Lovelock: 'We can't save the planet'

On July 23, 2016, we discontinued our forums. We ask our members to please join us in our new community site, The Hartmann Report. Please note that you will have to register a new account on The Hartmann Report.

16 posts / 0 new

Professor James Lovelock, the scientist who developed Gaia theory, has said it is too late to try and save the planet.

The man who achieved global fame for his theory that the whole earth is a single organism now believes that we can only hope that the earth will take care of itself in the face of completely unpredictable climate change.

Interviewed by Today presenter John Humphrys, videos of which you can see below, he said that while the earth's future was utterly uncertain, mankind was not aware it had "pulled the trigger" on global warming as it built its civilizations.

More

SueN's picture
SueN
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

Comments

I don't think that Lovelock is correct about the planet per se. The earth has experienced many catastrophic events, such as the impact that created the moon, and survived. Climate has also changed throughout the earth's history and the planet has survived, an example is discussed in <a href="http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/03/100331141413.htm">Ice Sheet Melt Identified as Trigger of 'Big Freeze'</a>. The problem is that we are an extinction event, and if we don't reduce our population to a sustainable level and develop sustainable economies, that include removing animals and their habitat from the economy, then we will end up slaughtering most large animal species. Not only is that immoral, but it will result in collapse of the biological systems on which we depend.

The earth will go on, as it has after other extinction events.

jeffbiss's picture
jeffbiss
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

Lovelock inspired me to think about the planet in different ways. Along the lines of what you've said, jeff, I came to think of humans as a cancer in the living body of Gaia. If Gaia cannot expunge this cancer before it kills most of her life processes, the result can be catastrophic. The sad part is, we have the ability to see that we are a cancer. A normal cancer does not. But we find ourselves at war with our own nature, and the selfish, self centered, and narrow visioned aspects in our species have great power.

.ren's picture
.ren
Joined:
Apr. 1, 2010 6:50 am

.ren,

I was listening to the BBC Newshour on my local public radio station and they discussed a Church official who supports the use of contraception, which is great. However, they also had some conservative Kenyan woman who thought that the Church should not change its position on birth control because there's enough for everyone, all the First World need do is share. This is the delusion that operates so widely. These people have a world view that ensures devastation of the earth's biological systems and the slaughter of life for their pleasure. We are indeed a cancer, and not just metaphorically but actually.

I apologize for not having a link to provide the details about the contraception story, but the show was in process and so was not available on-line yet. Maybe I'll be able to post that later, to fill in details about the people involved.

jeffbiss's picture
jeffbiss
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

The Eart will go on, but not as we know it. It would change out of all recognition, as different as a caterpillar to a butterfly, or a hibernating creature to an active one. It has been through many cycles - this is just another one, albeit far more swiftly brought about than a single species has been able to do before. But in meantime it would probably have swung so far out of the narrow band of conditions that we find comfortable, that we will have died out.

SueN's picture
SueN
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

I find it funny in my observations of egotistical narcissistic socio-theistic perceptions that the existence of this planet is somehow dependent on the continuation of human beings.

In my not so humble opinion humans will end their own course of existence long before this planet looses it ability to sustain other life forms.

But that's just me and what do I know?

bonnie
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

The issue of "saving" the planet is goofy unless one accepts that Gaia theory thing, which I don't. The real issue is how we, purportedly moral beings, affect those we don't value. The earth will go on but seals will still be slaughtered by the worst Canada has to offer, their underemployed sociopaths, so that the worst the world has to offer can wear pretty fur, as we daily slaughter cows, pigs, chickens, fish, etc, so that people can satisfy their desire to eat their flesh, as the worst among us commit murder, rape, and twist societies to their ends.

As far as I'm concerned it's really about what we consciously do to others at their expense.

jeffbiss's picture
jeffbiss
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

Don't worry folks, the Club of Rome is on this problem.

When a forest becomes decadent, that is, when it has reached its climax of the growth cycle, the trees start to die. Bark beetles help the decomposition process along and when the forest is nice and dry, a large forest fire comes through and takes out the decadant forest. Meanwhile, other healthier forests still thrive and in the aftermath of the fire, another cycle begins.

Whatever happens because of overpopulation, I don't know if it will be the end of humanity, but there could be signifcant reductions in human population levels. The more people eat non diverse foods, that is, genetically modified (Monsanto) foods, the more monoculture-like humans will become. The more monoculture the less biological diversity and so the greater the risk of catastrophic losses.

The best recipe for survival, become independent and eat organic. Step off the human conveyor belt.

Choco's picture
Choco
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

http://planetquest.jpl.nasa.gov/AlienSafari_508.html  shows how life can exist in extemes. Radiation, heat, methane, - no problem. Humans might be fighting each other over who gets that 7th lifeform, the methane ice worms, probably a protein source [yum].

douglaslee's picture
douglaslee
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

http://planetquest.jpl.nasa.gov/AlienSafari_launch_page.html  might work better than the one above

http://planetquest.jpl.nasa.gov/AlienSafari_launch_page.html  I have no idea why this site comes up not available, maybe, since it is NASA linked, [big govt] and not Genesis creation life thing, it is aso tied to http://www.iau.org/  a union!!

douglaslee's picture
douglaslee
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

Looks like they have changed the format of the links, for example...

http://eis.jpl.nasa.gov/planetquest/AlienSafari_508.html

SueN's picture
SueN
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

I suppose if we insist on growing the population into the indefinate future, we should probably begin raising cockroaches rather than beef as a protein source. We'd get a lot more per acre...and they don't produce methane gas.. They can even be home-grown taking up very little space

Retired Monk

"Ideology is a disease"

polycarp2
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote polycarp2:

I suppose if we insist on growing the population into the indefinate future, we should probably begin raising cockroaches rather than beef as a protein source. We'd get a lot more per acre...and they don't produce methane gas.. They can even be home-grown taking up very little space

Retired Monk

"Ideology is a disease"

I'd go along with that as long as they were free range cockroaches.

Choco's picture
Choco
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
I'd go along with that as long as they were free range cockroaches.
I was in a service business when someone asked me what kind of animal the UHT milk, that I ws offering, came from. I said free range [with a straight face]. UHT, is ulta high temp, milk that can be kept at room temp, but I never thought UHT could be a different species, I thought it was funny, free range cockroaches is funny, Sawdust had a sense of humor, too.

douglaslee's picture
douglaslee
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
The best recipe for survival, become independent and eat organic.

I've said it before... ...if things ever get really, (and I mean really), squirrelly - I will but my trust in a survivalist vs. an economist.

bonnie
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote bonnie:
The best recipe for survival, become independent and eat organic.

I've said it before... ...if things ever get really, (and I mean really), squirrelly - I will but my trust in a survivalist vs. an economist.

Good choice, Bonnie. Many economists insist that resources are infinite. There is plenty for the taking ...forever. They have theories to prove it!

Retired Monk - "Ideology is a disease"

polycarp2
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

America: Meet Your Overlord Rupert Murdoch...

Thom plus logo The main lesson that we've learned so far from the impeachment hearings is that if Richard Nixon had had a billionaire like Rupert Murdoch with a television network like Fox News behind him, he never would've resigned and America would have continued to be presided over by a criminal.
Powered by Pressflow, an open source content management system