Is One World Enough for All of Us?

Why are we unable to feed the peoples of the Earth despite the successes that we have seen in recent years in reducing the incidence of extreme poverty?   Where is the impetus to care for our brothers and sisters across the globe?  Are we planning our budgets so that we can buy the next iPhone or the latest Samsung Galaxy?  Are we doing enough to mitigate climate change associated with an ever-increasing concentration of CO2 and other greenhouse gases in the atmosphere of the Earth?  Are we doing everything we can to minimize damage to precious habitat?  Are we protecting species in our oceans, forests, lakes, rivers and wetlands?  Are we concerned about windfall profits of corporations and shareholders?  Are we even thinking about limiting compensation for CEOs and others in power that literally strip the value of a successful corporation to feather their own nests only to shaft the hard-working pensioners that have built that company from the ground up?  Or do we accept that if corporations are to attract the talent that they need to lead their organizations, it is only natural that pay packages should exceed the average salary of employees by 30,000%?  That's my way of saying that the CEO makes over 300 times as much as a typical employee. 


What are we doing to protect our earth?  Are we taking steps to protect rainforests?


The truth is we are engaged in an epic battle for the future of not only our nation, but by extension the entire earth.  We are in a desperate fight for the very soul of the United States of America.
But most of you blokes don't seem too concerned.
Look what is happening in Britain, Germany, China and other parts of Europe.
Germany will probably get through this, but Brexit and a return to absolute power in China can only signal disaster for liberty.
Other nations in Europe are also seeing a rise in nationalism.
I see the greatest threat to national and global prosperity and peace coming from the right.  I'm not just talking about silly right-wingers such as certain U.S. contributors found on the WB.  But even these seemingly innocuous fanatics are dangerous enough when in lock-step they vote for harmful politicians and support policy which directly hurts people.
The truth is that if not for income disparity, we most likely could feed most of the world's population with the resources that our magnificent earth has made available to all of us.  The Peace Corps of the 1960s and the Green Revolution of the 1970s are still happening across the globe.  We have never been closer to having real solutions to supplying global needs for clean water and agriculture.
But it is all threatened by the actions of an elite class that would rather pollute precious waterways, our groundwater, lands and oceans solely for the monetary gain of a tiny fraction of the 1% that are the true über-wealthy.
You know.  The ones you nut-cases call the Deep State or the Obama Shadow Government.
They would threaten the most vulnerable populations on the entire planet with extreme drought and famine because of their idiotic and stubborn refusal to accept and act upon the consensual accepted science of Anthropomorphic Climate Change.
They would clear-cut the forests of the earth for profit as rainforests, the lungs of the earth, diminish precipitously year by year.  Often these precious habitats are simply burned down.
These powerful men rob resources from the peoples of the earth under complete protection because they have a minion class of sycophants that gladly trumpet that the takers are always looking for a handout, while the hard-working peoples of the earth pay for their groceries, beer and cigarets.
No, my dear friends.  So far the problem has not been proven to be over-population.  It is a broad scorched-earth environmental and mining policy coupled with extreme greed.  It is unregulated pollution.  Now with the disastrous and sadistic presidency of the monster we see a refusal to accept clean water standards that protect us from mining interests.  We see a rollback of minimum mileage requirements for vehicles.  We have witnessed a complete neutering of the EPA.  Instead of pursuing clean energy technology, we are urged to bring back coal.  To mine and burn more and more coal without any rational thought or consideration as to the severe environmental consequences.  The Trump administration wants completely unrestricted access to oil and natural gas extraction.
I hear many on the WB complain about the banks and the Fed.
Why not just reign in the depositors and the lenders?  A bank is no more than a repository.  Do away with usurious interest rates and devastating penalties, fees and penalty interest rates aimed at the poor.  Limit credit card rates.  Turn the kick 'em while their down system that is at the core of U.S. legal and lending policies upside-down so that the lowest interest rates and penalties go to those who can least afford to enrich the banks and municipalities.  Forgive excessive traffic fines for people who have the fortitude to come before a judge and please, have the mercy to not require jail time for minor traffic offenses.  Eliminate private, for-profit prisons.  Drug law reform.
Exactly none of these things has happened under Jeff Sessions.  He would put Tommy Chong back in prison if he could.
You may say that I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one...
Or just keep heading downhill to the bottom of a rock quarry on a bullet train.  It should be a great ride until we all crash.


Pardero Added Mar 12, 2018 - 5:42am
Flying Junior,
I accidentally called you by someone else's name  on one of your comments. Sorry. 
Flying Junior Added Mar 12, 2018 - 5:44am
You can call me Flying Bill if you want.  Bill was the best dog I ever had.  Sadly he died two weeks ago.  His little brother, Chauncey, is twelve years old and still doing fine.  Flying Bill probably sounds less goofy than Flying Junior.
George N Romey Added Mar 12, 2018 - 7:29am
I’d say first there needs to be a revolution. However, the developed world will need to be in far more misery and dissatisfaction for that to happen. Too many people still haven’t figured out the 2 party system is nothing more than a vassal for the elites you speak about.
Leroy Added Mar 12, 2018 - 8:01am
That's quite a piece, FJ. We differ on the problems and solutions, but I appreciate the thought you put into your articles.
We can feed the world at any time, but do we really want to? If conditions stay as they are today, there will be a massive population explosion in India and Africa. By the end of the century, the megacities won't be in the US, Europe, or China; they will be in India and Africa. The migration we see today pales in comparison to what our children and grandchildren will see. That's if nothing changes. Ending hunger will only exacerbate it. It's cruel; it's heartless, but it is true. We'll see just how many progressive liberals support open borders in the future when the Western world is being overrun by cultures that don't agree with the liberal agenda and will vote to make the world like the shitholes from where they originate. The Western world has solved the population crisis and is not even replacing themselves. The third world countries have not.
You may deny it, but another inconvenient truth is that CO2 has been and will continue to be a net benefit to life on earth. That may change someday, but for now, it is true.
CEO pay is too high and it is wrong. On that, we agree. There are capable people out there that can run any corporation and would gladly do it for a million bucks or less. It is not about free markets. There is nothing about free markets that is dictating such ridiculous compensation. If it can't be solved by changes in corporate governance rules, then maybe we should tax it out of existence. I can't believe I said that. It's crazy. I'm rewarded when I do well (at least with a pat on the back and maybe a cup of coffee, if I am really good); when I don't do well, I am punished. CEO's of major corporations make fortunes either way. There is something wrong there.
The truth is, the rainforests are being slashed and burned by the poor trying to eek out a living.
The problem is not the right or the left. It is the extremes. Who was it that said something to the effect that extremity of virtue is not a sin? I believe that to be true. The answers may be at the extremes, but, in terms of party, in order to build a coalition, there is a lot of bad that comes with the good. We need changes, which implies something progressive. We need rationality, which implies a measured approach. We don't need compromise; rather, we need extremity of virtue. That won't come until we can agree on a direction. I am afraid that it will take a catastrophic event, natural or otherwise. The progressive left had its chance and failed miserably. The right is rising, the good along with the bad. It will fail too.
Trump is our last, best hope. He is neither right nor left. He's an arsehole, but maybe it is an arsehole that we need.
Leroy Added Mar 12, 2018 - 8:04am
I swear that I haven't gone Michka.  I put in paragraphs.  Don't know what happened.
George N Romey Added Mar 12, 2018 - 8:22am
None of this will occur until the elites feel economic, social, mental and even physical pain. It goes without saying for the masses it will be far worse. A corrupt, illogical system must be purged but that’s a very painful experience with loads of collateral damage.
So far central bankers have been able to print our way to seemingly prosperity. But it’s all an illusion (hence the opiate addictions).
One day this debt fueled global economy will collapse beyond financial gimmick repair. Some of the elites see that day coming. They have purchased and conditioned private island they can wait the human slaughter period out in relative comfort.
Riley Brown Added Mar 12, 2018 - 11:11am
Junior, many people aren't caviler or don't care enough about the earth to want to stop man made global warming, they don't believe our money is well spent trying to stop it.  There is a huge difference.
I do think an experienced CEO who can greatly improve your companies chances of success is worth hundreds of times more in pay than someone whose influence starts and stops at their desk.  They are like super athletes who have the ability to generate or lose millions by having the experience or connections it takes to do things right the first time.  If you don't think so, don't invest in companies whose boards hire them, but at the same time don't tell me I shouldn't be able to put my money in companies they run. 
If you were assembling a sports team would you exclude all the highly paid athletes?  If you were fighting a complicated patent infringement case would you hire a cheap inexperienced law firm, or and expensive one with a track record of winning similar cases?
Benjamin Goldstein Added Mar 12, 2018 - 12:33pm
I think we are all going crazy. I was also short of writing an article simply saying that something goes wrong and we cannot point our finger on it. Instead we are partisan for the sake of it. Partisan is okay to some agree. I can take a position whether antisemitism sucks or not. But we also have lost fairness and honesty. No problem will ever be solved if we are just concerned with weaponizing it against some opponents.
Most German conservatives suck. They are just left-wingers who just happen to be against mass migration and Islam. They are just as rude as the left. It also sucks because they have little to say about army deployments, taxes, state media, state churches, subsidies, regulations and so on. They are dull. Many are eco-fanatics closer to Jill Stein than to far-right Nazi Hillary Clinton (if Clinton were German Reuters, AP, etc would call her a far-right extremist).
And a lot has to do with the ostracism and the labels. I avoid labels for groups that they don't use themselves. "Nazi" is an exception that I do not make often.
What was the topic? We all feel that something is wrong.
Pardero Added Mar 12, 2018 - 1:41pm
Flying Junior is a great name. I won't mix them up again. Flying Bill is the bicycle guy. You are the one with the splendid uncle.
Sorry you lost Bill. 
Stone-Eater Added Mar 12, 2018 - 4:00pm
We're going downhill. Why ? Because humans only live 70-80 years, and egoism reigns. When we'd live up to 500 years a piece, it would be different, because WE would be concerned.
Easy as that.
Dave Volek Added Mar 12, 2018 - 4:04pm
Your response was great. When we can speak from the heart instead lip-singing the popular ideologies, we will get closer to the truth and better solutions.
Stone-Eater Added Mar 12, 2018 - 4:06pm
Policicians, no matter which couleur, are simply slaves of the worldwide economic net. They are actors, no more. TV personalities, in the US even soap actors like Donnie. Flat-brainers as flat earthers and Muslim converts and Jihad fighters with iShit digital stuff, following Wahhabia rule dated 700AD LOL
Contradictions everywhere.
I have stopped to take the world seriously and resort to Monty Python for my last years. At least I won't suicide myself in a supermarket to get n virgins in heaven without a penis.
Benjamin Goldstein Added Mar 12, 2018 - 4:14pm
SEF: When Islam and leftism merge further, I'm also worried about martyres not even having penises any more.
Dave Volek Added Mar 12, 2018 - 4:15pm
Flying Junior
I recommend a book called "11" by Paul Hanley. This researcher has some interesting angles in how the world could feed 11 billion people.
Mr. Hanley points to various socio-economic projects that is helping the world to reach this goal. His contention is that they are not getting enough media attention to spawn other similar projects. My contention that the world's current democratic processes are not capable of handling these kinds of changes very well. It is time for a new system.
Benjamin Goldstein Added Mar 12, 2018 - 4:17pm
We have to get rid of the greens, so the poor can be fed with gene manipulated crops.
Flying Junior Added Mar 12, 2018 - 5:04pm
Great comments friends.  I'm sorry.  I'm going to have to get back to you.
A. Jones Added Mar 12, 2018 - 11:03pm
The truth is that if not for income disparity, we most likely could feed most of the world's population with the resources that our magnificent earth has made available to all of us.
Here's a little basic arithmetic to blow away some of your brain-fog:
The total wealth of the entire world — "global GDP" — is about $108 trillion. The total population of the entire world — "global population" — is about 8 billion.
$108 trillion / 8 billion = $13,500 per person (globally)
$13,500 per person / 365 days = $37 per day, per person, for one year.
Once that's spent — most likely on immediate consumables — there's zero incentive for the talented, the ambitious, the educated, and the capable, to produce, worldwide, another $108 trillion to redistribute to the 8 billion of the world for another 365 days. You can confiscate wealth from them once, but you'll never do it a second time, even with guns pointed at their head; if and when that happens, they will produce as little as possible just to keep themselves from getting shot. And if and when that happens, the $37 per day, per person, will quickly dwindle, and instead of "wealth disparity" we'll be back in the middle ages with "equality of poverty."
Which might be what you and the political left really desire.
So instead of socialist pipedreams of redistributing already existing wealth, why not imagine ways to make productive those parts of the globe that are currently unproductive, so that NEW WEALTH can be created?
I'll bet you never thought of that.
Flying Junior Added Mar 12, 2018 - 11:09pm
Hey Pard,
It is tough to lose a pet.  I guess it is good practice for when you lose a loved one.  I tear up at funny times, usually when a place reminds me of things we used to do.
I am the bicycle guy.  Riding a bike can almost feel like flying.  I used to always ride in to work from my wagon.  I would park way off-campus.  Every Friday I took a four-mile ride and then I ate a torta on company time in a little patio that no one ever noticed.  I never would have tried that except that they laid me off for an entire year.  At least it was a true lay-off.  I got rehired the following summer.  When I had to go to work without my bike, I was earthbound.  If I wanted to get some exercise, I had to take a walk.  I hated being at work without my bike.
James Travil Added Mar 12, 2018 - 11:10pm
Interesting article and comments. I don't think I have ever seen a place with as many science deniers as here, weird. Does that mean that the Flat Earthers have a presence here also? I just ran into a loon who tried to make the "earth is 5000 years old" crazypants assertion. Geez and here I thought it was 6000 years old! Seriously though they recently discovered archeological ruins in Europe that date back to 12,000BCE but I guess the nutters will only believe what supports their own crazy. Hey at least you came up with some genuine ideas and things to critique Trump about Flying Junior.
Flying Junior Added Mar 12, 2018 - 11:12pm
Maybe a revolution in the way that we think would be in order.
Flying Junior Added Mar 12, 2018 - 11:21pm
Ron Paul had the right idea.
Imagine if Ron Paul had become the 45th president January 20, 2013.
That might have been worth sacrificing the second term of President Moses.
Flying Junior Added Mar 13, 2018 - 4:15am
CEO pay is too high and it is wrong. On that, we agree. There are capable people out there that can run any corporation and would gladly do it for a million bucks or less. It is not about free markets. There is nothing about free markets that is dictating such ridiculous compensation. If it can't be solved by changes in corporate governance rules, then maybe we should tax it out of existence.
Way to go Leroy.  Let's all break out of the molds that keep our minds imprisoned by dogma.
Trump is our last, best hope.
That's going to be a tough one for me.  I was telling someone that I used to believe that conservatives and liberals all really wanted the same things; clean water, beautiful lands, safe sources for food, good schools, excellent health care, a thriving economy and infrastructure.  We all want to raise our kids in a healthy way.  We want our families to be able to stay together.  We want to enjoy social relationships and long life.  We work together for the common good.
Lately I decided that conservatives do want the same things.  The only difference being that they only want them for themselves and not for just anybody.  But I'll take you at your word.  Let's all put aside despair and come together to hope for a better world.  Just promise to never give up no matter how bad things look.  (That's another quote from me going back to 1996.  Little did I know how fucked up the world was soon to become.)
I'll try it on for size and see how it feels.
"Thank the goddess that the crazy, corrupt, crawling cripple Hillary Rodham Clinton was prevented from becoming the president of the United States of America.  Talk about dodging a bullet!  I am so happy that a true man of the people, yea a man after God's own heart, is now our spiritual, intellectual and political leader.  And he's so cute and funny.  I pledge my complete support to the 45th POTUS and promise to love, honor and obey him until such time as his insane policies bring our once mighty nation to its knees." 
There.  That wasn't so bad.  I understand and will comply.
If you think that Trump is our only hope, you gave up hoping a long-ass time ago.  He is no Obi-Wan Kenobi.
Flying Junior Added Mar 13, 2018 - 4:36am
Junior, many people aren't cavilier or don't care enough about the earth to want to stop man made global warming, they don't believe our money is well spent trying to stop it.  There is a huge difference.
I would posit that the same people that do not care enough are the same people who are cavalier.  People who are not cavalier about such things would include myself.
Your speech is too ambiguous to accurately describe which difference or sameness that you are talking about.  But let me clear it up, if I may.  The argument that reversing or mitigating AGW is just another unwanted expense is fallacious.  The only people that stand to make money by preserving the status quo are the people that are poised to extract more fossil fuels cheaply from the earth and continue to sell them as they have for nearly two hundred years.
In truth, spending money by investing in renewable energy is a great way for all of us to streamline our finances.  Think about how solar energy was once believed to be simply too expensive to ever be practical.  Even the monster seems to be unable to destroy the economic feasibility of solar energy.  Wind farms are just as promising.  Purifying ocean water for drinking water is working out well despite the naysayers.  Today desalinization is the most reliable source for potable water in California.
FFS clean energy was poised to be the greatest driver of the economy since the internet.  WTF are you guys thinking?
Just how much money do you expect that we will save by increasing coal consumption?  Is that money well spent despite environmental concerns every step of the way?  Of course not.  It's just a cheap and easy way for entrenched fossil fuel interests to continue to make money no matter how much damage is inflicted.
What about relaxing EPA minimum mileage standards for automobiles?  Will that save us money?  Don't you get it that the real money is in finding better ways to conserve energy and cleaner ways to produce energy?  I'm getting tired.
Prosperity is not possible in a degraded environment.  It's that simple.  You are young enough that things could get pretty fucking bad by the time you are my age.
Global warming.  No big deal?  Who are you kidding?
Flying Junior Added Mar 13, 2018 - 4:46am
GM is ubiquitous.  The only time you will see labels that say, "NON-GMO," is likely to be when it is a great selling point.  It's better than organic.
Does not the EU allow GMO crops?  We sure as hell do.  For the most part I don't see a down side.
The funny thing about this topic is that I'm not really used to proposing solutions to problems that face the world.  Like my father-in-law always says after a particularly serious discussion, "Well now it looks like we've solved all of the world's problems."
Hi James,
Did you plant any seeds?  Not too late.  Wait until the new moon.
Dino Manalis Added Mar 13, 2018 - 9:14am
Some of us may choose to live on the moon or Mars in the future, but we should strive to improve conditions on planet Earth for all of us!
Leroy Added Mar 13, 2018 - 9:50am
FJ, you seem incredulous that we don't act because the evidence is so abundantly clear.  Did I get that right?  It does not seem that clear to me.
Does it make sense for the government to set mileage limits when the technology and practicality are not there yet?  Yeah, sure.  If the technology is there and it can be implemented without making the vehicles unaffordable for those with less wealth than yourself, why not force them to do the obvious?  Of course, we have to assume that they are really stupid not to do the obvious.  Just seems like one more regulation we can do without.  It only serves to increase the cost.  Manufacturers of washing machines, for example, are bullied into making machines that use less water.  The washing machines today costs a small fortune and you are lucky if they last more than five or six years.  And, they don't clean worth a damn unless you use the deep cleaning cycle.  The same with dishwashers.   You have to flush low volume toilets multiple times   What are we truly saving?
Solar energy is cheap only if it is subsidized.  Currently, it costs about three times more to produce.  My neighbor installed solar panels on his house.  I'm sure it cost $40,000 or so.  With federal and state tax credits, it probably cost him $20,000.  I hope he isn't paying for all those service calls.  As the panels become more and foggier and my trees grow taller, they will produce less electricity.  If he doesn't spend $500 or so a year to clean and maintain them, it will degrade one or two percent a year.  After ten years or so, they will become a liability if they ever want to sell the house.  Maintenance cost will explode.  If the house ever catches on fire, the fire department will likely watch it burn down while they scratch their heads trying to figure out how to put out the fire without electrocuting themselves.  You may think that you are doing the world a great favor by installing solar panels, but you are only passing the buck (literally) to your neighbor.  Try doing a little research on the cost to produce solar power and on how little solar electricity is actually used (not how much is produced or the system ratings).
Many states are rethinking their subsidies on wind power.  There are more efficient turbines available today.  Many of these turbines will become zombies in the desert as they become impractical to maintain.  Only when they are cost efficient will these systems be installed and properly maintained.  Otherwise, they will continue to become eyesores and a liability to the taxpayers, not to mention the environmental damage.
My point is that if the advantages are so manifestly obvious, they don't need to be subsidized.  People aren't stupid.  They will do what makes sense (cents).  They only do stupid things when the government gets involved.   I am all for greater energy efficiency and lower energy costs and a cleaner environment.  Nuclear is the best option today.  And, if we pursue it, perhaps we will achieve the holy grail of fusion.
No offense, but, as I have always said, those of the liberal persuasion tend to be short-term thinkers.  We all want the same things that you mentioned.  It's just a matter of how we get there.   Government subsidies are just a facade that masks reality.
Even A Broken Clock Added Mar 13, 2018 - 10:03am
FJ - thanks for writing this. Like you, I am sensing that things are coming off of the rails, and the train of humanity is about to derail. I've been a subscriber to Science magazine since 1980, even though I have just a bachelor degree. I've seen the discussions about the effects of greenhouse gases, and I believe in the science. The effects of anthropomorphic climate change are showing up all around, and we are likely very near a tipping point when the natural gas clathrates start bubbling out of the continental shelves around the world. Once the methane freely flows, we are screwed.
But this administration in particular abhors anything that smacks of knowledge-based policy. Fie on them.
BTW, wish I was out in San Diego this week. There's a couple of basketball games on Friday. I can hope that both Marshall and WVU win their first round game and then meet in the second round. Watch for Jon Elmore of Marshall - one of the best point guards in the country that no one's heard of.
Riley Brown Added Mar 13, 2018 - 10:38am
Junior, the reason you think renewable energy is such a great value is because your fellow taxpayers are paying most of the costs.  Take the solar you like so much.  Many of the companies that create the parts get huge tax breaks for being in green businesses, so you can buy parts for less than they really should cost.  Then you get a huge tax break, up to about 50% off the system, thanks to your personal tax breaks and rebates, also paid for by other utility and tax  payers.  Solar is not alone, even electric vehicles get similar breaks, all thanks to the fact that your neighbors taxes pay for so much of the purchase price.
Unfortunately we've seen this before, like with solar water heaters where you might notice almost none still exist despite the fact that they were wonderfully popular when they were new.  Once installed, solar equipment becomes your responsibility to repair, and taxpayers no longer help you out.  That means after it starts having problems the system will be far more expensive to try and keep running and most people will decide to rip them off their roof instead of fixing them, like happened with solar water heaters.
At some point they will also realize their roof needs repairing or replacing, and guess what, it  will cost a small fortune to have the panels removed and put back together, and much more to re-roof around all those solar roof supports... oh the hidden costs they never talk about.  Who ever thought it would cost more to have the system removed and replaced than it cost to put it up their to begin with.  Who ever thought it might be impossible to find an electrician who is familiar with your solar wiring or can find parts for it 5 years after the company who made them switched to newer models or went out of business.
Even if you want to keep the system going, will your roof brackets fit the panels they make at that time, will they seamlessly work with your existing electrical system, or will you need to replace all the panels and the rest of the inversion equipment because they really are a system that must work together and be fully compatible.  It's hard to fix a Delorean without compatible Delorean parts.
NO, solar isn't a good deal, if your neighbors aren't paying for most of the costs.
Flying Junior Added Mar 13, 2018 - 10:55am
You did get it right, Leroy.  I say investing now in green energy is looking to the long-term.  Going backwards or staying put is short-term thinking to me.
I learned most of what I know from broadcast on the UCTV network aired between 1996 and approximately 2006.  Many different lectures and television shows devoted to explaining what was happening in the oceans and in the atmosphere.  From UCSD, UC Berkeley and UC Santa Barbara mostly.  You know, the typical liberal think tanks.  I think the best discussion with graphics I ever saw was in a National Geographic.  It detailed how the ocean absorbs and reflects energy from the sun.  I would give anything to have that issue today.  I can't find it on-line.
Back then we never anticipated that we would seriously have to argue the point with skeptics.  We thought people that grumbled about Al Gore and Roger Revelle were just cranks.  Apparently they are still going strong.
Stone-Eater Added Mar 13, 2018 - 11:39am
What is a "leftist" today ? I used to describe myself as a leftist in Europe when I was 20 - according to Marx and Engels. I don't know what a Leftist today is and I don't care for that anymore, because I'm too old to require a label. I go for what's called common sense, and there no -ism is needed.
Dave Volek Added Mar 13, 2018 - 12:30pm
Leroy and Riley
I think you guys are making some great points on the flaws of renewable energy. Unfortunately its ardent advocates tend to sweep them under the rug hoping they will never be seen. This makes for bad policy.
Sometimes we have to go in directions where the economics are not all that great for the moment. With enough experimentation, we will find the better solutions. But pretending there are no flaws is a bit naive.
Even A Broken Clock Added Mar 13, 2018 - 12:57pm
Leroy, don't give up on solar just yet. There's a whole new type of solar cell being developed with perovskite materials which are cheaper than silicon / silver based cells. Or they can be combined into a single device that harvests electrons from several different wavelength bands. They will be commercial within about 5 years I would predict.
I have a different perspective on energy production. The best source of energy is that which creates the least amount of entropy, when viewed over the entire life cycle of the energy producing system. This is based upon my belief that creating entropy is bad for life and the earth in general. I don't know what life cycle analysis would show for the various renewable sources of energy, but I do know that generating electricity through the mountain top removal of coal, followed by combustion and creation of fly ash slurries has got to be the system that creates the absolute largest increase in entropy, and thus should be avoided.
Benjamin Goldstein Added Mar 13, 2018 - 1:17pm
I don't mind financing some research into solar panels and stuff, but I have a huge problem with the German energy policy which is destablizing the energy grid with wind mills and so on. It costs billions to subsidize hogwash and the customer pays a lot for energy. I hate the greens.
FJ: The EU bans all gene manipulated food. The greens ran such a scare campaign across the continent that you could be let to believe American popcorn is radioactive.
Benjamin Goldstein Added Mar 13, 2018 - 1:25pm
Wow, I did not know the fire problem of the solar panels. Can anybody confirm that the fire brigade won't be able to put it out? Do they have to throw water from a helicopter or throw some foam at it?
Henry Ortiz Added Mar 13, 2018 - 2:38pm
I have not been proactive in reading and commenting lately because Iwas tired of reading the same thing over and over...Either “I love Trump” or “I hate Trump” .
It is refreshing to read that comments are trying to focus in a different point of view.
At the end, it is not the Trump administration, nor the Obama one, it is WE.
We are the ones who buy the last IPhone and increase the bonus of that CEO, we are the ones who go to the stadiums and increase the “value” of those athletes, who in many occasions have no neurons working but only the one to play that sport, we are the ones who do care of ourselves and make healthcare so expensive.......
Doug Plumb Added Mar 13, 2018 - 6:03pm
re "Why are we unable to feed the peoples of the Earth despite the successes that we have seen in recent years in reducing the incidence of extreme poverty? "
You need to take a drive in the country. You will see empty fields and farmers sitting houses getting government benefits not grow food. You are a completely brain washed Lefty.
re "Are we doing enough to mitigate climate change associated with an ever-increasing concentration of CO2 and other greenhouse gases in the atmosphere of the Earth?"
lol. No scientific training/education, right?
As for the rest of your essay, you should take up reading as a hobby because you have idea wrt what you are talking about, and also throw around insults like they were dimes and you were Rockefller. Hibris is blind.
Doug Plumb Added Mar 13, 2018 - 6:06pm
re "This is based upon my belief that creating entropy is bad for life and the earth in general."
How are you going to create energy without creating entropy?
Doug Plumb Added Mar 13, 2018 - 6:07pm
re "It costs billions to subsidize hogwash and the customer pays a lot for energy. I hate the greens."
Everyone that has scientific background hates the greenies.
opher goodwin Added Mar 13, 2018 - 8:03pm
FJ - an excellent article.
We are running this planet like a bunch of morons.
We have the technology to produce a life of good quality for every person on this planet yet we choose to promote a system where a few live in absolute opulence while billions live in poverty - or worse.
We are driven by such greed that we are destroying the forests and natural world for profit, polluting air, land and sea without regard to other creatures or the future.
We wage war against each other out of intolerance, fanaticism and for profit.
We are creating a climate change that will be incredibly destructive just so that elite can have more than they can ever need.
We are the maddest, cruellest and most stupid creatures that ever evolved on this planet.
Katharine Otto Added Mar 13, 2018 - 10:29pm
Regarding the "feeding the world" problem specifically:  At least one third of the grain produced in the world goes to feed livestock.  Asia is consuming more meat.  
Now that we have the ethanol mandate in the US, we are using more grain to feed cars and trucks.  Sugar--a major water hog--is being grown in vast quantities to make ethanol in places like Brazil.  Wherever crops are grown for burning, that land and water can't be used to grow food.  
What are our priorities? I can't do anything about CEO salaries, but the ethanol mandate is an insult to the world.  It wastes perfectly good food, land, and water, is less efficient than gasoline so probably worse as far as CO2 emissions are concerned, and it ruins engines.    
Doug Plumb Added Mar 13, 2018 - 10:48pm
I'm not sure how these reduced water flow machines work. Where do lefties think the water goes when you flush? Does less water mean less poop? It really exposes the man-bear-pig for what it is.
A. Jones Added Mar 13, 2018 - 10:51pm
the ethanol mandate is an insult to the world. 
It wastes perfectly good food, land, and water,
is less efficient than gasoline so probably worse as far as CO2 emissions are concerned
False re CO2 emissions:
– 12.72 lbs of CO2 from burning 1 gallon of pure ethanol.
– 19.64 lbs of CO2 from burning 1 gallon of gasoline.
– 22.38 lbs of CO2 from burning 1 gallon of diesel fuel.
Doug Plumb Added Mar 13, 2018 - 10:53pm
re "$13,500 per person / 365 days = $37 per day, per person, for one year."
I wonder how much of that is spent on bullshit. It seems like around $35.00.
Mark Hunter Added Mar 14, 2018 - 3:46am
Sorry about your dog, Junior ... been there. Our firehouse dog (technically owned by the assistant chief) passed away last week, and he was a real little sweetheart.
Flying Junior Added Mar 14, 2018 - 4:11am
You are a completely brain washed Lefty.
I love you Douggie.  I wish somebody could wash my brain and make me feel clean again.
I am overwhelmed by the response to my humble post.  Stone told me that instead of writing a book in a comment thread...
This began as a comment on the recent Michael B. article.
I intend to address comments regarding AGW.  That is the issue that has stirred up the greatest controversy.
Thank you Mark.  Back in the 1960s the La Jolla Fire Department always had a Dalmatian.  The last one that was kept as the fire station dog probably passed away in the early 1980s.  Dogs make us more human.
Flying Junior Added Mar 14, 2018 - 5:08am
That's right.  The dogs would ride on the firetruck with the firemen.
But as far as I know, they didn't ride on emergency calls.
From about 1977 to 1980, the La Jolla Fire Department had the most beautiful American LaFrance engine.  They must have purchased it used, because I had never seen it before.  But the way that it was waxed and polished, you might have thought it was a new design.  Front fenders, sweeping into running boards.  Shiny chrome on the grill.  Big motor covered by a Bentley-style hood.  It was something to behold.  That motor purred like it had a tuned exhaust.  Except that it was just a large, powerful motor, turning at a nice, low rpm.  It didn't rumble.  It just sounded very deep.
Mark Hunter Added Mar 14, 2018 - 5:19am
No, we didn't let Squirt go on emergency calls, although he did ride in parades. He was just a little dog, so he couldn't have accomplished the job of original firehouse dogs: to keep other dogs away from the fire horses.
Oh, American LaFrance, those were awesome fire trucks. We had a truck with an American LaFrance pump, but it was on a Chevy body. Our antique, a 1929, was made by the Buffalo Fire Apparatus Company of New York, a company that didn't last nearly as long as A.L.
Doug Plumb Added Mar 14, 2018 - 9:29am
It was always Dalmations that were at firehouses wasn't it?
TexasLynn Added Mar 14, 2018 - 10:03am
I enjoyed the article though I'm in sync with Leroy and Riley in disagreement with many of your assertions and solutions.
As one example you want to simply reduce the take of the 1% and use it to use that to feed all the hungry in the world (a simplification of your stance, I know).  But money and want isn't the problem in this case as much as the tyrants and war-lords standing between you and the staving people... who would just as soon take for himself what you have to offer the poor.
FJ, if your article did anything if gave an excellent thread for Leroy, Riley, and Dave to flesh out your original premise.  Thanks for the article and the thread.
I think you were referencing one of my favorite Barry Goldwater quotes.
"Extremism in the defense of liberty is now vice... and moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue." -- Barry Goldwater
Flying Junior Added Mar 14, 2018 - 3:44pm
Thanks Lynn,
I don't think the answer is to send food and money and try to get it past the military without them taking it all.  It's a more complicated approach.  Peace Corps type stuff.  Clean water and agriculture.  Practical solutions for food storage and cooking.  That kind of thing.
I have mentioned before that at one time I watched a great deal of UCTV.  I hope to get it again on cable very soon.  All of the shows that I watched were available on podcast, but today only the best broadcasts have been archived to the public.  I found about twelve broadcasts from 2007 to 2017 that address the issue of climate change.  Before I link to a podcast that I recommend, I would like to share my own humble thoughts on climate change.  But here is the page that I found with the podcasts.
You can see that I settled on the name Keeling as my search term.  The first podcast is quite good.  I haven't finished watching it yet, but there are several Scripps Institution of Oceanography graduate students who give short presentations.
Flying Junior Added Mar 14, 2018 - 3:58pm
The first thing that I would like to say is that twenty years ago or even ten years ago, the planet had a pretty good shot at limiting and mitigating the effects of catastrophic climate change.  Today we are looking at an existential threat to thousands of species that has become irreversible.  The best we can do is to try to slow this process down by limiting and eventually reducing the quantity of fossil fuels that we incinerate to meet our energy needs
Ten years ago we had already fallen short of goals set by climate scientists.  But vigorous efforts by many nations in the intervening years have actually slowed the rapid growth of consumption.  While it is too late to prevent the type of global warming that we are seeing all around us, it is still in our best interests to act.  Scorched earth policies by the greedy undermine the progress that the civilized world has worked so hard to achieve.  It laughingly flies in the face of security and reasoned policy.  Why do you think I likened climate change deniers to lemmings?  It's true.
I would ask Riley, "What better way can we spend our money than to preserve a livable planet?"  He already seems to be satisfied that he has successfully repudiated my silly idea about creating jobs in the clean energy industry.
Flying Junior Added Mar 14, 2018 - 4:38pm
What evidence do we have before us that the planet is warming?  This is a thorny subject.  Of course, extreme temperatures and weather have been with us since the last ice age.  It is tempting to say that the extreme hurricanes of 2017 along the Gulf Coast, the Caribbean and the Atlantic Seaboard were intensified by a warming climate.  But of course, that would be unreasoned and unsubstantiated.  Darn that Googol, I was just looking up the hurrican season of 2017 so I got my oceans right.  Googol knows who you are.  I didn't even have to ask.
So I learned that the strongest winds ever recorded in a hurricane occurred with Hurricane Patricia in 2015.  215 mph!  That's awesome.  How cool is that?
I know I can't complain about 106 degree heat in my little forest behind my house.  But what about the wildfires of Southern California in September?  They were the largest ever recorded.  I salute the thousands of firefighters from across the stat that worked so tirelessly around the clock enduring extreme heat and risking their lives every moment they were in the conflagration.  Unbelievable stamina, effort and heroism.  I guess it's a calling.  If this keeps happening it will be tough to make the case that California is a paradise.  Maybe Trump is right.  California is a mess!
The most irrefutable evidence of AGW is species migration and extinction of both plants an animals.  The examples of trees and flowers that have sought higher elevations on mountainsides is manifold.
How about climate change in Yellowstone National Park?  Can we really trust the National Park Service to be Neutral?

Snowfall in Yellowstone melts into rivers that span the continent from the Gulf of Mexico to the Pacific Ocean. Scientists are documenting significant changes in the amount of snow that falls here as well as the intensity and timing of spring runoff. These trends could affect everything you see when you come to the park, as well as everyone and everything living downstream.


Yellowstone's climate is changing. Climate is one of the primary drivers of the processes that make an ecosystem look and function the way it does. Weather reflects the short-term conditions of the atmosphere. Climate consists of the long-term averages of daily weather, usually in 30-year periods. Change in climate can greatly alter ecosystems.
Scientists have monitored Yellowstone's climate for decades. Studying climate is complicated and the impacts of climate change are difficult to predict. Current research indicates Yellowstone's temperature will continue to rise over the next century, but the behavior of precipitation is more difficult to predict. Scientists have already documented these changes in Yellowstone:

Average temperatures in the park are higher now than they were 50 years ago, especially during springtime. Nighttime temperatures seem to be increasing more rapidly than daytime temperatures.
In the last 50 years, the growing season (the time between the last freeze of spring and the first freeze of fall) has increased by roughly 30 days in some areas of the park.
At the northeast entrance, there are now 80 more days per year above freezing than there were in the 1960s.
There are approximately 30 fewer days per year with snow on the ground than there were in the 1960s.

Mark Hunter Added Mar 14, 2018 - 7:24pm
Dalmations became the tradition, Doug ... something about them having the right temperament to both get along with the horses and keep the other dogs at bay. Not nearly as much of a problem, these days!
opher goodwin Added Mar 14, 2018 - 7:55pm
FJ - the information on climate change is conclusive to me. We are seeing migration of many animals in the UK in response to warming. Our climate is fluctuating wildly due to permutations in the artic vortex. It is all extremely worrying.
Pardero Added Mar 14, 2018 - 11:48pm
Flying Junior,
Great writing although I differ a bit on the content.
I had no idea that you were a Ron Paul fan. I was a delegate for him at our county convention, some years back.
Mustafa Kemal Added Mar 15, 2018 - 12:13am
Flying Junior, 
OT, but I have to tell you:
I went to Walgreens today in Phoenix and there was this old grumpy black cashier and I went her and said 
"can you  tell me where the brooms and mops are?, Im batchen it and forgot all about that stuff", Well we got to talkin about alot of things including that she wants to retire 
(a second time) back to Chicago and I asked her about Buddy Guys club and was it still hoppin and you should have seen her light up! We spoke of Junior Wells and then she asks me if I know her cousin Matt Guitar Murphy, I just smiled and said "your kiddin me"  She says that he just had his 88th birthday combined with a new marriage. I just checked, he certainly is 88. 
I shook hands with my new friend Shirley and she said " I guess you got a bit a scrubbin ahead of you" and I said "hey, I was flying high, what are you tryin to do?" You should have heard her laugh. I departed, thinking "Walgreens, in a rough part of Phoenix" treasures. 
James Travil Added Mar 15, 2018 - 1:43am
All one has to do is look at the satalite photos of the Arctic from year to year to see that climate change is happening. Only science denying extremists claim otherwise. 
Flying Junior Added Mar 15, 2018 - 2:34am
I thought everybody loved Ron Paul.
Flying Junior Added Mar 15, 2018 - 2:39am
There are two flavors of deniers.  Most are too intelligent to deny that it is happening.  It is difficult to debate these guys.  How do we really prove what is causing climate change?  Others clamor to load up graphs and statistics that say crazy stuff like, the ice caps are actually growing, or the climate has actually been cooling for the last twenty-five years.  If a six turned out to be nine type stuff.  It doesn't seem to matter if it's true or not.
Must be a great number of extremists out there.
Flying Junior Added Mar 15, 2018 - 3:02am
This is for the Clock,
I'm going to just go ahead and post my link to a show produced by the Scripps Institution of Oceanography.  As I mentioned, after the introductory presenter, eight graduate students take the podium to discuss various problems in the oceans associated with increased carbon in the atmosphere.
I had all but forgotten.  Aside from the clear danger of global warming which really should scare the shit outta just about anybody, another big problem is happening under the surface of the water.  Maybe you have heard this term before.  The oceans of the Earth are a carbon sink.  The oceans absorb 25% of the carbon dioxide that is produced by human activity every year.  When carbon dioxide dissolves in the seawater, you guessed it, it produces carbonic acid.  I do not know how many oceanic species are adversely affected by this phenomenon, the most widely known example is coral.  It is my understanding that carbonic acid or ocean acidification can slowly kill off living coral.  The article that presented itself to me describes mass bleaching events occurring on the Great Barrier Reef.  The ocean is a delicately balanced ecosystem.  Depletion or extinction of one species causes ripples which affect all related species.  It does not take very much imagination to think about how this could affect the harvesting of seafood so necessary to human life in so many cultures.
I have enjoyed learning about the oceans all of my life.  Coral reefs are beneficial homes to diverse ocean life.  They are a vital element of coastal biosystems.  You don't want our coral reefs to slowly die off unnecessarily, do you.  From the article.  Some basics,
Via the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration:
Fundamental changes in seawater chemistry are occurring throughout the world's oceans. Since the beginning of the industrial revolution, the release of carbon dioxide (CO2) from humankind's industrial and agricultural activities has increased the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere. The ocean absorbs about a quarter of the CO2 we release into the atmosphere every year, so as atmospheric CO2 levels increase, so do the levels in the ocean. Initially, many scientists focused on the benefits of the ocean removing this greenhouse gas from the atmosphere.  However, decades of ocean observations now show that there is also a downside — the CO2 absorbed by the ocean is changing the chemistry of the seawater, a process called OCEAN ACIDIFICATION.
Mission statement
To understand the changing chemistry of the oceans and the impacts of ocean acidification on marine ecosystems.  Our observations of key physical, chemical, and biological parameters support NOAA's overall efforts to predict how marine ecosystems will respond and to develop management strategies for adapting to the consequences of ocean acidification...
Read about it for yourself.
Flying Junior Added Mar 15, 2018 - 3:05am
I'm sorry.
This is the link to a one hour UCTV podcast produced by the University of California, San Diego and our partner, the Scripps Institution of Oceanography in 2007.  I didn't have the heart to watch later podcasts which would have inevitably included sad tales of warnings ignored.
Flying Junior Added Mar 15, 2018 - 3:16am
I used to really get into reading up on the NYT science page or just going directly to the websites of the University of Hawaii, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution or Scripps and just read up on all of the super cool ocean research that was going on in our exciting world.  There are many new inventions, floating or underwater sensors, underwater robots, small one-person submarines, cameras, networks and arrays.
Scientists even plugged a GPS into the side of a Great White Shark and tracked him swimming from Hawaii to California.  For real.  2,500 miles one way.  Another really cool thing that has been developed is pinging a sonar sound from a source in Hawaii to a target in California.  By measuring the amount of time it takes for the sound to reflect back to the source, scientists can determine the mean water temperature.
The wonderful thing is that the scientists share all of their discoveries and measurements instantaneously with the entire world community of scientists.  In fact a great deal of information is available to the general public.
Doug Plumb Added Mar 15, 2018 - 5:47am
re "All one has to do is look at the satalite photos of the Arctic from year to year to see that climate change is happening. Only science denying extremists claim otherwise."
Of course the climate is changing. No one denies that. Its been changing since the beginning of time or the planet - the silly thing is to think man has anything to do with it or can control it. CO2 emissions by man are miniscule compared to the oceans, and the left has had to admit this.  
Doug Plumb Added Mar 15, 2018 - 5:49am
Lefties and the climate change leaders always forget that we have a sun and solar system. Solar dust comes into the atmosphere and creates the seeds for clouds to develop. Clouds are the primary controller of the weather. CO2 isn't a big player at all.
Doug Plumb Added Mar 15, 2018 - 5:50am
CO2 is good, better to have 100 ppm than 400.
Doug Plumb Added Mar 15, 2018 - 5:50am
CO2 is good - better to have 1100 ppm than 400.
Flying Junior Added Mar 15, 2018 - 3:33pm
Lefties and the climate change leaders always forget that we have a sun and solar system. Solar dust comes into the atmosphere and creates the seeds for clouds to develop.
You have a point, Doug.  Life on Earth depends on carbon dioxide, among other things.  Sun is good.  Clouds good.  Rain good.  Plants and animals make good companions for each other.  But I'm fairly certain that climate change leaders factor in radiation from the sun in their experiments.
Take an hour and watch my podcast.  If you don't learn anything new, at least you will be better equipped to argue your POV.
I'll watch it too.
opher goodwin Added Mar 15, 2018 - 4:08pm
Doug - scientists are not idiots. Solar output is factored in. Clouds and vapour are factored in. The greenhouse effect is real and makes the small differences that really count.
Phil Greenough Added Mar 16, 2018 - 8:41am
The following are the answers to your questions:
Why are we unable to feed the peoples of the Earth despite the successes that we have seen in recent years in reducing the incidence of extreme poverty?  
First and foremost, we should all give ourselves a pat on the back for our recent successes.  As for the places where hunger is still an issue, that could be resolved through military intervention.  So it’s understandable why some still suffer from hunger. 
Where is the impetus to care for our brothers and sisters across the globe? 
I see it everywhere.  Would you like some examples? 
Are we planning our budgets so that we can buy the next iPhone or the latest Samsung Galaxy? 
I think all people should be able to enjoy the fruits of their labor.  For some, that probably does mean buying a mobile phone, among other items. 
Are we doing enough to mitigate climate change associated with an ever-increasing concentration of CO2 and other greenhouse gases in the atmosphere of the Earth? 
There is no proof the climate is changing as a result of CO2 emissions from humans.  That being said, I’m all for making our environment cleaner…are you with me or would you prefer to make this into a political issue? 
Are we doing everything we can to minimize damage to precious habitat? 
We can always do more.
Are we protecting species in our oceans, forests, lakes, rivers and wetlands? 
Are we concerned about windfall profits of corporations and shareholders? 
If a corporation is doing a great job, the people most deserving of the windfall are the shareholders.  That being said, to keep the golden goose laying eggs, it would probably be wise to share some of that profit with the employees. 
Are we even thinking about limiting compensation for CEOs and others in power that literally strip the value of a successful corporation to feather their own nests only to shaft the hard-working pensioners that have built that company from the ground up? 
No CEO has literally stripped the value of a successful corporation. 
Or do we accept that if corporations are to attract the talent that they need to lead their organizations, it is only natural that pay packages should exceed the average salary of employees by 30,000%? 
It depends on the corporation and the CEO what the compensation package should be.  Average salaries of the employees should have nothing to do with it. 
What are we doing to protect our earth? 
A lot.
Are we taking steps to protect rainforests?
Yes, but we can always do more.
Flying Junior Added Mar 16, 2018 - 2:29pm
Thank you Phil for stopping by.
I'm glad that we agree on so much.
Doug Plumb Added Mar 16, 2018 - 6:13pm
Opher re "Doug - scientists are not idiots.". No but some are liars just like attorneys, bankers and politicians. They are really part of the same ball of shit.
Doug Plumb Added Mar 16, 2018 - 6:14pm
re "Are we planning our budgets so that we can buy the next iPhone or the latest Samsung Galaxy? "
For an idiot, a computer can probably be a bad thing, he or she will do idiotic things on it, it will reinforce idiocy. But the opposite is true as well.
Katharine Otto Added Mar 17, 2018 - 1:56am
A. Jones,
Your emissions statistics do not take into account the energy content of ethanol, compared with gasoline.  Gasoline has more BTUs, so you get better mileage.  In other words, the statistic would be more accurate if you compare miles traveled per CO2 emitted, rather than per gallon.  I think you would find ethanol's inefficiency makes it a bad fuel, even from the CO2 faddists' perspective.
Katharine Otto Added Mar 17, 2018 - 2:15am
I always enjoy reading your point of view, but I live downriver from Plant Vogtle, and I resent like mad that Southern Company is trading on the New York Stock Exchange.  In other words, the money exporters win whether there's a Plant Vogtle meltdown or leak, terrorist sabotage, employee incompetence, or computer failure.  They just get their insurance to pay for it and bouncey-bouncey go the high-dividend monopolistic utility stocks.  In other words, "shareholders" but not "rate-payers" are profiting from SoCo's expensive mistake.  "Rate payers" are subsidizing "share-holders'" dividends, and living with the ever-present danger of accidents.  What part of this is fair?
I agree with you that solar and wind are not for everyone.  I don't believe in roof panels, for reasons you mention, weight on the roof, difficulty maintaining and cleaning.  I would like a small solar set up specifically to run my water well, when the power goes out, as it often does.  I would ground-mount any panels.  I've considered a set up on wheels that could be rolled around to sunny locations, along with batteries.
Nuclear power is not a good solution, unless the plants are very small and regional.  I believe we use way too much energy.  I don't have a dishwasher, got rid of it, because it was too noisy.  Why do people drive so much when there's a McDonalds' or Walmart within walking distance from your average USA home?
Katharine Otto Added Mar 17, 2018 - 2:27am
If there is a single factor leading to buildup of CO2 in the atmosphere, it is deforestation.  I just finished reading The Land Grabbers, by Fred Pearce.  It's appalling how they are razing rain forest, traditional tribal lands, all for planting sugar cane or palm oil trees, or other industry designed to maximize stockholder dividends in the short term.
The less you spend, the less you have to work, the less you pollute, and the less CO2 you exhale.  
Flying Junior Added Mar 17, 2018 - 3:11am
For an idiot, a computer can probably be a bad thing, he or she will do idiotic things on it, it will reinforce idiocy. But the opposite is true as well.
True, my friend.
Flying Junior Added Mar 17, 2018 - 3:32am
Thank you for returning, Katharine.  Your original comment on the ethanol mandate was lost to me for a couple of days.  I only read the comments supporting your  POV.  Devil's advocate, my car is designed to run on E85.
You and I can agree that deforestation is a primary driver of this phenomenon.  And thank you so much for pointing that out.  I did mention about the rainforests.  As you and I both understand they are the lungs of the earth.  Just as animals use up the oxygen in our atmosphere, plants use the carbon dioxide that we exhale.  Green plants give off oxygen.  It's an incredibly well-balanced system.
That's the main point that I wish people could understand.  Life on earth is such a miracle, and so manifold and of incredible beauty in its infinite diversity, that fundamentally changing any of the necessary components in a profound way can only lead to upsetting that delicate balance.  No frogs.  No bees.  No more fish.  Worst case scenario, no more birds.  It has happened and will continue to do so.  Honestly, the ignorance and callousness of responses not only to my article, but in so many places is nothing short of frightening.
Happily, I can report that tree frogs and some kind of crazy La Jolla Ravine-Coastal frogs still exist in the community directly east of La Jolla, Clairemont, and in at least one ravine that drips water to the ocean year-round.  That frog location is on the southern portion of Black's Beach.
Our neighbor has frogs in his duck-pond.  But he doesn't always have ducks.  We still have honeybees.  But the last Bumblebees were at least ten years ago.
Another thing that we can agree on is that increasing the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is dangerous.  I am planning a series of articles.  The first may very well focus on ocean acidification.
Frosty Wooldridge Added Mar 18, 2018 - 10:35am
In the 21st century, human overpopulation continues to be the most ignored, suppressed and avoided issue of our time. World leaders and religions dodge every discussion pertaining to its onslaught in the face of human struggles at epic levels. With our planet screaming its accelerating anguish via contaminated oceans, poisoned soils and polluted atmosphere---we indifferently add 80 million of ourselves annually and one billion more every 12 years. Our 7.3 billion numbers wreak havoc on the rest of the natural world as we cause extinction rates of other creatures at over 100 daily and hundreds of thousands by mid century. At some point, we face catastrophic climate destabilization, lack of water and arable land to grow food as well as loss of oil energy to drive our civilizations. When the final drivers descend on our species, Mother Nature won’t be kind or forgiving. Frosty Wooldridge, 6 continent world bicycle traveler
Flying Junior Added Mar 18, 2018 - 10:50pm
Hi Frosty,
Nice to meet you on neutral territory.  I envy you your bicycle prowess.
My post was actually a comment on Michael B's thread that seemed like it was good enough to spin into my own article.  I was extremely disturbed at the solutions that were being proposed...  I guess I'm just not a good sport who recognizes parody when I see it.
One commenter wished there was an easier way to, "cull the herd," than war and promptly suggested an epidemic.
The next guy said something about birth control and immediately brought up his own issues with being confronted about racism.  Next thing he was talking about Muslims.
Then one guy suggested a purge.  Then a real track star came up with the following:
If we can just figure out how to heat up the planet, we should be able to unlock huge parts of north america and asia for humans to come in and settle. Unfortunately people keep trying to prevent the planet from warming up. Best solution I can think of is to burn all the coal to de-salinize water to get the Sahara green again, but we need to figure out how to cycle the water so we dont need to keep desalinizing it.
No one was talking about any practical solutions to the problems faced by our planetary population.  All the comments seemed so cynical.  It devolved into bickering.  So I came up with my little hippie-dippie, "I love everybody," comment.  I decided to use a twist on the old Sting song for my title.  Thanks for visiting.  Normally I don't do the, "solve all the world's problems thing," but I did enjoy it.

Recent Articles by Writers Flying Junior follows.