Collapse of Civilization

[Bob Armstrong]

Collapse of Civilization

(Started: 23/10/30)

Weekly Overview

Notes:

1. The “Weekly Overview” of the topic is posted for the benefit of new members who may have come in between the “Weekly Overviews”. It provides an executive summary of the issue for new viewers.

2. The Stats of participation are important to allow all to determine the extent of continuing interest. For thread originators//responders they are important to see if the interest no longer warrants the labour.



A. Statistics

Week # 3 (23/11/13 –19, 2023 [7 days])

(Sometimes Adjusted for no. of days)

Weekly Stats:
.....................................................2023 Average..........................................................2023 Average
Last Week's......Prior Week's........Views/Day..........Last Week's.....Prior Week's......Responses/Day
Views/Day........Views/Day.............(1 wk.)............Responses/Day....Resp./Day.......(1 wk.).

…55........................38.......................27.........................5........................4........................4

Analysis of Last Week's Stats

Last week's stats are running ahead of those of the prior week, and the 2023 year to date. It seems that this new non-chess topic has hit an interest point.......good on the initiator, Bob Gillanders (I started the thread for him).

Civilizations do not collapse overnight........there is a long, steady, continuous deterioration before hand. Then, all of a sudden, the tipping point has been reached, and we get metamorphosis (Like caterpillar to butterfly, only in reverse!). Either Dystopia, or a new empire rising like the Sphinx from the ashes, sometimes worse than the one it replaces.

Do we care who is going to be in control, as humans battle to survive in an environment more and more hostile to their continued existence (Negative Climate Change; Possible Nuclear War; Pandemics; etc.) and the very collapse of our civilization is on the horizon?

B. Indicia of a Collapsing Civilization

Comment below on what the current evidence is that our world's civilization is now collapsing......we'll add some of your ideas here!

Additional Notes:

1. The goal of this thread is not to woodshed an opposing view into submission. Every position is entitled to post as it sees fit, regardless of the kind of, and amount of, postings by other positions. What is wanted is serious consideration of all posts........then you decide.

2. I personally, as the thread originator (After an initiative by Bob Gillanders), am trying to post a new response at least twice per week, but admit my busy schedule means I am sometimes falling short on this. So it is going to be necessary that a number of other CT'ers are posting responses here somewhat regularly.

Bob A

[Bob Armstrong]

Libertarianism & Governing

"Argentina’s Libertarian President-Elect Confronts a Quiet Buzzsaw of Russian-Funded, Anti-American Disinformation on Latin American Social Media."

https://www.nysun.com/article/argent...0%202023-11-21

Bob A

[Peter McKillop]

Fun, fun - I go into the hospital tomorrow for a test whether my pacemaker is defective...........sigh..........sucks when the body parts are wearing out!

Bob A

Hope everything goes well, Bob.

[Bob Armstrong]

Thanks Peter........

Good News - Pacemaker is fine!

Bad News - something else is causing my light-headedness and almost feinting (sigh)

Back to my personal physician on Tuesday!

Bob A

[Peter McKillop]

.... I was wondering if we could have a thoughtful conversation / debate on chesstalk. ....

Bob G

Baaaaaaahahahaha. Good one, Bob! But seriously, if dreams come true maybe the collapse of civilization could be deferred for a while.

[Bob Gillanders]

Baaaaaaahahahaha. Good one, Bob!

Thanks Peter.
You are right, my first instinct that a thoughtful conversation on chesstalk was a pipe dream was correct.

In fact, if I stay away from posting I may even experience a jump in IQ.
I think I will try that for a while. Wish me luck.

[Bob Armstrong]

Like.........what am I guys.........chopped liver?

Bob A

[Dilip Panjwani]

If you were a farmer in Croatia, the Yugoslav state stole your kitchen table, your cow, your horse, your underwear, your clothes, anything that wasn't nailed down. Later they stole your farm and if you didn't get away fast enough they wanted to kill you. Sometimes they chased you all the way to Canada or the U.S. or Germany to kill you. They gave your farm to people who had no idea how to run your farm. They later threw them into prison because they couldn't pay the taxes demanded by the socialist paradise.

One billion dollars is not enough to launch SpaceX, or Tesla or Intel or Apple (in today's environment). It is best not covet thy neighbor's goods. There is a reason that it is right there in the ten commandments. If we are ever going to attract sponsorship for chess it will come from the billionaires or the companies they built. Lets tone down the Bernie Sanders and AOC silliness.

Hi Vlad,
Your thoughtful comments will someday raise the IQ level of postings here on chesstalk... hopefully before it collapses...

[Peter McKillop]

......

Thanks for the link to the Dean article, Pargat.

[Peter McKillop]

.... It is best not covet thy neighbor's goods. There is a reason that it is right there in the ten commandments. .... Lets tone down the Bernie Sanders and AOC silliness.

And didn't the same guy (or a very close associate) who gave us the ten commandments also say, do unto others as you would have them do unto you? How does that fit into your biblical-cum-capitalist world?

[Peter McKillop]

Thanks Peter.
You are right, my first instinct that a thoughtful conversation on chesstalk was a pipe dream was correct.

In fact, if I stay away from posting I may even experience a jump in IQ.
I think I will try that for a while. Wish me luck.

I hope you don't go, Bob. CT needs some sanity.

A thought: what have we 'sapiens' accomplished during our relatively brief time on the planet that would make us deserving of a brighter future? To me, our time here is like a gigantic, reeking pile of pig manure with a few, widely interspersed birthday candles burning to signify humans' worthy accomplishments. And guess what?: PayPal is not a fucking birthday candle. One example of a birthday candle: during WW2 some brave Dutch citizens, at great risk to themselves and their families, hid Jews to protect them from the Nazi slime. Now THAT is a birthday candle!!!

[Bob Armstrong]

I'd like to defend Henry Lam/Francis Rodriguez & ChessTalk!

This non-chess forum DOES produce much rational and sound discussion, among all the noise of those making little contribution (Personal attacks are due to not knowing how to factually rebut).

Please review the following:

[Part I of 3 parts]

1. Negative Climate Change

CT/Negative Climate Change

Update

Statements on Negative Climate Change Generally Accepted by a Group of Canadian tournament Chess Players on the national chess discussion board, ChessTalk (Non-Chess Topics). The individuals represent a political partisan spectrum, and an issue spectrum.

We now have 11 STATEMENTS in various stages of acceptance (See below).

We use “The Conversation Format Protocol (TCFP)”. All Statements are a work-in-progress, though for some, there are now no outstanding Proposed Revision/Opposition Challenges.

A. Statements

Statement # 1

Solar Activity is the main driver of climate change. It is heat from the sun that is the "source" of the rising air/atmospheric temperature of Earth.

Support - Bob Armstrong (Post # 1453 – 23/7/20 - slightly edited) - "Our new Commonly Accepted Statement # 1 does not play one way or another as to whether the rise in temperature is a “problem”. It merely states the fact that Naturalists agree with - their fact is that the average rising temperature is about .5 degrees C every 100 years.....that is "rising" temperature."

Statement # 2

Earth's mean temperature is now rising, has been for some time, and will likely continue to rise for some time in the future.

Support 1 – Bob Armstrong – Post # 1485 – 23/7/22 [Lightly Edited]

“The post of Sid Belzberg (Post # 1296 – 23/4/29) "supports" Statement # 2! He asserts evidence that the average rate of increase is ".5 degrees every 100 years" over a 300 year period. This confirms "the temperature is now rising, and has been for some time".

Arguably, if it has been rising for 300 years, and you look at all the human problems arising from this rising heat (See Statement # 3), then heat is going to "likely continue to rise for some time in the future". We, of course, at this point in developing our Statements, have not taken on the issue, yet, of whether this trend of .5 degrees per 100 years is the expected increase for the future.”

Support 2 – Bob Armstrong – Post # 1523 – 23/7/27

“The New Warming Climate State/Multi-Century Temperature Periods

Scientists concluded a few years ago that Earth had entered a new climate state not seen in more than 100,000 years. As fellow climate scientist Nick McKay and I recently discussed in a scientific journal article, that conclusion was part of a climate assessment report published by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in 2021.

Earth was already more than 1 degree Celsius (1.8 Fahrenheit) warmer than preindustrial times, and the levels of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere were high enough to assure temperatures would stay elevated for a long time.

https://theconversation.com/is-it-re...=pocket-newtab “

Support 3 – Bob Armstrong – Post # 1526 23/7/27

“This [July] Looks Like Earth’s Warmest Month. Hotter Ones Appear to Be in Store.

July is on track to break all records for any month, scientists say, as the planet enters an extended period of exceptional warmth.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/27/c...d396a4debfd6ce “

Statement # 3

“The term “Record-Breaking” is sometimes loosely/wrongly used in the Main Stream Media re Earth's currently rising temperature. Cities across the globe may have unique geographic and meteorological characteristics that determine current temperature variations. Fact checking may be necessary.”

Statement # 4:

Currently rising air/atmospheric temperature of Earth is a problem for humanity.

Support 1 - Bob Gillanders (Post # 1468 – 23/7/19)

"Seems crazy and very hard to believe that they [Texas Governor, Greg Abbot,] would have to legislate employers to allow such breaks from a scorching heat work environment, but apparently that is the case. The water breaks since 2010 that Governor Abbott now wants to take away has reduced the death toll on workers significantly."

Support # 2 - Fred Harvey (Post # 1470 - 23/7/19)

"I have lived in the same town for 50 plus years (how dull...not). Amongst other things, I have seen the tomato growing season go from 2.5 months to 4 months. For 35 years we lived without air-conditioning....now not so much. Them's two facts that suggest significant warming."

Support # 3 - Bob Armstrong (Post # 1451 - 23/7/11)

"I, for one, believe we see "problems" for human living all around us every day, the world over, from rising heat levels (Regardless of arguing over why the heat is rising or the rate at which it is rising)."

Statement # 5

Since the year 1650 (200 years before the Industrial Revolution [Started: 1850], which is the earliest global temperature recording), the Earth's mean temperature has been rising naturally (Earth has been in a natural warming cycle; it has gone through various cooling and warming cycles before this current warming one). There is surface temperature data for the period 1650 to 1850, and beyond, from the records of the UK Meteorological Observatory. Some propose that they are sufficient to use to analyze our increasing temperature problem.

Support - Sid Belzberg - Post # 1296 (23/4/29)

"Given that heart of the early Industrial Revolution started in the UK, where manmade CO2 emissions were significant, it is an excellent platform to analyze the data.”

Statement # 6

Between 600 million and 400 million years ago, CO2 in Earth's atmosphere was quite high (over 600 ppm). Between 200 million and 150 million years ago, it had dropped to over 300 ppm. and remained there. But by 2022, almost 200 years after the start of the Industrial Revolution [1850], the percentage of the air/atmosphere that is CO2 had again spiked. "Carbon dioxide measured at NOAA’s Mauna Loa Atmospheric Baseline Observatory peaked for 2022 at 421 parts per million in May, pushing the atmosphere further into territory not seen for millions of years, scientists from NOAA and Scripps Institution of Oceanography offsite link at the University of California San Diego announced today. "
[ Note: The significance of CO2 as a factor in negative climate change is hotly debated. Whether CO2 production from the time of the Industrial Revolution is relevant is also hotly debated. These await further Statements, if any generally accepted Statements are possible.]

Supporting Reasons - Bob Armstrong - Post # 1735 - 23/9/1

The source of the percentage of CO2 in the air, both historically, and currently is given. The spike in CO2 after the human Industrial Revolution (Approx. 1850 A.D.) coincides with the period of increased warming. CO2 is only one of the greenbelt gases forming the non-porous heat canopy around the Earth.
This Statement deals only with CO2 in the air/atmosphere. It does not tie the rising temperature of the Earth to the spike in CO2; that will have to await future Statements, if there can be a generally accepted on in this group at all.

Statement # 7

It is essential to have alternate sources of energy; it is good that this transition is now underway; our options include renewables (solar panels, tidal, water turbines, windmills) and nuclear. Traditionally used fossil fuels, including coal, are finite, though more plentiful than commonly thought.

Support # 1 - Bob Gillanders (Post # 1415 – 23/7/2)

“Scientists have been warning us about climate change (global warming) for decades. The science is very complicated, but we now have 50 years of data to support the premise that burning fossil fuels is the primary cause. We need to free ourselves from our dependence on fossil fuels. Our options include renewables (solar panels, windmills) and nuclear.”

Support # 2 - Dilip Panjwani (Post # 1417 – 23/7/2)

“It is essential to have alternate sources of energy, as fossil fuels, including coal, won't last for very long.”

Support # 3 – Sid Belzberg (Post # 1419 – 23/7/2)

“In theory, this is a finite resource, but it is not scarce and likely would take several hundred years to deplete entirely.”

Support # 4 – Bob Armstrong (Post # 1423 – 23/7/2)

“Please note that I have introduced ....... including in renewables, "tidal" & "water turbines".”

[See Parts II & III below]

Bob A (As Group Secretary)

[Dilip Panjwani]

...how would you raise the massive amounts of money required for drug research and development if you can't provide prospective investors with the confidence that any successful outcomes will be protected by patents/etc long enough for them to recoup and profit from their investment?

https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle...&impID=5666892

Peter, after the real painstaking research has been done at the Universities, big-pharma pays a paltry amount to 'buy it' and vey little additional investment is needed to convert it into a drug.
They then spend large amounts orchestrating, by hook or by crook, (i) the conduct of deliberately faulty studies to 'misguide' overuse of that drug, (ii) hype these faulty studies across medical centers and (iii) work behind the scenes in getting overuse guidelines created... Instead, these should ideally be in the domain of the Medical Universities, and one way to stop current practice which is harmful to patients (more side-effects) and to whoever pays for the drugs, is to have a system of adequate public rewards to the University intellectuals, and give open access (without restrictive patents) to drug manufacturing...

[Bob Armstrong]

In Defence of ChessTalk (Non-chess Forum)

Part II of 3 (Part I above; Part III below)

CT/Negative Climate Change

Statements Update

Statement # 8

If farming has an effect on global negative climate change (Whether it does will be dealt with in another Statement, if possible), then any negative effect will be mitigated to some extent by the farming industry becoming “sustainable”. Sustainable agriculture is the efficient production of safe, high-quality agricultural product, in a way that protects and improves the natural environment, the social and economic conditions of the farmers, their employees and local communities, and safeguards the health and welfare of all farmed species.(Definition by Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food & Rural Affairs: https://www.omafra.gov.on.ca/english/busdev/facts/15-023.htm").

Support - Bob Armstrong - Post # 1606 - 23/8/7

The definition of sustainable agriculture used does not explicitly say that this involves necessarily only organic farming. The definition leaves open the possibility that Non-Organic farming could be "sustainable". It is argued that used correctly, certain fertilizers have no effect on health or the environment. But this is still an open question.

Secondly, the statement does not take any position on whether or not farming DOES have a negative effect on climate.

Statement 9

The two seminal papers by distinguished atmospheric physicists, William Happer of the Princeton University Department of Physics and William A. van Wijngaarden of the York University, Canada, Department of Physics and Astronomy prove that Methane and Nitrous Oxide emissions have no statistically meaningful effect on warming hence farming does not have anything to do with climate change.

Supporting Reasons: Sid Belzberg Post # 1646 – 23/8/15

Statement # 10

Carbon dioxide is not a dangerous pollutant. CO2 is the most important nutrient for all life on Earth, without it, we would be a dead planet.

Support Reasons: Sid Belzberg - Post # 1733 – 23/8/31 (Secretary)

Statement # 11

The average rate of temperature increase from 1695-2023 is .5 degrees per 100 years. 50% of this time was pre-industrial emissions of CO2.

Support

As expected, post-1850, the rise in CO2 emissions had no impact on the temperature whatsoever! The Hadcet dataset is a great model for climate change as the heart of the Industrial Revolution and industrial CO2 emissions was in the UK that began in 1850.
The average rate over a century is climate change, and variations year over year are the weather! The modern media attempts to confuse the two.
[Chart – Post # 1800 – 23/10/5]
The Central England temperature record (HadCET) contains the longest continuously measured thermometer-based regional temperature dataset in the world, going back more than 350 years. This record began in 1659, in the depths of the Little Ice Age (1250 – 1800) which was marked by some of the coldest temperatures in nearly 8,000 years. The period of the late 17th century and early 18th century was a horrifically cold period known as the Maunder Minimum. Thankfully, the current warming trend we are in began in the year 1695. The next 40 years had more than twice the rate of warming as we experienced in the 20th century. The first half of this 300-plus year warming had about the same amount of temperature rise as the latter half and was entirely naturally driven. The natural forces driving temperature changes for the first 200 years of this temperature history did not cease functioning in the 20th century.

Temp: Parker DE, Legg TP, Folland CK (1992) A new daily Central England Temperature Series, 1772 – 1991. Int. J. Clim., Vol 12, pp 317–342, https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/hadobs

CO2: Boden TA, Marland G, Andres RJ (2016) Global CO2 emissions from Fossil-Fuel Burning Cement Manufacture and Gas Flaring 1751 – 2013. CDIAC, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, U.S. Dept of Energy, Oak Ridge, TN, USA, DOI 10.3334/CDIAC/00001_V2010

Source(s): , Boden TA, Marland G, Andres RJ (2016) Global CO2 emissions from Fossil-Fuel Burning Cement Manufacture and Gas Flaring 1751 - 2013. CDIAC, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, U.S. Dept of Energy, Oak Ridge, TN, USA, DOI 10.3334/CDIAC/00001_V2010

Source(s): Temp: Parker DE, Legg TP, Folland CK (1992) A new daily Central England Temperature Series, 1772 – 1991. Int. J. Clim., Vol 12, pp 317–342

B. Rejected Statements

Statement A

Additional carbon beyond 400-450 PPM where we are today (est) has no impact on the climate as all heat is absorbed in the first 400 PPM.

Supporting Reasons: Sid Belzberg Post # 1730-2 – 23/8/31

Opposition Challenge 1 - Bob Gillanders - Post # 1720 - 23/8/28

I think statement # 10 is outrageous.

If true, it would give the fossil fuel industry unlimited licence to burn everything, because hey "would have no impact on the climate".
As the church lady says, "how convenient".

I do follow climate updates elsewhere, and I don't see any mention of support for statement #10. I know Sid has cited a recent study by a couple of scientists, so if it does gain credibility elsewhere, I will let you know.

So instead of just letting statement #10 stand as is, I think some notation that it is not considered generally accepted as of now.

Opposition Challenge 2 - Bob Armstrong (As Participant) - Post # 1732 - 23/8/31

Statement # 6 now is:

Between 600 million and 400 million years ago, CO2 in Earth's atmosphere was quite high (over 600 ppm). Between 200 million and 150 million years ago, it had dropped to over 300 ppm. and remained there. But by 2022, almost 200 years after the start of the Industrial Revolution [1850], the percentage of the air/atmosphere that is CO2 had again spiked. "Carbon dioxide measured at NOAA’s Mauna Loa Atmospheric Baseline Observatory peaked for 2022 at 421 parts per million in May, pushing the atmosphere further into territory not seen for millions of years, scientists from NOAA and Scripps Institution of Oceanography offsite link at the University of California San Diego announced today. "
[ Note: The significance of CO2 as a factor in negative climate change is hotly debated. Whether CO2 production from the time of the Industrial Revolution is relevant is also hotly debated. These await further Statements, if any generally accepted Statements are possible.]

Sid's Statement # 10 (Proposed) is roughly in agreement with the fact re current CO2:

Additional carbon beyond 400-450 PPM where we are today (est) has no impact on the climate as all heat is absorbed in the first 400 PPM.

But other scientists draw very opposite conclusions from Sid's Statement # 10! Recently moving into the 400 PPM range is a big spike in the percentage of CO2 in the atmosphere. Many scientists see the spike as due to anthropogenic activity (The Industrial Revolution). And they clearly link the increase in CO2 to the increase in temperature (Part of the Non-Porous Greenhouse Gas Canopy argument):

Carbon dioxide in Earth's atmosphere - Wikipedia

https://www.noaa.gov/news-release/ca...ustrial-levels

So CO2 DOES have an impact on the climate as it is one of the causes of the rising heat level on Earth.

I agree with Bob G - it is not generally acceptable and should be stricken from the list of Statements.

Statement B

There is no climate emergency.

Opposition Challenge # 1 - Bob Gillanders - Post # 1788 - 23/10/2

"...it is not generally accepted under any reasonable definition of generally accepted.

Court cases are now underway and winning to protect the environment.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPXY..._channel=MSNBC

Besides, where is the definition of "emergency"?"

Opposition Challenge # 2 - Bob Armstrong - Post # 1791 - 23/10/3

"There IS a "climate emergency". Tons of material now exists in the public domain to this effect. Governments and private organizations (World Economic Forum) are sounding the alert. We are seeing the effects of climate change across the globe: wildfires; floods; landslides; rising sea levels; melting polar caps; etc. It is now well-accepted, both inside this group, and in the world at large, that it is likely the human species will be unable to adapt to this new increasingly hostile environment, and will go extinct.

What other definition is there of an "emergency".

The fact of this very thread shows that there is NO general acceptance within this group (This is Post # 1,791!! and BOTH sides are posting their little hearts out).......there IS raging controversy

This Statement is both wrong, and not generally accepted by this group."

Opposition Challenge # 3 - Pargat Perrer - Post # 1792 - 23/10/3

"Just this past week, New York City suffered floods due to precipitation levels not seen in a single day since 1948. That's 75 bleeping years. The extent of the widespread damages is still being worked out.

Guess what that is going to do to property insurance rates in New York City?

Property Insurance companies are the canary in the coal mine; if you want to know whether we are in a climate emergency, follow the falling fortunes of the biggest property insurers and of their customers. Never mind what CO2 levels might have been hundreds of thousands of years ago."

Bob A (As Past Group Secretary)

[Bob Armstrong]

In Defence of ChessTalk (Non-chess Forum)

Part III of 3 (Parts I & II above)

CT/Negative Climate Change

Statements Update

C. Secretarial Rulings

I – Procedural

Ruling # P1 (Post # 1624 – 23/8/23)

New Proposed Statements must be accompanied by a short, executive summary, set of reasons.

[Note: If the Support Texts are extensive, they will have to be shortened by the proposer; these Statements are often repeated and updated in future postings, and extensive support texts, with graphs/charts/ long book or report quotes, etc., will simply become too unwieldy; but the Post # & date of the Extensive support texts will be noted for those viewers wanting more information than the executive summary.]

II – Substantial

Ruling # S1 (Post # 1682 – 23/8/24)

There shall be put forward no Statement on the cause of current Canadian wildfires.

Support

There is great controversy outside this group, and inside, as to the cause of current Canadian wildfires (Natural, Accidental Human, Deliberate Human [arson]). A generally accepted Statement is not possible.

D. CT'er Group Decisions

1. Discussion Protocol (Post # 1736 – 23/9/3)

This CT'er group will continue to use the "Generally Accepted" (The Conversation Format Protocol) Protocol . It has rejected the “Free-Form” discussion protocol.

2. Group Secretary Position (for group process in generating Statements) – Post # 1817 – 23/10/26)

The group secretary position is now unfilled.

Bob A (As Past Group Secretary)

NOTE

All this created by some ChessTalkers!!!!

I have 2 more posts coming to further drive home my point to put a stake through the heart of the MYTH that nothing intelligent ever is generated by ChessTalkers!

Bob A