[Victoribus Spolia]

@quetzalcoatl,

Where did you get that chart? Very curious.

[quetzalcoatl]

@quetzalcoatl,

Where did you get that chart? Very curious.

This is a reproduction of the MIT 1970 chart that summarized the conclusions of the "Limits of Growth" World3 computer model - It also incorporates updated information from the 2010 study by physicist Graham Turner that concluded the basic outlines were trending in line with the original report.

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2012/ ... till-track

Going by that infographic..

Trend reversals are hard to predict. The study hasn't really held up well at all yet because the trend reversals haven't happened yet.

Overshoot is already past. What trend reversal do you envision that could avert the fallout from overshoot?

However a population is reduced if the carrying capacity of the environment is not then the population will bounce back to fill it. Only an incoming ice age (or nuclear winter) could have the scale to reduce that carrying capacity.

Wrong.

The carrying capacity of the earth will be severely impacted by the additional atmospheric carbon load. This has already happened in previous extinctions. The average rate at which carbon dioxide entered the atmosphere during the end-Permian extinction was slightly below today’s rate of carbon dioxide release into the atmosphere due to fossil fuel emissions. The end-Permian extinction occurred 252.2 million years ago, decimating 90 percent of marine and terrestrial species, from snails and small crustaceans to early forms of lizards and amphibians. “The Great Dying,” as it’s now known, was the most severe mass extinction in Earth’s history.

[Steve_American]

@ Solar Cross,
How can you claim the AGW will not reduced earth's carrying capacity of humans? There 4 way it will surely happen.
1] Sea level rise will flood large areas of prime farm land.
2] Higher temps. will reduce grain crop yields. This effect of temps. on grain crops is a scientific fact.
3] The oceans will produce less fish to catch.
4] Some areas around the equator might become uninhabitable if the wet bulb temp. there goes above 35 deg. C for weeks at a time.
. . .Yes, AC will help some, but only until they breakdown for whatever reason and can't be fixed.
The high temps. will take hundreds or thousands (even many tens of 1000s) to be reduced.
You are willing to gamble that the scientists are corrupt and evil. And none, break the code of silence. None the world over, all of them are evil.
You believe this with little real evidence. Yes, it is easy to find opinion pieces that say what you spout. But, there is hardly any actual evidence beyond testimony by people who might actually be the corrupt ones in this whole situation. If fact, that seems more likely to me because there are fewer of them than real climate scientists and most seem to be Americans (Americans being more motivated by money than most humans).
Who ever heard of the "Worlds Natural Health Association", anyway?

[blackjack21]

Revolution will happen in all Western societies due to the incompatibility of the Welfare State with both globalism and falling birth rates. Mathematically, it cannot be sustained unless poor people accept ever higher taxes, which historically hasn't borne out. As for interstate war, it will be more like the fall of the Roman Empire or the Middle Ages, when the barbarian hordes or the Muslim hordes or the Mongols invaded. The changing demographics will destroy political allegiance as well as social cohesion. States like California will not remain loyal to the United States, just as Spain lost much of its territory to Muslims during the late Dark Ages and early Middle Ages. Eastern Europe will not become integral to the EU, as the EU destroys its own social cohesion with mass immigration. Soy boys and butch gals will not have the stomach to fight cisgendered poorer immigrant populations with higher birth rates and a stronger work ethic.

So it will evolve more like One Degree mentioned. There will be more "autonomous" regions to sustain the illusion of central control when in fact it doesn't exist any more than Iraq or Pakistan are real nation states and not just figments of the imaginations of self-styled elites.

[SolarCross]

Wrong.

The carrying capacity of the earth will be severely impacted by the additional atmospheric carbon load. This has already happened in previous extinctions. The average rate at which carbon dioxide entered the atmosphere during the end-Permian extinction was slightly below today’s rate of carbon dioxide release into the atmosphere due to fossil fuel emissions. The end-Permian extinction occurred 252.2 million years ago, decimating 90 percent of marine and terrestrial species, from snails and small crustaceans to early forms of lizards and amphibians. “The Great Dying,” as it’s now known, was the most severe mass extinction in Earth’s history.

No one knows what caused the Permian extinction but it could not possibly be caused by lots of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere because that is common enough at times without extinction and there is no causal mechanism. The most likely cause of the permian extinction was an asteroid impact throwing up vast quantities of dust into the atmosphere shrouding out the sun so all the plants died starved of light, then with all plants dead the animals starved. I don't how you could get that so wrong except on purpose.

[Victoribus Spolia]

No one knows what caused the Permian extinction but it could not possibly be caused by lots of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere because that is common enough at times without extinction and there is no causal mechanism. The most likely cause of the permian extinction was an asteroid impact throwing up vast quantities of dust into the atmosphere shrouding out the sun so all the plants died starved of light, then with all plants dead the animals starved. I don't how you could get that so wrong except on purpose.

This seems to be true.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permian%E ... ent#Causes

Likewise, the amount of C02 that would lead to the destruction of all life is far higher than the amount that could be produced even if we burned up ALL of our carbon fuels right now in an instant.

Past hot-houses, most of which had much higher c02 levels than we currently have, were far more biologically diverse than we are even at this time.

Mass death related to climate change will have more to do with maladaptive persons and societies than it will with anything specifically ecological. Climates change all the time and if you can't adapt you should move, if you do neither, you will die. Its simple as that.

This is a reproduction of the MIT 1970 chart that summarized the conclusions of the "Limits of Growth" World3 computer model - It also incorporates updated information from the 2010 study by physicist Graham Turner that concluded the basic outlines were trending in line with the original report.

Thanks. I will look into it, this is one of the only long-term studies i've seen that actually predicts western (world) collapse quicker than Spengler does. I appreciate it.