Earth outside its safe operating space..

[boatman61]

It's good to see some of the 'Experts' share my views about screwed up priorities regarding the planets survival..

Earth is exceeding its “safe operating space for humanity” in six of nine key measurements of its health, and two of the remaining three are headed in the wrong direction, a new study said.

Earth’s climate, biodiversity, land, freshwater, nutrient pollution and “novel” chemicals (human-made compounds like microplastics and nuclear waste) are all out of whack, a group of international scientists said in Wednesday’s journal Science Advances.

Only the acidity of the oceans, the health of the air and the ozone layer are within the boundaries considered safe, and both ocean and air pollution are heading in the wrong direction, the study said.

“We are in very bad shape,” said study co-author Johan Rockstrom, director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in Germany. “We show in this analysis that the planet is losing resilience and the patient is sick.”

In 2009, Rockstrom and other researchers created nine different broad boundary areas and used scientific measurements to judge Earth’s health as a whole. Wednesday’s paper was an update from 2015 and it added a sixth factor to the unsafe category. Water went from barely safe to the out-of-bounds category because of worsening river run-off and better measurements and understanding of the problem, Rockstrom said.

These boundaries “determine the fate of the planet,” said Rockstrom, a climate scientist. The nine factors have been “scientifically well established” by numerous outside studies, he said.

If Earth can manage these nine factors, Earth could be relatively safe. But it’s not, he said.

In most of the cases, the team uses other peer-reviewed science to create measurable thresholds for a safety boundary. For example, they use 350 parts per million of carbon dioxide in the air, instead of the Paris climate agreement’s 1.5 degrees (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit) of warming since pre-industrial times. This year carbon in the air peaked at 424 parts per million.

The nine factors are intermingled. When the team used computer simulations, they found that making one factor worse, like the climate or biodiversity, made other Earth environmental issues degrade, while fixing one helped others. Rockstrom said this was like a simulated stress test for the planet.

The simulations showed “that one of the most powerful means that humanity has at its disposal to combat climate change” is cleaning up its land and saving forests, the study said. Returning forests to late 20th century levels would provide substantial natural sinks to store carbon dioxide instead of the air, where it traps heat, the study said.

Biodiversity – the amount and different types of species of life – is in some of the most troubling shape and it doesn’t get as much attention as other issues, like climate change, Rockstrom said.

“Biodiversity is fundamental to keeping the carbon cycle and the water cycle intact,” Rockstrom said. “The biggest headache we have today is the climate crisis and biodiversity crisis.”

University of Michigan environmental studies dean Jonathan Overpeck, who wasn’t part of the study, called the study “deeply troubling in its implications for the planet and people should be worried.”

“The analysis is balanced in that it clearly sounds a flashing red alarm, but it is not overly alarmist,” Overpeck said. “Importantly, there is hope.”

The fact that ozone layer is the sole improving factor shows that when the world and its leaders decide to recognize and act on a problem, it can be fixed and “for the most part there are things that we know how to do” to improve the remaining problems, said Carnegie Mellon chemistry and environment professor Neil Donahue.

Some biodiversity scientists, such as Duke’s Stuart Pimm, have long disputed Rockstrom’s methods and measurements, saying it makes the results not worth much.

But Carnegie Mellon environmental engineering professor Granger Morgan, who wasn’t part of the study, said, “Experts don’t agree on exactly where the limits are, or how much the planet’s different systems may interact, but we are getting dangerously close.”

“I’ve often said if we don’t quickly cut back on how we are stressing the Earth, we’re toast,” Morgan said in an email. “This paper says it’s more likely that we’re burnt toast.”

[sailorboy1]

no one really talks the real problem

too many people

[boatman61]

Originally Posted by sailorboy1

no one really talks the real problem

too many people

They need the workers to keep the Gravy Train running.. still have the ancient breeding mentality "Go forth and Multiply"

[GreenWave]

Originally Posted by sailorboy1

no one really talks the real problem

too many people

Ding ding ding- winner!

[Chotu]

We are well on our way to the solution:

Synthetic nutrients/oxygen/water for the biological part, reduced need for air/water/nutrients, more need for electrical power. Most, if not all of life taking place virtually.

It’s a steady march in this direction.

So we will survive even though the current incarnation of humans and the planet won’t.

What’s really strange about this is it might actually be nicer than the current life that we (most people)have or our past.

You can add in all sorts of experiences that would seem perfectly real. You would have no way of knowing if it was real or not. Weird stuff. But I think we’re heading here.

[landsend]

Perhaps AI will step in and rid the planet of the its parasites. Coming to a city near you.
Sadly the solution is so simple but politically impossible. Oh well,carry on.

[Chotu]

Originally Posted by landsend

Perhaps AI will step in and rid the planet of the its parasites. Coming to a city near you.
Sadly the solution is so simple but politically impossible. Oh well,carry on.

Ooops. My post was lacking information about the picture

AI is not what I meant. Sorry.

I meant a merger of us and electronics. It’s already well underway.

Check out the ability we all of a sudden have to listen to the sounds inside someone’s brain. We also have the ability to see images inside people’s brains.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...vity/?amp=true

I don’t think it’s a very far leap to go the other direction and push those images and sounds and eventually tactile feelings and complete reality into someone’s brain.

Every year our lives are more and more tightly interwoven with machines. The way we live today would have been unthinkable 90 years ago.

I think over hundreds or thousands of years, we’re going to end up as one.

When we do, what is required for life on this planet or other planets won’t really matter anymore.

The new issue will only be finding enough energy to run the machinery and convert into synthetic resources for the bits of biology left (if any). I think there is a possibility we will abandon biology if we can get to the next level where we can store our consciousness in hardware and still provide the feelings and experiences we crave from our evolution.

I don’t know if this is good or bad, it might be good. It might be bad. It’s kind of scary. But I really think this is the ultimate endgame for humanity

First, because we are headed there already and second, because as we destroy the planet and run out of resources eventually, we won’t have much choice.

[Winf]

Originally Posted by sailorboy1

no one really talks the real problem

too many people

So......just kill some?

[leecea]

IMO the planet's survival is not at risk. It may become uninhabitable for humans but the planet will survive. Maybe that seems like nitpicking but perhaps we need to consider how little time we've been around and how we need a very narrow band of climate and environmental conditions to survive. If we thought of ourselves as "fragile" compared to how the earth can change, perhaps we'd try harder not to upset it.

[GordMay]

The paper, to which Phil refers:
“Earth beyond six of nine planetary boundaries” ~ by Katherine Richardson et al
➥ https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.adh2458

Fig. 1 Current status of control variables for all nine planetary boundaries

[siamese]

Oh, I should stay away from this thread, but....

If only environmental issues weren't politicized. But, I could also wish for unicorns.

Because it's such a political issue, it's more difficult to access unbiased information.

On the one hand, Leonardo DeCaprio addressed congress on climate change, but his yacht uses 30,000 gallons of fuel per fill up (or thereabouts).

Al Gore is a great champion of the planet, but his carbon footprint is a few hundred times greater than mine. He'll tell you he buys carbon offsets, but then we're back to unicorns.

Bono is another champion of the ecosystem, but his carbon footprint dwarfs mine, and probably yours.

So, a group of scientists says, bla bla bla, but is that because getting funding or even holding onto your job may not be possible if you're a scientist with an opposing view?

I'm not taking a stand here, other than to recognize, and lament that I can't be assured of obtaining unbiased information on critical issues.

[s/v Jedi]

I’m sorry but most of you are completely misinformed and still believe it. Too many people? No, they are all old people that will soon die. We don’t have enough people. Not enough young people.

I recommend you research this a bit. A country like Japan (they already sell more adult diapers than baby diapers)will loose 60% of it’s population this century. The US and most of Europe are at 50%
When you study this, you will start to understand why governments are hauling in immigrants by the millions… even though it’s just temporary relief. Can’t get a plumber, electrician? Still didn’t figure out why?

The good thing is that it will fix all the problems from the OP of this thread. The depopulation is unavoidable, it already happened and is just a matter of the fuse burning it’s way through.

The guy in the video below is annoying, as is his self promotion etc. but I found he got straight facts lined up instead of opinion:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tk5KoWUwz6Q

[sailorboy1]

have to make it to 2100 first

[boatman61]

Originally Posted by s/v Jedi

I’m sorry but most of you are completely misinformed and still believe it. Too many people? No, they are all old people that will soon die. We don’t have enough people. Not enough young people.

I recommend you research this a bit. A country like Japan (they already sell more adult diapers than baby diapers)will loose 60% of it’s population this century. The US and most of Europe are at 50%
When you study this, you will start to understand why governments are hauling in immigrants by the millions… even though it’s just temporary relief. Can’t get a plumber, electrician? Still didn’t figure out why?

The good thing is that it will fix all the problems from the OP of this thread. The depopulation is unavoidable, it already happened and is just a matter of the fuse burning it’s way through.

The guy in the video below is annoying, as is his self promotion etc. but I found he got straight facts lined up instead of opinion:

r

The West (1st?World) does not have a population problem, we have automation and the way things are going we won't even need soldiers in the near future.. the day of the Droid is fast approaching.
Its places like Africa with over a billion under 35 and not enough jobs and little tech.
India has 65% under 35...
Malaysia 5,532.8 thousand under 25..
Africa will be the place where the Water Wars begin, the rumblings of which have already begun..
Their populations are already hitting Europe where the smug superiority of the elite is failing to see the growing enemy within.. Reverse Colonisation..

[Cheechako]

Originally Posted by landsend

Perhaps AI will step in and rid the planet of the its parasites. Coming to a city near you.
Sadly the solution is so simple but politically impossible. Oh well,carry on.

THIS... ^^
It's evolution, we will create things which dont need air or food, and which replace us. Maybe our thougts will live in their data files, maybe not. The planet will shed itself of the worst parasites... humankind. Unfortunately the animals which should occupy this globe naturally without our interference may suffer and disappear along the way.
Mankind is an aberration of the worst kind. A failed experiment. An unwelcome mutation.