/2023/09/weekly-commentary-remembering-ltcm.html
Dear Rob,
Thank you for the daily feed of hand-picked news.
It seems to me they all point in the same direction: an acceleration of the destructive forces to current arrangements.
At this point, any resistance seems futile, however a large portion of society does not seem to be ready for a managed retreat, yet. So I guess the general strategy is to maintain the illusion of normalcy, close our eyes, brace for impact and wait for what’s coming next…
As individuals, it seems more rewarding to either focus on necessities, the small, local and immediate and/or practice full acceptance.
Denial is also a fear-coping mechanism, isn’t it? It kicks in when we both know what’s coming, don’t know how to do anything meaningful about it (in our frame of understanding and cling to the frame).
Once we are all individually slapped by reality, we will finally consider a change.
I liked this article from the honest sorcerer:
https://thehonestsorcerer.substack.com/p/a-grandiose-experiment.
Note that if reality is somehow totally deterministic, if there is absolutely no free-will, then prophets of doom, I mean themists 😉 who think they can change the behaviour of the group are in denial too. Even though, they may still be useful (in that some have to play the role of the coal mine canaries)
Thanks Charles. That’s an excellent essay by B and ties in nicely with Preston’s discussion of the MPP.
It seems B is a disciple of Nate Hagens, and not a disciple of Dr. Varki. 🙂
I admit that my efforts to increase awareness of MORT so that we might avoid the worst are yet another example of denial as I have explained in the past:
There’s dark stuff going on behind the scenes. They are quietly working on a global agreement to do more of what they just did with covid. No lessons were learned.
I quit half way through. I can’t take it. The power of evil pharma makes me crazy.
Thank you to AJ for bringing to my attention this must watch 17 minute presentation by Dr. Peter McCullough to the European Parliament on Sep 13, 2023.
Dr. McCullough is an expert with impeccable integrity and is a genuine hero who worked hard and sacrificed his career to save lives and to expose the many covid crimes committed by our “leaders”.
I have no doubt that the people at the center of the pharma cabal are evil, but it’s not probable that the majority of parliamentarians are also evil. The evidence presented here by Dr. McCullough is so compelling that if Europe does not soon ban the use of all mRNA poisons we should assume this is another example of our genetic tendency to deny unpleasant realities. The fact that trusted official experts deliberately harmed the parliamentarians, their children, and billions of others, and continue to do so, is just too unpleasant to believe. So they’ll probably deny it.
https://rumble.com/v3hwcgm-dr.-mcculloughs-speech-at-the-european-parliament.html
We seem to be close to the end of an empire. Curious minds want to know if it will end with a bang or a whimper.
In addition to MPP being hard wired into all species genes, because otherwise they would be outcompeted over time and then go extinct, there is another concept explored by Odum that also plays a part in the unfolding predicament.
Emergy analysis tries to calculate not just how much energy is utilized in a process, but also how much energy is “embedded” in the components of a transformation process. When we try to calculate the EROEI of various resources or extraction efforts, drawing a boundary around the system to accurately determine the EROEI is critical to make correct decisions. Most analysis, even life cycle analysis is incorrectly done, often intentionally, so we get bad decisions and poor application of what nonrenewable resources still remain.
Consistent and agreed emergy calculating is still a work in progress ( it’s complicated!), so not a big player in the ongoing discussions.
I don’t think we’ll see a PV powered production facility that cranks out sufficient panels to replace themselves AND power the facility, AND extract more panel materials (no recycling is 100%) AND power the rest of an economy of any size. Emergy analysis would make this more clear. I think of PV as just a short term extension of fossil power, kind of a set of training wheels to make the decline to a completely bioenergy based existence more gradual.
A counter or refinement to the MPP theory is that there are biomes where cooperation and efficiency do get established, such as the tree/fungus/microbe based system in old growth forests. This is described in Suzanne Simard’s “In Search of the Mother Tree”.
Unless we tip the whole system into a death spiral, some species will pass the bottleneck, as we will still be getting sun energy input to the system. As long as photosynthesis is not snuffed out, complex life will continue. I kind of hope humans are part of the ride, but if not, so it goes.
Thanks for the lesson on emergy. Very interesting.
I get annoyed by the endless debates about the viability of RE which use the complexity of the calculations to obscure reality and to support whatever agenda is being pushed.
I settled the issue in my mind with one simple observation. If it was possible to run modern civilization on RE then we should be able to point to one example, of any size, anywhere in the world, that does it. There is no example, therefore it’s not possible.
Countless small “modern” communities operate exclusively with diesel, gasoline, and propane. Yet we can’t point to a single one that does it exclusively with RE. That’s conclusive evidence without even having to draw on your point about making PV with PV.
I also like Gail Tverberg’s argument that any viable energy source will be able to profitably grow its own use without a subsidy from a different energy source.
Alberta’s Premier is fighting the Feds to decarbonize their grid by 2035. They have spent huge amounts on wind turbines and solar panels but the variability means they have to back up with gas. Alberta says 100% RE means a grid with intermittent power and rolling blackouts. I’m not far right like Danielle Smith but in this case she is right.
When the topic comes up I tell people that if renewables were “better” they would just take over the way that fossil carbon did as an energy source.
Adam
Sadly, I don’t see humanity doing anything on a large scale to soften the inevitable landing. Jimmy Carter asked people to wear a sweater rather than turning up the heat. If people are fighting tooth and nail against cosmetic changes to their lifestyles to mitigate overshoot, what are the chances they will vote for the revolutionary change actually needed to address overshoot.
Preston, I would be interested in hearing about your experience in an intentional community, if you’re willing to share.
The little I’ve read suggests that most fail. I’m curious if your community needed some form of unifying spirituality to succeed.
Rob, first let me thank you for your efforts to provide reasonable stability in the current troubled times. I cannot speak about other intentional communities, but the one in which I reside has about 100 homes and is much more like a “standard” residential subdivision, but with larger lot sizes (1 acre or .4 hectare min.)
As an original member in this community (now 50 years old), I helped others build their houses, much as was done in early New England or Midwestern US communities. Those actions build community unlike “normal” subdivisions where most folk know few except perhaps their next-door neighbors, folk who may stay only a year or two.
For those who live in more standard apartments, condos, or residential homes, there are ways every person can build community. For example, talk to them (even if you just knock on their door and introduce yourself). Get email addresses for the group (as appropriate) and share info. Share when someone notices something suspicious. Pass the word when someone needs a ride to work next week while the car is in the shop. What goes around comes around.
For example, when a hurricane damaged a neighbor’s house (trees fell), they were offered use (with fair rent) of a vacant cabin someone had. Also, others set up a meal service providing dinner to the affected couple while they made repairs. Again, actions that reinforce community.
Not everyone in our community shares the same views on important issues (like me, for instance, with a very unpopular view about Humanity’s future). I sometimes get into strongly worded discussions with others in my community, but — at a deeper level — we all agree, notwithstanding our disagreement, we are “in community” to the best of our ability (whatever that means in the then-current context). There is a large supply of person-to-person energy if only we can find a good way to tap into it. My neighbors and I — with plenty of bumps here and there — have found strength in community, strengthened by our diversity.
Thanks Preston. Sounds like you live in a very nice community. I had an incorrect mental image of a communal kitchen and wondered what the secret to making that work was.
P.S. I added your name to your comment so people will know it is you.
Thanks for putting this up, Rob. It again shows that humans are a species and act like any other species. Call it MPP or MORT but the real cause of our predicament (and that of all species) is the origin of life on this planet. MPP is how life got going and diversified over the whole planet. There is no “solution”, regardless of what we would like. Any small apparent victory is drowned out by the MPP.
Mike, I do not remember your views on MORT. If you think MORT is wrong, what mechanism do you think is in play to ensure MPP trumps our uniquely powerful intelligence?
MORT seems real but is a consequence of life, as is MPP. What trumps our powerful intelligence is being a species. Rex Wyler, in that recent Nate Hagens round table, made this plain, just as Preston Howard has in this post. Denial must happen to continue the MPP and the MPP must continue for all species.
Good, I think we agree. This means no life in the universe can be super smart unless it denies unpleasant realities. In addition, all intelligent aliens will believe in life after death.
I do not believe Nate Hagens and Rex Wyler acknowledge that genetic denial is the mechanism that prevents intelligence from overriding MPP. They are missing a key piece of the puzzle required to understand what is going on.
I would put this differently
” no life in the universe can be super smart unless it denies unpleasant realities. ”
I would say
No life in the universe can be super smart if it doesn’t have the capacity to doubt its understanding of the universe.
I do not understand. Your idea seems too complicated for evolution. What selection pressure would cause a brain to doubt its understanding of the universe and how might a mutation to an existing brain cause that behavior?
LOL Rob,
How about the frequent experience of being wrong?
” is that a snake in the grass??? Oh thank god it is only a stick!”
Yes, that’s an evolved behavior for good reason. Our fear response is triggered without having full evidence that a threat exists. Fast thinking trumps slow thinking as Daniel Kahneman says.
But that’s the opposite of the behavior we’re trying to explain: Why do we deny overshoot?
There are plenty of imperfect signals that should trigger our fear response but instead we aggressively deny overshoot. Clearly this is a different evolved behavior that requires an explanation.
I really don’t think it is.
You and I and most of the folks here have read and seen evidence that we interpret as a signal that the human population is deep into ecological overshoot and we are expecting some pretty horrible things are coming for us.
Others have read and seen evidence that we are progressing to ever greater levels of power and control, and that good things are coming.
You are wondering why they deny your beliefs about what will happen, and they wonder why you deny their beliefs about will happen.
But at the core are beliefs about the future.
And you consistently think your beliefs are true and others are denying the truth, when in reality they may just doubt that your beliefs are true.
We disagree.
If you approach a super smart polymath that uses slow thinking to conclude overshoot is not a problem, like Pinker, and present conclusive evidence to show overshoot is an imminent threat and we must get our population down to reduce suffering, they will aggressively deny the evidence and what needs to be done.
Denial is a different behavior than each of us interpreting imperfect evidence differently.
Well yes Rob, we do disagree. (why do you deny the Truth? LOL or do you just doubt that i am correct?)
I am willing to bet that Pinker would say something like :
That is not conclusive evidence. You are disregarding this, that and the other thing.
For example: Productive, programable, self replicating wet nanotech takes care of all the issues you have.
And I would then show Pinker the math and the physics which proves he is wrong and he would still deny reality.
Denial is a different animal than us having different beliefs about reality. There is a true reality and most deny it.
We disagree.
LOL
I do believe that there is a true reality, but humans can not know it. ( its bigger, interconnected, operates at scales that are too small and too large for us to incorporate into our very limited understanding.)
All we have is more and less useful ideas about reality.
math and physics can be very useful but they are ideas about reality not reality itself.
So you are wrong, denial of your “truth” is just another example of having a different understanding of reality.
(now that does not mean the people who think we are not in ecological overshoot aren’t horribly wrong, i believe they are wrong. I just don’t believe they are in denial.)
Of course math & physics do not fully explain reality, yet. But the portion of reality that math & physics do explain is a bedrock that can be relied for making decisions about what is true and what is not. A person that disagrees with the conclusions of math & physics does not have a different interpretation of reality, they simply denial reality, as explained by Varki’s MORT.
No Rob
You keep denying this fundamental philosophical truth.
Why are you in denial?
Does your belief that you know the truth satisfy some type of evolved need for ontological / epistemological certainty?
( i will stop beating this horse now, in the hope that you will understand that other people can have good reasons to believe differently than you . other people can be wrong, you can be wrong, i can be wrong but that doesn’t mean that we are in denial.)
Intelligent people can disagree about the nature of dark matter because we don’t understand it yet.
Intelligent people cannot disagree about overshoot (or the laws of thermodynamics) unless they deny reality.
Reality isn’t a matter of belief. It’s a matter of facts (and maths and physics). Those who believe other than what can be shown by the tools all have access to must expect to be wrong. Those who accept what can be shown by the tools we all have access to can only expect to be more or less correct (nothing is 100% but some things are accepted fact that even deniers accept but don’t want to think about).
The appearance of progressing to ever greater levels of power and control is what we would expect as we go up the curve. Then we will wonder what went wrong as we go down the curve post peak.
Expecting infinite growth in a finite world is definitely wrong. There can be no debate, surely?
To Mike “Reality isn’t a matter of belief.”
Well that’s true. But, none of us is really debating over reality, we are debating over interpretations of an aspect of Reality.
Because we are limited in our perception of reality (there is only access to the now through the “gates of perception”, the senses, and then through language and ideas to a bit more, but the further we get from direct experience, the fuzzier it gets).
And that’s highly complex, because we literally drown in Reality, but do not even recognize it (I guess for functional reasons). We like to think reality can be reduced to simple ideas.
The so-called cornucopians believe we have only scratched the surface of what is possible. And they may well be right (even though, I myself believe, not this time). To make an analogy (which may be totally bogus because it is based on so many unknowns), Romans at the apex of their empire wouldn’t have been able to imagine the level of today’s energy expenditure. However, there was, in theory, no laws of physics preventing them exploiting fossil fuel that was already there.
I guess that’s why some people may genuinely believe we will go to mars, harvest fusion, or some other magical technology.
Other people may well argue that we will gently decline over a period of a century rather than collapse. For instance, Ananda Shiva claims small farms feed 70% of the world already. So, I guess for them lack of big machinery is not going to be a problem.
Themists like to have margins of errors and focus on the infeasibility. Given human have a natural optimism bias and tend to deny pretty much everything that goes against their narrative, themists may well be turn out to be right (that’s what I believe at least).
But, ultimately, this is still only a war of ideas.
I also believe some people genuinely do not care at all about suffering and mass dieoff. They may frame all this as the cost of progress of the human species (evolution needs some way to separate the chaff from the wheat).
Some just take things as they come, one after the other. This is still not denial. To them it’s outright crazy to spend so much energy trying to imagine how the future will look like and to influence the outcome. As if we knew what’s best for ourselves…
There is one Reality. But we all live in different layers of it.
We can’t really access Reality. We debate ideas about an aspect of reality.
We easily get convinced our idea of reality is Reality. We tend to confuse the map for the territory.
In the realm of ideas, so much is debatable. There are many people in denial. But there are also genuine believers in their own idea of reality.
But it seems I am just rehashing the words of jim.
(Two more off-topic aside, but still on the relationship between reality and beliefs:
* our experience of reality is influenced by our beliefs. There are things we are unable to see because we strongly believe they are not there,
* being reality ourselves, we are co-creators of reality, so our beliefs end up impacting reality)
I like that.
Indeed, don’t we all evolve in different layers of the same reality?
Reality is so rich, it is in itself an offence to try caging her inside an idea. The thing which is not a thing. Incomprehensibly beautiful.
I might put it another way: No life in the universe can be super smart.
I can’t disagree with your first comment (no super smart life without denial) but perhaps for a different reason. Because life is what it is, MPP, MORT, lack of free will, etc, if it is capable of denying anything, it will, but that won’t stop or support its characteristic species behaviour. The appearance of denial is how humans would interpret what they observe.
Regarding your second comment, I think it’s very possible but not certain. It’s one strategy that may enable denial to be rationalised.
How do I remain sane while knowing this? Denial is sometimes the only way to remain sane.
There’s a touch of crazy in all of us that are aware of our overshoot predicament. It’s tough to swim in a sea of fish that are oblivious to everything that is important. With defective denial genes we probably would not have survived in a hunter-gatherer tribe.
My best advice for coping is to do something proactive to prepare. Even if your actions don’t help in the end, doing something potentially useful for surviving, using your awareness of reality, will probably make you feel better. At least it did for me.
If I may…
There are so many solutions to that question…
Maybe you don’t. Sanity is insane. It is arbitrary, conforming to the norm of the day.
Only to function in society is it necessary to behave as sane, on the inside, everything goes.
You are free to break out.
Aren’t we free to pick whatever reading of the world suits us? Many are valid along at least some cross-section. Many more are pure fantasies.
Aren’t all ideas, as limited abstractions of reality (of That which is indescribable), ultimately just inert fantasies?
Some have trust. They lay down their mental weapons and stop waging the eternal war against the world. They live in peace and joy.
Some are brave. They accept they can never attain truth but simply live it. They are in free fall, in continuous wonder, while starring into the abyss.
Some are daring. They decide they are the ones giving all the meaning to the world. They live passionately.
Some even chose to live in nihilistic hell, or is it paradise?
In truth, at some point, we are just running in circle: haven’t we always known we, like any “thing”, were mortal, but that’s because we define ourselves as an individual separate entity enjoying “free” will. So it’s just tautological.
If you define yourself as the divine, then there is no death. But then, you also have to let go of the temptation of the little subject/object control game. Because there is no separate entity either.
At this point you can just calmly watch everything unfold as if you were the train station manager (who has no impact whatsoever on the timetables even though he acts as if he is the one telling the trains to leave the station).
I apologize for opening up the perspective so much that it may have no value. But school maths problems usually have only one solution. And it’s such a relief to see that life is not reduced to being a math problem. You may break the frame.
I am glad that he mentioned the case of indigenous tribes acting contrary to the MPP. While it is possible in exceptional cases for humans to defy MPP, it can only happen if the prefrontal cortex is able to override the primitive brain.
We are the only species that has the capacity to defy MPP, at least in theory. In theory as oil decline becomes obvious in a few years leading powers could come together and decide to divide remaining resources equitably and try to achieve a soft landing where we are able to draw down the resources over centuries while implementing population policies that Rob suggests.
But as the primitive brain is all too powerful for the rational brain to override, especially in such large numbers as required right now. And with the primitive brain in charge of our decisions we become similar to the reindeer in our capacity to think.
There is NO WAY that American policy planners are going to compromise the “American dream” in any way. They were itching for a nuclear war with the soviets when there wasn’t even a resource conflict just an ideological one. If there is a resource conflict with China for real , American leaders would rather burn the world down than give up the American way of life, which is just endless consumerism.
The actions of our leaders today unfortunately suggest you are correct. I remember when Canada was respected for being a global peacekeeper.
If we assume MORT is false and we do not have a genetic tendency to deny unpleasant realities, can anyone think of a mechanism to explain how a leader can contemplate using nuclear weapons?
I think China’s race to achieve nuclear parity with US and Russia makes it pretty clear that they foresee the use of nukes in future conflicts with the west.
This post also makes another thing painfully obvious that democracies, especially the western ones are doomed to fail. I am not a fan of authoritarian regimes but in this particular scenario it seems to have an edge over democracies.
For instance when we are staring down the inevitable resource crisis and collapse a FEW people at the top of authoritarian regime can overcome denial and implement the right policies (or force it down) which would ensure the survival of their country.
In a democracy MAJORITY of population has to overcome denial and elect leaders who will then have to implement these painful policies.
Good points. Very hard to win an election unless you lie when resource depletion prevents growth and everything in our system breaks. Also very hard to hold on to an elected position in that environment. We’ll probably lose democracies.
The “Benevolent Dictator” is likely the only way to move away from complete ruination to a hard landing.
At this point, we are way beyond even the possibility of a soft landing.
The saga of the last four years, has revealed that 94% of the population are sheep. Worse than that, a large proportion of them will not be happy unless the rest of us are forced to also be sheep (take the experimental dangerous jab or lose your job, etc.).
There are an enormous number of people that deserve to suffer.
The human race – a very pretty firework, short lived and blew a few hands off.
No society can succeed, if that means continuing indefinitely. Countries can’t continue for ever no matter who is leading them (though any one person can only lead for so long, anyway).
No species is capable of overriding MPP. It only appears that way in small bites.
Thank you for this post. I always wanted someone to explain MPP to me. And now my wish has been granted 🙂
In particular, I found point 2 extremely interesting. As I see it a change of effective competition strategy once the world becomes full.
Precisely because of point 2, there is still something I don’t understand. How is it that MPP necessarily ensures that “Homo sapiens will join the long list of extinct flora and fauna previously unable to survive a changing world”? Isn’t there rather the possibility for a shift in strategy which would follow point 2?
Or framing the question differently, which conditions ensure a similar outcome to the ones presented in the three examples (Paramecium and deers)? And which conditions rather ensure an outcome similar to reaching a forest climax (which seems to me consistent with what point 2 describes)?
Well-presented and irrefutable.
Of course, there are a few more dimensions to this predicament, as is the case with any single-bullet theory.
Humans are ultrasocial, bound by fear and hierarchy and innate self-deception to remain committed to the social order that contains the maldistributed benefits of maximum power. Biological scientists tend to ignore sociology, which would demonstrate the hyper-absurd levels of broad social power held by corporations, state-corporations, and their profit- or advantage-seeking allies.
“We” do not drill for oil, and neither do “we” trade in commodities of earth’s resources. “They” do, and they have not been regulated in any appreciable way.
Javier Blas and Jack Farchy’s “World for Sale” is an amazing book to give the political, real evidence of how corrupt and unregulated humanity’s economic and social supersystem has become because of the Maximum Power Principle that Preston Howard has delineated so well.