Draft Work in progress Notes for One for the Septics

  • Selection_152.jpg

    • You asked about my Systems Science paper from 2000, and you found it in a space I was not aware of. One has to scroll down to find it. Note that I was not asked if it was OK to post it there!! It is not my sort of website. It shows it was first republished in Countercurrents in 2011.

      It is about overpopulation and optimum population, and is not a subject for this blog. It has been in the public domain for nearly two decades, and has receive only positive responses as far as I know. If you have objections regarding it, you are free to write a rebuttal.

      I had responded to your first comment on this blog’s topic with two points. You’ve addressed neither. They require only a few sentences of clarification/explanation. You declined twice to address the list on them.

      If I find your rebuttal to my paper substantial, rest assured that I will respond in a relevant public forum concerned with Systems Science and Human Population. You may send the rebuttal to my Yahoo address:
      kurtzsb AT yahoo DOT ca

      I will inform you of the forum to which I will post your statement along with my response.

    • Jolly Good, Steven.
      I will post my essay on Monday on my own blog you can do what you like and stick it where you like, its no skin off my nose.
      Just to clear up the point on your claim to have quoted Smil in that paper, both cite a Smail but not Smil. Is there another paper or has the Global Community web site , published by the Prophet of God and Global Government no less, got your original citations screwed up too? It certainly doesn’t seem so.


      The Global Community organization, Global Parliament, Earth Government and the Federation of Global Governments were founded in 1985 in Calgary, Canada by Germain Dufour,  Prophet of God, Spiritual Leader and President, and further developed through Global Parliament meetings. Later on in 1990s he was joined by his wife, Virginie, in the developing of many global concepts. Symbiotical relationships were defined to show the path for a better world. The Federation was formed to replace the United Nations.

      Do they have you By Line Bio right Stephen?

      Steven B. Kurtz, a philosophy graduate of New York University, is a member of the Canadian Association for the Club of Rome. He was an Assistant Director of Merrill Lynch International Bank during a twenty-five year career in financial derivatives. After nine years organic gardening in New Hampshire, he now does research and volunteer work in ecological economics and sustainable futures with several organizations.


      Regarding your claim that I have somehow to explain to your satisfaction the work of both Henry George and Dr Adrian Wriggley is quite bizarre. I take it that you are not interested in a public Live streamed debate as outlined on my blog?
      I think Derrida has something in this little interview here, Bateson is interesting on the same subject in his book, A Philosophy of Mind.

    #159. The perils of equilibria. Carbon Taxation. GE2019 the #CO2 #COP outs, Our Democracy is on Fire! Von Der Leyen and the #EUGreenDeal #WrongKindofGreen



    Ursula von der Leyen


    In 10 days, the @EU_Commission will present the .
    Our goal is to be the 1st climate neutral continent by 2050.

    If we want to achieve that goal, we have to act and implement our policies now. Because we know that this transition needs a generational change. 

    View image on Twitter
    1,102 people are talking about this

    Hi, Stephen, I do not claim ownership of The Ideas of the Late Dr Adrian Wrigley.
    I do not claim either to be A Henry George or Single Land Tax Expert. I have Read George and also some developments of his ideas. Mainly I have been into the work of GK Chesterton and Hillaire Belloc and Distributism which is an Honest hybrid of Market and Social ideas that is neither Left or right but founded in the Catholic Christian tradition.
    My won work on all of these ideas of political economy is on my blog anyone can search the concepts I mention and with respect to elaborating here, I prefer not to as persons such as yourself have made it quite clear that you will brook no discussion only passive submission to your own settled minds. Tim our host is I must say not included in that remark but you certainly are.

  • Ah, so Your refusal to explain your scheme to the blog members is my problem. And then you cloak your muddled thinking with a religious doctrine. Must be greatly self-satisfying, however the list learns nothing from it.

  • Steven,
    Thank you for your invitation to address the List? I will decline thank you very much. My ideas are very extensively explained and sourced with citations, links and so forth and my Conquest of Dough Web site also has many links to downloadable PDF’s.


    I did explain to you that The Late Dr Adrian Wrigleys work is his and not mine and they are his ideas and not mine the full web site which is now run by Robin Smith, who used to publish a satirical blog called the melt Fund, now runs it.
    Here is the link.
    The Systemic Fiscal Reform Group (SFR Group)
    Melt Fund on the way back machine.

    For the dilettantes and hard of Irony please be aware that the Melt Fund is a footlights production of Cambridge academics bursting with good old fashioned British irony. I merely mention this as Steven has self-identified previously as a dilettante in one of his only moments of blinding insight I recall from his participation on the “List”. In sharp contrast of course to my own cloaked .. “muddled thinking with a religious doctrine”.
    I still await a link to your 2000 systems paper Steven but you are I recall not interested in ideas outside of your own No Intelligence allowed religious doctrine of atheism.

    mentions “retired dilettante trained in analytic philosophy, but have researched this for 3 decades or so”. So Steven 3 decades as a Dilettante it seems? Have you got a link to your 2000 systems paper quoting Smil, I would like to read it.
    Just out of courtesy and so those who resent the links I have added and do not wish to and have an understandable disinterest in Stevens charges against me a philosopher and poet on little note or consequence that lives in the middle of nowhere in a Swedish forest here are the bare bones on the question of Distributism and “ChesterBelloc” political Economy of the Catholic Christin Democratic variety.
    Distributism is found under the Christian Democracy section of Wikipedia, rather than dabble in ad-hominem and making strawmen arguments for a correctly cited school of thought from the Christian Catholic Tradition, where Belloc and Chesterton drew from to produce their very interesting system in the “30 acres and mule” and “3 acres and a cow”, land reform traditions in the USA and The British Isles.
    Predicting in the Serville State modern Neo-Liberalism and of course the rise of Adolph Hitler.


    That an ethical foundation can be found within a traditional religious framework should not provoke such harsh reproach as it does in you Stephen such reactions are found in Iconoclastic Zealots and no doubt dilettantes down the ages, is it presumptuous to think you might bring your personal experience and self-analysis to bear on that question?



  • Steven B Kurtz
Steven B Kurtz on  said:

Dear Mr Lewis,

You obviously are unfamiliar with the Negative Fallacy. It is 100% up to the claimant of supernaturals to provide sharable evidence. In a complex, open system, proving non-existence is logically impossible. The ball is in the court of *all* claiming the existence of *anything* non-physical [energy-matter-information] I stand ready to wager for charity at longbets dot org that there will be no evidence forthcoming.

I recall giving a link to my System Science paper which is “Feedback and Dis-Equilibrium in Human Overpopulation.” It was given to the Plenary of The World Congress of the System Sciences- 2000, Toronto, webcast to 3 continents, and has never been rebutted. Search Countercurrents dot org and the above title, or my name Steven B Kurtz

As to cluttering Tim’s blog with many references from *your* blog and other sources rather than replying to the two simple points I challenged in my original reply, I must say that our gracious host is most tolerant.

Yes, retired dilettante is my title, but I stand willing to debate and/or wager for charity on points about which I am confident. Religious sorts and ideologues never step up to the plate.


  • Steven, Dilettante is as dilettante does. Thank you for the information to search for the link I will take a look, Thankyou. You had not previously provided this information. On the Graciousness of Tim our Host, of course, Tims excellence and acuity is not in question, certainly not by me. Regarding your Blustering. Steven, our discussion is linked and people can read and make up their own minds. And in making up their Minds!, therein lies the question.
    What is Mind?
    My own Mind is persuaded by the great Logician and Father of American Pragmatism C S Pierce.

    “Three modes of evolution have thus been brought before us: evolution by fortuitous variation, evolution by mechanical necessity, and evolution by creative love. We may term them tychastic evolution, or tychasm, anancastic evolution, or anancasm, and agapastic evolution, or agapasm. The doctrines which represent these as severally of principal importance we may term tychasticism, anancasticism,and agapasticism. On the other hand the mere propositions that absolute chance, mechanical necessity, and the law of love are severally operative in the cosmos may receive the names of tychism, anancism, and agapism.” — C. S. Peirce, 1893[2]

    Pierce had considerable Nous.

    and to finish with a little more Peirce. CHARLES SANDERS PEIRCE: ´´In order to reason well …. it is absolutely necessary to possess … such virtues as intellectual honesty and sincerity and a real love of truth (2.82). The cause [of the success of scientificinquirers] has been that the motive which has carried them to the laboratory and the field has been a craving to know how things really were … (1-34).[Genuine inquiry consists I in diligent inquiry into truth for truth’s sake(1.44), … in actually drawing the bow upon truth with intentness in the eye, with energy in the arm (1.235). [When] it is no longer the reasoning which determines what the conclusion shall be, but … the conclusion which determines what the reasoning shall be … this is sham reasoning…. The effect of this shamming is that men come to look upon reasoning as mainly decorative…´´.

    Pierces seminal essay How to make our ideas clear is also a great starting off point for embracing such truth as we might be fortunate enough to encounter in our allotted time on this blue marble suspended in eternity.

    Chrysippus Ha! you jest with me? Beware of the shaft of insoluble syllogism.

  • http://globalcommunitywebnet.com/GCNewsletter/GCJuly2011.html
    #Kurtz Steven could you confirm that this is the paper you wish to engage in/upon a discussion / Debate with me.
    I am happy to arrange a convenient time to debate your paper Live-streamed on my YouTube/channel or any other platform you consider more convenient to you. Here are two previous such live streams I have participated in.

    also, available on the Progressive Momentum Blog of Bill40 a GolemXIV stalwart of the comments section.


    There is no reference to Smil but to Smail, is Smail? Smil? according to your claimed quotes of Smil, is there another longer paper perhaps with more substance?. Vaclav Smil is not J. Kenneth Smail, Professor of Anthropology and Sociology at Kenyon College, so naturally, I am wondering if this is the same paper you refer too or whether you did not correctly recall who you quoted. You do quote a lot of people as part of your argument to authority style, so it’s hardly surprising that you may have tripped your self up or misremembered.

    It seems clear that in your “Paper” you substitute the word “Evidence” for what should be correctly called “opinion”, it is also quite clear that arguments to Authority are very important to your world view. My own background comes from a tradition of Logic, Mathematics and finite element analysis. Given that I sense from your writing that yours is not a Scientific or indeed mathematical Background I am happy if you wish, for you to propose a seconder with the necessary, Mathematical, Scientific and Statistical chops to debate the qualitative empirical data in an informed manner. Tim has the chops and it would perhaps be appropriate if he would agree that we ask Tim to chair our discussion a 3-way skype conference call is easily streamable, there are also several more sophisticated platforms we could use which I am also familiar with.

    You claim that your paper has never been rebutted. Culturally the term Rebuttal seems somewhat de-valued in US chattering class circles such as yours, “Kill the poor to prove you love them”, circles. It is also true, in much the same way, that the Term “Research” has also been similarly diluted and turned on its head in Social Media.

    For the record, I found your paper challenging and challengable at All quadrants and all levels not least because it is a Polemic and not a serious inquiry into the question. As it stands as its own rebuttal, Hoisted on its own petard, one might say, it is unsurprising that it has not been challenged by anyone seriously pursuing the subject either in the field or more widely drawn intellectual salons. As you are unaware whether it has been “rebutted” ( as you call it) or publicly challenged, I assume you can not point me to any substantive discussion or formal challenge to it?
    I will be only too happy to make a full account and particularise its shortcomings. I will write a formal essay doing just that after the Uk General Election results have been declared on Friday. I will post a link to my essay here next Monday.

    There is one basic Mistake I feel it only fair to point out. steady states and Equilibria are much-misapplied terms, quite as much as Rebuttal and Research are, as pointed out above. In Dynamic Systems oscillation across complex dimensions and domains characterise the multiple possible states of any System and What Lewis called “Possible worlds” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Possible_world

    Equilibria and Steady States are what Quine termed convenient posits, you might find Claes Johnson’s work on the Navier Stokes Equations helpful in understanding the more scientific analysis of the systems and system states you so clearly misrepresent, through your poor understanding of the concepts you dabble with.

    You may take this post as my accepting your Duelling Gauntlet,

    En Garde.

  • Selection_155.jpg
  • http://globalcommunitywebnet.com/GCNewsletter/GCJuly2011.html#Kurtz
      Feedback And Dis-Equilibrium In Human Overpopulation
    by Steven B. Kurtz, Countercurrent

    Overwhelming evidence has engendered a consensus among global scientists that the human population level and trend are unsustainable. Although we are part of nature, we may have some choice in the ongoing process of which our numbers are but one variable. Individual, social, and institutional factors are examined, and policy options are considered. Evidence is given debunking the claim that the rich attempt to coerce poor nations to reduce fertility. Carrying capacity and optimum population concepts are discussed, particularly as to equilibrium potential. Prospects for pro-active success are entertained.


    “A suitable total for the number of citizens cannot be fixed without considering the land…” Plato, Laws, V

    During the New Millennium, many unexpected events and conditions will undoubtedly surprise our progeny and us. Perhaps the decline of fossil energy sources will be rendered benign due to scientific discoveries. Perhaps “factor ten” improvements in technological efficiency will aid in the rehabilitation of the environment. Perhaps our species will self-select for survival tolerances in polluted or otherwise altered conditions. These possibilities are little more than speculations.

    We can have a bit more confidence that our numbers will not continue the growth pattern of the last century, during which they quadrupled. This paper will briefly explore why it is that a consensus of the world’s experts believe the rate of growth will continue to slow, whether or not a reduction or crash is likely, and if it is plausible that stabilization might occur at some level other than extinction.

    Some people claim that humans are somehow exempt from the sorts of systemic constraints, which limit the populations of other life forms. We indeed have managed to extend our range into vastly diverse habitats due to our adaptive fitness. Language, abstract thought, and reflective consciousness are traits, which aided this expansion. However, in a largely closed system, physical expansion cannot be infinite.

    We will explore possible scenarios, which might lead to stabilization or equilibrium.

    Projections vary somewhat, but the next half-century is conservatively expected to result in a 50% increase to approximately nine billion of us. We will explore the extent to which it is conceivable that human planning could affect the actual outcome.

    The first section will provide brief evidence that overpopulation is a problem. The fascination with “virtual realities” and the myth of the “de-materialization” of economies are examples of impediments to the grasping of this issue. The vast majority of humans who are unwired know they cannot live on bits and bytes even if some of us believe otherwise; their needs include food, water, and energy.

    The second section will outline some variables affecting human reproductive behavior as positive and negative feedback. These include our genetic make-up (hard wiring), environmental conditions, socio-economic values, institutional pressures, and what is called “free will”.

    Next will be the question of what could constitute equilibrium. Carrying capacity connotes a maximum number of a species, which can endure in a habitat. Tolerances in a complex ecosystem are variable to inputs and internal changes, and are most sensitive when near maximum thresholds. Freedom has been described as the key human value, and it is reflected in maximal options for future decisions and actions. (Buchanan, 1997) Equilibrium seems inconsistent with carrying capacity, since the proximity of potential constraints would reduce future options and maximize the destabilizing risks of changing conditions. If attainable, equilibrium at some variable optimum level should maximize freedom and well-being, and minimize destabilizing occurrences.

    Finally, I will venture into the realm of speculation to consider the prospects for success in the self-determination of equilibrium. Peace and the minimization of future suffering seem to be related to the ultimate outcome.


    “Intensification of production to feed an increased population leads to a till greater increase in population.” (Peter Farb, 1978)

    Albert Bartlett, Emeritus Professor of Physics at The University of Colorado, has demonstrated that with a 1% annual growth rate, human population would in 17,000 years equal all the atoms in the universe.(Bartlett, 1996) As a reference, the last ice age was about 17,000 years ago. We currently are growing at a rate around 50% faster than that. Bartlett was responding to the claim of the possibility of 1% annual growth of the human population for seven billion (then corrected to seven million!) years by Management professor Julian Simon. If space were the only requirement for a healthy, enduring habitat, the issue would be relatively easy to address. In short, sustainable (non-stop) growth of physical systems is an oxymoron.

    Following are some opinions from diverse sources. In a letter to me dated October 3, 1996, U.S. Vice-President Al Gore stated: “I consider the dramatic growth in the world’s population to be the greatest challenge currently facing the environment…The effects of this rapid increase are felt around the globe. Starvation, deforestation, and lack of clean water are just some of the problems…”

    Stuart L. Udall, former US Secretary of the Interior, wrote in a recent essay:

    “…current consumption of the two cornerstone resources of modern life – water and oil – foreshadow shortages that will cripple the economies of many nations if present [population] trends continue.”(Udall, 2000)

    There is a solid scientific consensus evidenced by a 1992 joint statement by The British Royal Society and the (US) National Academy of Sciences urging world leaders to address human overpopulation, as well as by the “World Scientists’ Warning to Humanity” written in 1993 and signed by over 1600 senior scientists from 70 countries which includes the following:

    “The earth is finite. Its ability to absorb wastes and destructive effluent is finite. Its ability to provide food and energy is finite. Its ability to provide for growing numbers of people is finite. And we are fast approaching many of the earth’s limits.”

    “Pressures resulting from unrestrained population growth put demands on the natural world that can overwhelm any efforts to achieve a sustainable future. If we are to halt the destruction of our environment, we must accept limits to that growth.”

    “No more than …a few decades remain before the chance to avert the threats we now confront will be lost and the prospects for humanity immeasurably diminished.”

    ” We must stabilize population.”

    ” We must ensure sexual equality, and guarantee women control over their own reproductive decisions.”

    Many people besides world leaders and scientists understand the seriousness of our predicament. John H. Adams, Executive Director of The Natural Resources Defense Council, an organization not active in population affairs, began an essay entitled “What Matters Most” in The Amicus Journal:

    “There is no single thing more significant for the future of the world than the fact of human population growth.”(Adams, 1997)

    Author of Pulitzer Prize winning Guns, Germs, and Steel Jared Diamond wrote in The Third Chimpanzee:

    “A nuclear holocaust is certain to prove disastrous, but it isn’t happening now. An environmental holocaust is equally certain to prove disastrous, but it differs in that it is already well underway.”(Diamond, 1992)

    Diamond may unfortunately underestimate the risk of a quick, violent demise.

    The University of Toronto’s Peace and Conflict Studies Program has done extensive research on factors influencing violent conflict. One area of the program is the Project on Environment, Population, and Security. Scarcities, depletion, and degradation of resources such as potable water are part of the feedback loops of human activity-habitat systems which impact violent conflict.(Homer-Dixon, et al. 1993)

    “Don’t worry, be happy” is sadly no longer applicable to our predicament. There are some, though, who dismiss these concerns as fiction. They point to past analyses (Ehrlich1968) which contained some incorrect judgments as to the timing of approaching limits. Evidence is strong, though, that the trends are proceeding as he envisioned if we believe the scientific consensus. The nay -sayers include those like the late Julian Simon and Reason Magazine’s Ronald Bailey who conveniently ignores issues like declining stocks of fish which are to be shared by a quarter of a million net additional people daily.(Bailey, 2000)

    The UN has been at the forefront in seeking solutions for overpopulation. The poorest nations are struggling to address the issue, but aid promised by wealthy nations has been slow in coming. India recently announced a national population policy and China is still struggling with the issue. Denial that overpopulation exists and is a serious problem led biologist Garrett Hardin to write a new book last year called The Ostrich Factor. Suffice it to say that I view the evidence as overwhelming.


    “The more we examine the relationships between population, resources, and the environment the stronger the connections appear.” (Dr. Nafis Sadik in an address to The UN Conference on Environment and Development, Geneva, 1991)


    The widely accepted theory called the demographic transition holds that upon reaching a secure and materially comfortable lifestyle, birthrates tend to decline. The case histories of North America and Western Europe are used as evidence for the theory’s validity. In some cases, correlations have occurred, and causal links may seem obvious. However, many physical and social scientists are more rigorous when seeking causal evidence. Virginia Abernethy a professor of psychiatry at Vanderbilt University Medical School, argues convincingly that the perception of the commencement of better economic times (material well-being) leads to higher fertility rates. She gives several good examples:

    “In times of privation in France, prior to the revolution, a sense of limits promoted reproductive caution, and small families were the norm…Prosperity induced high fertility rates in Ireland after the introduction of the potato, and in Turkey, when families received land.” (Abernethy, 1994)

    Even when a “demographic transition” is claimed to have occurred, there could be several generations between supposed cause and effect, making the number of variables too numerous and complex to yield analytic certainty. Several generations of high fertility, like those in the US during the first half of the twentieth century, could result in a rapid population increase, after which a slowdown in births occurs. Abernethy claims that the rise of the US as an economic power, with concomitant optimism for well-being by it’s citizens, was key to the high birthrates. She sees uncertainty about real wages and job security, combined with the high costs of education and health care as factors in the slowdown in US fertility in the latter part of the century.

    Humans do not easily embrace this sort of evidence, but we must continue to examine the possible causes of our actions if we are to pursue effective solutions. Many animals exhibit reduced fertility and/or lower survival rates of young offspring well in advance of serious food shortages. This is an adaptation for survival. Humans exhibit similar patterns when stressed by overcrowding and environmental scarcities. D.H. Stott discussed this at length, and I continue by quoting:

    “…the predicted catastrophe of a world population increasing by geometrical progression to the point of starvation is unlikely to occur. It will be forestalled, if not by conscious human design, by physiological mechanisms, which have evolved to obviate such a calamity. This is not to minimize the fact that these mechanisms themselves are highly unpleasant. Nature prescribes happiness when it has survival value. To man nevertheless is given an answer. We need not wait for the physiological killers and maimers to come upon us…It should not, however, be beyond the capacity of man to develop cultural methods of regulating population-numbers which do not involve distress and unhappiness.” (Stott, 1962)

    Bill Rees, well known for developing the ecological footprint concept, noted ten years ago the relevance of work by Prigogine and Stengers, Crutchfield et al., and Palmer regarding thresholds of unpredictability. The systemic feedback that will affect human numbers with or without our intent may be unexpected in timing and intensity. Worth noting here is the principle of the weak link as expressed by Rees:

    “It should be understood that while human society depends on many ecological resources and functions for survival, carrying capacity is ultimately determined by the single vital resource or function in least supply.” (Rees, 1990)

    There are well-entrenched historically based values, which provide disincentives to reducing fertility. Only children were thought to be deprived by the lack of siblings. This “folk wisdom” is still widely believed despite the lack of conclusive supporting evidence. Large families are accepted by many societies as a joy or a blessing. When farm labor was important for economic viability, this might have reflected rational criteria. In modern industrialized nations, agriculture depends more on energy, chemicals, and technology than on farm hands, and a very small percentage of families is engaged in farming. In many countries the family farm has been subdivided among offspring for generations, resulting in small, unviable plots. Feedback of this nature can be mythical, but nonetheless is still effective.

    In societies with high mortality rates for infants and youth, and lack of institutional old age security, poor families need to produce children as their only realistic means of attempting to secure their future. Here the biological constraint of the prospect of inadequate food is challenged by the human need for future security. This seems a most basic example of the human predicament, called by The Club of Rome, the “global problématique.”


    What types of actions might prove useful in a humane attempt to influence fertility? The acceptance that we have some sphere of free will seems necessary to continue this exploration; just how much is not easy to say.

    “Sociobiology’s premise is that individuals of all species including humans are genetically predisposed to act in ways that maximize their ‘inclusive fitness’…Axiomatically, every living individual had ancestors that succeeded…so most of us carry genes impelling us…” (Abernethy, 1993)

    It is not my intention to attempt to classify or divide human behavior into determined movements or free actions – or any percentage combination of the two. Tendencies or predispositions can be accepted as indicators of probabilities or expectations. We plan and make choices about our role in sexual reproduction to greater or lesser degrees. Ansley Cole has delineated three categories for successful intentional implementation of reduced fertility. First is the actualization and realization that both parties indeed have a choice in the matter. Second is that they perceive benefit(s) from the resulting smaller family. Third is the availability and knowledge of various means of implementing their choice.(Coale, 1989)

    Dr. John R. Weeks is the Director of the International Population Center at San Diego State University. He develops Coale’s concepts into policies with direct and indirect impacts on reproductive behavior. From a systems perspective, these constitute feedback. Direct policies include full legal rights for women, payments for having fewer children, higher (rather than lower) taxes per child, legalization of contraceptive technologies, abortion and sterilization, and availability of family planning services in local outlets. Examples of indirect policies are improved secular education, increased economic opportunities for women, lower infant and child mortality rates, community birth quotas, and public campaigns promoting knowledge and use of birth control.(Weeks, 1990)

    Further discussion of possible planned intervention will be undertaken in the final section of this paper: Prospects.



    Most governments, even when well-meaning, have discovered deficit financing and become addicted to revenue growth. The addition of interest results in larger total future payments than the amount of the original loan. This inevitably results in a race to keep up, as new borrowings are added on a regular basis. With the onset of declining fertility and demographically aging populations in many developed nations, immigration increases are sought to keep the economy growing and to expand payments into the pension system. There have been attempts in Germany and France, among others, to stimulate higher fertility by native born women. This may reflect fear of cultural dilution by societies, and is evidenced by recent political victories by advocates of restricted immigration. If there were a national wealth surplus rather than a debt, growth would not only be unnecessary, it might be undesirable. Old age security would be covered, and remaining wealth could be shared by fewer people.


    Globalization has been accompanied by the dominance of multi-national corporations. It is the mandate of corporations to deliver maximum profits to shareholders, and managers seek to maximize their own income and security by achieving that goal. It is not rational for corporations (or any business) to seek shrinking markets for goods or services. So the system has a built in growth imperative. At the same time, labor shortages would give bargaining power to workers, and would likely increase costs to business. For decades businesses have been relocating facilities to areas where labor is abundant and therefore cheaper. A lack of necessary skills may be a short term constraint, but a declining population is generally not appealing to businesses.

    Now let’s have a look at how a Chinese expert perceives this. Zhang Zhirong is Deputy Director of China Population Welfare Foundation in Beijing. He wrote a report to the Third Conference of the International Consortium for the Study of Environmental Security from which I quote:

    “China is caught in a vicious cycle of swelling population and diminishing resources…Economic growth is the goal of China’s industrial policy. However rapid population growth allays the economic growth that occurs.” (Zhirong, 1994)

    It appears that it is possible for business leaders to catch on that there is a point of diminishing return to population linked economic growth. I expect this feedback to spread globally, like a viral meme, as systemic instability increases.


    There are many religious (and ethnic) beliefs which can influence human reproductive behavior. Some examples include Muslim sects, Orthodox Jewish, and Catholic doctrine. The most extreme example that I’m aware of is the Morman belief that twelve offspring by a man places him closest to God. Groups at war have overtly used competitive breeding as an alternate method of conquest, and rape has been used as part of ethnic cleansing. Other than obscure suicide sects, I know of no religions, which advocate a reduction in the number of their adherents. Some might recognize that overpopulation is a problem. This could present a dilemma to them as they seek to spread their version of the truth and the good. The Dalai Lama gave a speech in New Zealand a few years ago where it was reported that he said the world’s population problem would benefit from more priests, nuns, gays, and lesbians. I interpret this as a touch of humor applied to a serious problem by a wise leader.


    “All optima must lie between the minimum viable population size, MVP, and the biophysical carrying capacity of the planet.” (Gretchen C. Daily, A. Ehrlich and P. Ehrlich)

    The above range is wide enough to drive all the vehicles in the world through. How might we narrow it? The authors state in the same paper:

    “…social preferences are critical because achieving any target size requires establishing social policies to influence fertility rates. Human population sizes have never, and will never, automatically equilibrate at some level. There is no feedback mechanism that will lead to perfectly maintained, identical crude birth and death rates.” (Daily, et al. 1994)

    Although I agree with the need for planning, it seems like a conceptual error to place it somehow outside the feedback system. Again ignoring the free will issue, it is not reasonable in my opinion to somehow excise our planning from the ecosystem of which we are a part. Recall Stott’s point about natural governors of fertility. Our planning could be part of our adaptive fitness.

    The paper goes on to state criteria for choosing optimum population size. First is a desired minimum quality of life balanced by the impacts to the ecosystem for sustaining it. Second is an acceptance that material wealth will always be unequally divided among humans, and the resulting need for a cushion (or excess) of continuously available per capita resources. They include a consideration of waste reprocessing without toxification of the system.

    Next is the value of cultural diversity. They believe geographic dispersion requires a certain minimum amount of population. I think this is a prehistoric era consideration, and not meaningful now. Rather it seems that an excess of people combined with globalization, results in cultural extinctions. I find this categorically different than the prior criteria, believing that adaptation in evolution will result in ongoing cultural changes in any event.

    A “critical mass” distributional criteria similarly perplexes me, although I understand the cultural value of urbanization. These two criteria seem more like value judgments based on the cultural biases of the authors, who live in the developed world.

    Next is the need to protect biodiversity. Obviously each human displaces (or alters habitat potentially useful for) other life forms, with the partial exception of human parasites. Biodiversity, they explain, is anthropocentrically valuable as part of our habitat and is necessary for our health. It also provides aesthetic pleasure. They then add the ethical responsibility of humans to minimize species loss. Cultural bias seems involved in the latter two elements, but it is arguable that they reflect universal human values.

    The authors then add the key value of human freedom that was mentioned in the introduction:

    “In general, we would choose a population size that maximizes very broad environmental and social options for individuals.” (Daily, et al., 1994)

    For a different perspective, let’s turn again to Zhang Zhirong on China’s population: “According to The China Academy of Sciences, and based on estimated land resources, the optimum population in China is 950 million now, and 1.16 billion by 2000.” (Zhirong, 1994). Zhirong then states that China’s carrying capacity, also based on “land resources” is no more than 1.6 billion. He believes that serious environmental and social problems exist and will worsen as China’s population first exceeds the optimum level, and then the carrying capacity level. Maybe China expected to add some land resources between 1994 and 2000. What other variables could cause it’s optimum population to go up by 7% in six years? No answer is given in the report.

    Nicolaas Bloembergen, Nobel winner in Physics and Harvard professor, said in a presentation to colleagues: “Would a total world population of about one billion as existed two hundred years ago represent a reasonable compromise between quantity and quality of human life? The answer…clearly involves value judgments.” (Bloembergen, 1996)

    J. Kenneth Smail, Professor of Anthropology and Sociology at Kenyon College in Ohio, has an argument for “…a sustainable optimum of approximately 2 billion by the beginning of the 23rd century.” He presents much evidence that mere stabilization during the 21st century will result in a “future demographic catastrophe.” (Smail, 1995)

    I see no clear way, given the current cultural, economic, and geophysical variables of societies on earth, to expect a consensus for approximating an optimum human population. Stabilization, or equilibrium, if it is to be realized anytime soon, would seem to be based on fragmented actions, or unintentional outcomes. What is obvious from my investigations is that most concerned with the issue believe that the desired direction for human population is downward.


    “Nobody knows if a steady state population could be reached by the year 2050. Perhaps a period of negative population growth could be envisioned…hopefully not be caused by …war, famine, and pestilence.” (Bloembergen)

    We have discussed a variety of influences on human reproduction. Included were inherent predispositions and individual responses to environmental and social conditions. We also explored possible policy options, which many believe have the potential to influence our demographic future. Besides the institutional obstacles mentioned, there are some common misconceptions by many well-meaning people. I will mention only one, which, if sufficiently countered, might abet a more humane resolution.

    The environment and social justice are issues, which have growing support among those able to think about more than their immediate material needs. Advocates seem certain that their own issue is the most important one, but many fail to question its sufficiency. A typical response to the introduction of the overpopulation factor is that the rich should reduce their consumption and waste production instead of chiding the poor people of the planet. This demonstrates a lack of knowledge that the poor have been clamoring for our aid in population matters, and that they have banded together to help themselves. Provision of such aid is not a substitute for encouraging conservation and cleaner economies at home. There is no either/or involved. Both are desirable.

    In 1989, as verified by The UN Population Fund, the following countries signed a statement urging early stabilization of human population. Austria, Bangladesh, Barbados, Bhutan, Botswana, Cape Verde, China, Columbia, Cyprus, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Egypt, Fiji, Grenada, Guinea-Bissau, Haiti, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Jamaica, Japan, Jordon, Kenya, Rep. of Korea, Liberia, Malta, Mauritius, Morocco, Nepal, Nigeria, Panama, Philippines, Rwanda, Senegal, Seychelles, Singapore, Sri Lanka, St. Kitts-Nevis, St. Lucia, St. Vincent & the Grenadines, Sudan, Thailand, Tunisia, Vanuatu, and Zimbabwe. Note the absence of most wealthy nations. It is ridiculous to claim that the rich are trying to coerce the poor nations to reduce population. In fact, they are not responding to the affirmed needs of the poor.

    The following countries are part of either the South Commission or Partners in Population and Development: Zimbabwe, Kenya, Mexico, Colombia, Thailand, Indonesia, Bangladesh, Morocco, Egypt, Tunisia, China, India, Pakistan, Uganda, Algeria, Argentina, Brazil, Cuba, Guyana, Ivory Ciast, Jamaica, Kuwait, Malaysia, Mozambique, Nigeria, Philippines, Senegal, Sri Lanka, Uruguay, Venezuela, Yugoslavia (former), and Western Samoa. The “Partners” share expertise with each other in reproductive health, appropriate technologies, and population policy. The Challenge to the South: Report of the South Commission, included this unequivocal statement:

    ” In the long run the problem of overpopulation of the countries of the South can be fully resolved only through their development. But action to contain the rise of population cannot be postponed.” (Nyerere, 1990)

    Easier said than done. Nature will provide, as they say, but what percentages of any “cure” will be higher mortality versus lower fertility? What percentages of lower fertility could be due to willful constraint versus physiological changes? We may have some choice in the answers to these questions, but acts of omission (purposeful inaction) decrease that possibility. Smail says he is “cautiously optimistic” that humans will take global action based on “an individual and collective concern for posterity.”

    Bloembergen summarizes six measures proposed by Joel Cohen, which have been widely supported. “Educate and empower women; educate men; promote the distribution of contraceptives; save the children, improve the economics in developing countries; all of the above.” Abernethy strongly supports the empowerment and education of women. The economic element may need refinement to address the “opportunity model” (Abernethy and Smail) in which population expands in synch with perceived future well-being. This is the most difficult element of feedback to address in my opinion, since the poor naturally and expectedly strive for better material conditions. Perhaps sustainable development combined with other comprehensive measures is the right approach. Traditional development with minimal population policy action is a recipe for continued suffering by humans and the rest of the planet, only greater in scope and severity.

    Udall’s essay calls for the establishment of “a direct-to-the-people non-profit organization financed by a consortium of billionaires.” It would be primarily locally staffed, and deliver women to women reproductive health services to the poorest nations of the world. The Ted Turner, Bill Gates, George Soros, Rockefeller, Packard, and many other foundations have recognized the importance of this issue. It may well be that those enmeshed in fierce economic competition are blinkered by their focus to succeed, while those who are very rich have the opportunity to step back and look farther into the future. A trillion dollars in assets passed to progeny can’t by itself guarantee them a peaceful planet, clean air and water, delicious healthy food, and the joys of a diverse natural environment.

    A primary need is for human action to accelerate systemic feedback to augment womens’ empowerment, health, and education. The technical means already exist to control fertility. A second, and not previously mentioned challenge is the need for system science methodology to grow worldwide and to ultimately replace irrational, power based approaches to social organization. Overpopulation is but one of the global issues we must address; and the principle of the weak link applies to the whole system.


    Abernethy, Virginia D., 1993, Population Politics, The Choices That Shape Our

    Future, New York, Plenum

    Abernethy, Virginia D., 1994, The Democratic Transition Revisited, Report of

    the Third Conference of the International Consortium for the Study of

    Environmental Security

    Adams, John H., 1997, What Matters Most, The Amicus Journal, 19(1)

    Bailey, Ronald, 2000, Earth Day Then and Now, Reason, May 2000

    Bartlett, Albert A., 1996, The Exponential Function, The Physics Teacher, 34

    Bloembergen, Nicolaas, 1996, Focus, 7(1)

    Buchanan, Bruce, 1997, Human Freedom and Cybernetic Principles, Proceedings of

    the Canadian Association for the Club of Rome, Spring 1997

    Coale, Ansley, 1989, The Demographic Transition, Proceedings of the

    International Population Conference, Liege, Vol 1

    Daily, G., Ehrlich, A., and Ehrlich, P., 1994, Optimum Human Population Size,

    Population and Environment, 15(6)

    Diamond, Jared, 1993, The Third Chimpanzee, Harperperennial Library

    Ehrlich, Paul, 1976, The Population Bomb, Amereon Ltd.

    Farb, Peter, 1978, Humankind, Houghton Mifflin Company

    Homer-Dixon, T., Boutwell, J., and Rathjens, G. 1993, Environmental Change and

    Violent Conflict, Scientific American, 268(2)

    Nyerere, Julius, 1990, The Challenge to the South, Oxford University Press

    Rees, William E., 1990, Sustainable Development and the Biosphere, Teilhard

    Studies 23(Spring)

    Smail, J.K., 1995, Confronting the 21st Century’s Hidden Crisis, NPG Forum,


    Stott, D.H., 1962, Five Cultural and Natural Checks on Population Growth,

    Culture and the Evolution of Man, Oxford University Press

    Udall, Stewart L., 2000, Population Control: A New Paradigm, The Seattle

    Times, February 11

    Weeks, J.R., 1990, How to Influence Fertility: The Experience So Far, NPG


    Zhirong, Zhang, 1994, Identifying Population Security Links and Optimum

    Population Considerations, Report of the Third Conference of the International

    Consortium for the Study of Environmental Security

    Steven B. Kurtz, a philosophy graduate of New York University, is a member of the Canadian Association for the Club of Rome. He was an Assistant Director of Merrill Lynch International Bank during a twenty-five year career in financial derivatives. After nine years organic gardening in New Hampshire, he now does research and volunteer work in ecological economics and sustainable futures with several organizations.

  • http://globalcommunitywebnet.com/GIMProceedings/GNewsJune2010.htm#thePresident

The Global Community organization, Global Parliament, Earth Government and the Federation of Global Governments were founded in 1985 in Calgary, Canada by Germain Dufour,  Prophet of God, Spiritual Leader and President, and further developed through Global Parliament meetings. Later on in 1990s he was joined by his wife, Virginie, in the developing of many global concepts. Symbiotical relationships were defined to show the path for a better world. The Federation was formed to replace the United Nations.




Episode 339 – Meet Paul Ehrlich, Pseudoscience Charlatan

 • 06/05/2018 • 86 Comments

Renowned scientist Paul Ehrlich has been in the public spotlight for half a century now. But there’s a question at the heart of the story of Ehrlich’s unlikely rise to prominence. A question that must be answered. Why is it that this entomologist has become such a superstar of science, received so many accolades and awards, and wielded such influence over the public conversation on population despite being so remarkably, consistently, staggeringly wrong about the issues he presumes to lecture the public on?

For those with limited bandwidth, CLICK HERE to download a smaller, lower file size version of this episode.

For those interested in audio quality, CLICK HERE for the highest-quality version of this episode (WARNING: very large download).


INTERVIEWER: Your main concern has been “The Population Bomb,” as you call it in your book. Do you feel that this takes precedence over any other type of pollution, and certainly human pollution?

PAUL EHRLICH: Yeah, it takes precedence in the following sense: The reason I named the book The Population Bomb was [that] in 1968, when I wrote it, everyone was getting concerned about pollution but people hadn’t seen the other element. I thought the emphasis ought to go there.

The thing that’s important to remember about population control is that if we want to avoid a tremendous rise in the death rate we absolutely must have a tremendous decrease in the birth rate. Now because the world’s population is so young, it means that even if we got a tremendous decrease in the birth rate—if the average completed family size immediately moved down to the vicinity of two—we would still face 40 or 50 years of rapid population growth. There’s a tremendous lag time built into it because those young people—the 40% of the people in the world that are under 15—are going to have children and grandchildren before they get old enough to die of old age.

So we have this tremendous built-in lag time, which means that we’ve got to start instantly on population control only because we know it’ll take so long.

SOURCE: Dr Paul Ehrlich Tape 2

Renowned scientist Paul Ehrlich has been in the public spotlight for half a century now. Showered with accolades and heralded in the press, his message has been remarkably consistent: there are too many humans using too many resources and the only way to avert catastrophe is population control, strictly administered by a centralized, supra-national government.

But there’s a question at the heart of the story of Ehrlich’s unlikely rise to prominence. A q and awards, and wielded such influence over the public conversation on population despite being so remarkably, consistently, staggeringly wrong about the issues he presumes to lecture the public on?

This isn’t a rhetorical question, it’s a real one. And the answer may surprise you.

Meet Paul Ehrlich, Pseudoscience Charlatan. This is The Corbett Report.

Idealsim, Materialism, Pragmatism. Putnam, Quine, Minsky, Lewis #PossibleWorlds #MetaLanguage #Conteuestion that must be answered. Why is it that this entomologist has become such a superstar of science, received so many accolades Context and #Syntax


created at TagCrowd.com
Measurement and context  only 382 views I despair
The world is full of busy fools.
It is never worth a first-class man’s time to express a majority opinion. By definition, there are plenty of others to do that.[26]

Ying and Yang and the Climate Church Strawman. #GrubStreetJournal @wiki_ballot



Hello Stephen,
Thank you for responding here. My posts are moderated at Tims Blog and do not always appear. First here is the Post I made regarding Your Claim which I think you refer to in your first sentence.

on September 30, 2019 at 5:06 am said:
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
Hello Stephen,
Ken Wilber is an interesting Philosopher and Psychologist I find his ideas interesting. Rupert Sheldrake’s theory of Morphic Resonance is very interesting as well, and one which I believe has much to recommend it.
Regarding Philosophy of Mind, it is a huge subject and my own interests tend towards the work of Wittgenstein and Linguistics. Ultimately I am though most persuaded by the Father of American Pragmatism CS Pierce.
Here is a link to my Essay, why are we here which I wrote in reaction to David Malones Documentary series of the same title,


An Exchange with the Climate Church of Armageddon continues. A Letter to Greta from Freinds of Science, Cool it and so comes the Wrong Think Police. #CLimateFraud #ClimateCult #Greta #ExtinctionDistinction




this is addressed to Greta Don, I am re-addressing it to you. Do bear in mind you are old enough to know better poor young Greta is being lead astray by older folk just like you who really should know better.

An Exchange with the Climate Church of Armageddon continues.


Part 2, or is it Three?of,An Exchange with the Climate Church of Armageddon continues. A Letter to Greta from Freinds of Science, Cool it and so comes the Wrong Think Police. #CLimateFraud #ClimateCult #Greta #ExtinctionDistinction

rogerlewis: While you were able to figure out my identity (calling me by first name), your knowledge of my level of technical proficiency in the areas of climate science and political-economics (and history) is superficial. You’ll understand my scientific and political-economic orientation more if you look at my linkedin page (which I basically use an my on-line resume).

As an environmental advocate and policy analyst since the late 1970s I have been reading and applying the “best available science” to natural resource management issues for decades. Initially I was focused primarily on forestry and related issues—water quality, land use, fisheries. I have been studying AGW since it came to my attention as a crucial aspect of sustainability some time in the 1980s.

I initially pointed out that your initial reference to a video that relied on The Heartland Institute and Richard Lindzen indicated fealty to the world of fossil fuel industry funded climate change denial. You might be offended by that term (“denial”) but it applies. E.g.: https://insideclimatenews.org/news/06032017/climate-change-denial-scientists-richard-lindzen-mit-donald-trump The same holds true, and more so, for the Heartland Institute: https://www.desmogblog.com/2019/08/11/heartland-deniers-deflated-climate-reality (line in opening paragraph: “most people with basic education, common sense, and a lack of financial interest in the fossil fuel industry accept what scientists worldwide have proven through decades of research…”)

Your posts (and web pages) are evidence of an incredible lack of knowledge and insight about climate science. Getting into a lengthy exchange with you on this blog—focused on economics, not science—would be huge waste of my time and Dr. Morgan’s patience. Cheers and carry on; this is my last post in this exchange.

Eulers Number, Eric Dollard Nicola Tesla, and Maxwell, The Exponential, the spiral, and the humble Right Angle. #GrubStreetJournal @Wiki_Ballot


This is a Three and a half-hour lecture I have probably watched it in full 5 times, as I have a photographic memory it is unusual for me to read or watch anything more than twice.

Why this Eric Dollard lecture is so important is that it makes two very important points about Magnetic Fields and Electric Currents.
The first is that Electricity does not flow through or within a copper wire or whatever material it is conducted “((Through(sic), Around))” conductor, it flows or propagates around them bounded by the insulator field, the other is that an electric current always flows precisely at right angles to the field
This bit.
“The Forgotten part of Maxwell’s Work
concerns two types of waves one
is transverse okay a transverse wave is
like waves on the surface of the ocean
okay there has to be a boundary and the
motion of the matter or the ether or
whatever deal you’re dealing with
there’s always at right angles to where
the wave is going okay ”

Dollard’s story is a remarkable one this lecture represents his life’s work in putting together the fragments of Nicola Tesla’s work.

The above Empirical fact regarding electromagnetism explains I would submit this. That is Eulers Number.

On Dons Point above about Homeostasis, for the same reasons that Dollards revelations regarding ELectricity and Teslas Discoveries are dangerous to vested interests so it is with Micrro Fages.
And the story of GC Maff.


How GcMAF works


persecuted by Big Pharma for developing & producing an EXTREMELY EFFECTIVE CANCER TREATMENT https://www.bitchute.com/video/Pz7LQI0bvQqR/ 


persecuted by Big Pharma for developing & producing an EXTREMELY EFFECTIVE CANCER TREATMENT


See GrubStreetJournal’s other Tweets



Steven B. Kurtz, a philosophy graduate of New York University, is a member of the Canadian Association for the Club of Rome. He was an Assistant Director of Merrill Lynch International Bank during a twenty-five year career in financial derivatives. After nine years organic gardening in New Hampshire, he now does research and volunteer work in ecological economics and sustainable futures with several organizations.


Steven B Kurtz@StevenBKurtz

If anyone can provide evidence for *anything* non-physical, a Nobel likely awaits. Thoughts, feelings, perceptions, verbalizations, etc are caloric events. No rhetoric or sophistry can negate that! Brains use energy!


“retired dilettante trained in analytic philosophy, but have researched this for 3 decades or so” . SO Steven 3 decades as a Dilettante it seems? Have you got a link to your 200o systems paper quoting Smil, I would like to read it.

View image on TwitterView image on TwitterView image on Twitter






Photojournalist Morrison (Australians Exposed, etc.) turns his attention to science writing in an attempt to describe and understand the world’s growing ecological crisis. Though he writes with conviction and passion, he seems very much out of his depth when discussing scientific material. Morrison does an impressive job of summarizing the ways in which humans are altering the planet. He touches on the importance of biodiversity, the declining quality of agricultural lands, ozone destruction, global warming, acid precipitation and overpopulation, as well as a host of other critical issues. But the bulk of his book centers on his belief that virtually every aspect of our behavior is under strict genetic control. We are, in his terms, a plague animal, destined by our genes to reproduce abundantly and then, after destroying our environment, to endure a decimation of the species. As a metaphor, this is powerful stuff. Morrison isn’t arguing metaphorically, however; rather, he contends that evolution, which he anthropomorphizes, is pushing us in this direction to protect the rest of the planet from our depredations. His conviction that genes dictate behavior lead him to political conclusions that are, by most lights, distressing. After saying that Hitler’s policies arose from his lack of interest in sexual promiscuity, Morrison asserts that “national leaders who are discreetly promiscuous are merely displaying reassuring evidence of their well-balanced ambition and general genetic fitness for leadership.” The kindest accurate description of this book is offered by Lynn Margulis in her very brief foreword, in which she refers to Morrison’s ideas as “idiosyncratic.” 49 b&w photos, 22 drawings, one map.
Copyright 1999 Reed Business Information, Inc.

The Innovation Journal: The Public Sector Innovation Journal, Volume 5(2), 2000, article9.
Book Review
Reg Morrison
The Spirit in the Gene Humanity’s Proud Illusion and the Laws of Nature,
Ithaca, New York and London, England: Cornell University Press, 1999
Reviewed by Steven B. Kurtz
Our extraordinary usurpation of habitat, resources, and waste sinks is one clear indicator of human success as a life form on earth according to the author of this great book. Morrison, an Australian journalist, explores various attributes of humans, compares them with those of other life forms, and analyses current theories of evolutionary development on earth. He makes a strong case that our massive brainpower, linguistic abilities, and self-reflective consciousness are
complemented to a great degree by an ingrained tendency to believe in mystical or supernatural phenomena. This includes our boundless faith in human potential, and our social cohesiveness centered on family, tribe, and culture. It seems as if there is a dominant genie at work encompassing our creativity, perseverance, and fulfillment.
“Compared to other primates we were seriously underendowed except in one
respect – our brain. But the close collaboration that eventually developed between
human language and our so-called spirituality not only compensated for our
physical shortcomings but also became an evolutionary asset…that would turn this
disinherited, endangered primate into a superior survivor…that would one day
manage to meddle with the evolutionary process itself.” (p. 257)
According to Morrison, we share with all mammals the living of a “double life.” Sensory
experiences and a “complex pastiche of memories, fears, and expectations” make up what he calls “an invisible landscape.” Phenomenologists, a school of philosophy including Edmund Husserl and M. Merleau-Ponty, examined experienced reality as a composite abstraction reported from experiences. The process is rather like detailed introspection, and is of course language dependent. Morrison believes that most of our important decisions (one could argue all) occur in the inner landscape, connected by our animal instincts and perceptions to the world. This is not mind-body dualism in the traditional sense. It is the belief that subjectivity and hard wiring jointly play a dominant role in human life. Subject-object dualism is more to the point. Morrison adds that humans err in believing that their decisions are mainly “cortical and rational.”
Our communication, planning, and teamwork skills combined with our instinct and emotional makeup made homo-erectus “an imaginative, resourceful adventurer.”
Although not a primary focus, the issue of free will versus determinism is woven through the book:
“Animals cannot help but sing, dance, mate, and fight in obedience to their
genetically directed notions of territorial proprietorship and sexuality. And we are
no exception….All our literature, music, art, drama, history, law, and legend has
been wholly founded on our genetically engineered misperceptions.” (p.258)
The Innovation Journal: The Public Sector Innovation Journal, Volume 5(2), 2000, article 9.
Nature, of which we are a part, undergoes periods of lesser and greater change, sometimes referred to as punctuated equilibrium. There are responses to changes at all levels in earth’s partially open planetary system. Solar and other forms of radiation enter our atmosphere, as do asteroids containing ice, minerals, and perhaps the basis for life itself. Gravitational energy influences tides and is said to affect biological cycles. Daylight periods and climate do not obey human commands. Human freedoms are in reality constrained by innumerable factors, and perhaps limited in scope. Yet, in life, we can experience existential angst engendered by our perception of freedom as overwhelming.
I agree with Morrison that uncertainty about the unknown, causal linkages, the future, reciprocal love, personal health and security combine with the human emotional makeup to engender to some aspects of our experience and imagination a ‘value endowment’ of extraordinary, supernatural qualities. The highly valued and greatly feared attain this special status. Evolution selected this behavior, as it is estimated that 80% or more humans currently affirm a sphere of a supernatural. It must, therefore, have served our forefathers well, or the trait would have become vestigial or counterproductive and have been de-selected. Morrison claims that it served (and
serves) us too well. It has become our Achilles heel, and is related to thinking with our loins – another naturally selected trait. The long term upshot of this selection for “significance, spirituality, and the supernatural” is, according to Morrison, the basis for our coming decline if not demise. We wrote many religious and social codes; one in particular commanded us to subdue nature and to multiply our kind. We
have been all too obedient in following our own rules; we are the most successful mammal on earth. Bio-diversity and habitat health, prerequisites for human sustainability, are being undermined by our success. Local civilizations have failed in the past from over expansion, but with globalization and interdependence we might all fail at once. Now that I’ve spoiled your day, you might ask why this review is appearing in The Innovation Journal.

Three reasons I offer are

1. the excellent analysis of innovative success in a nearly
empty, prehistoric human world,

2. the current challenge to override some of our (vestigial?)
hard wiring with new forms of innovation, and

3. Morrison sees artistic creativity, aesthetic appreciation, love and lust, as dominated by the mystical, emotional realm – perhaps innovation and problem solving straddle the rational and the mystical. Whether necessity, inspiration, the need for ego gratification, or other drivers are key to the creative process, our hard wiring lurks as a precondition.

Human history is marked by countless innovative successes from the wheel, through the harnessing of various energy sources, shipbuilding, agricultural development, water and waste system development, mechanization, medical technology, communication technology, computers, etc. Mortality rates declined rapidly during the past century, and lifespans have greatly increased in many areas of the globe. Now, in Morrison’s and my view humans are challenged to somehow innovate sustainable shrinkage. The
information exists to optimize our future; our hard wiring has so far provided massive
interference to successful implementation. Morrison says he wouldn’t want to live without the mystical aspects of life. But he can’t see the requisite rebalancing of our psyches occurring in time to prevent a crash. Frankly, neither can I. But to all you innovators out there, I shout a wake-up call. Here’s the greatest challenge man has
ever faced. There is no greater calling if your genes are to perpetuate.
The Innovation Journal: The Public Sector Innovation Journal, Volume 5(2), 2000, article 9.
Steven B. Kurtz, a philosophy graduate of New York University, is a member of the Canadian
Association for the Club of Rome. He was an Assistant Director of Merrill Lynch International
Bank during a twenty-five year career in financial derivatives. After nine years organic
gardening in New Hampshire, he now does research and volunteer work in ecological economics
and sustainable futures with several organizations.
A Comment on Steven Kurtz’ Book Review of Reg Morrison’s The Spirit in the Gene
Humanity’s Proud Illusion and the Laws of Nature, Ithaca, New York and London, England:
Cornell University Press,1999
I assume I am agreeing with Morrison and Kurtz when I assert that the thoughts that reverberate in our brains are part of the experiential matrix, just as are sensory inputs, in which we make our analyses and decisions.
If we wish to be innovators, we have to be aware of the baggage, or conditioning, that constricts our freedom, whether we attribute it to traditional belief systems or to “hard-wiring”. We have to be bold enough to question and revise some traditional beliefs to accord with present knowledge of the world, on the grounds that the original “religious” instructions were not “timeless”, but appropriate to conditions at the time. This, of course, has to be done with care and discrimination. By whom? There’s the risk.
We also have to keep an open mind as to what to include in our world of experience and
discourse, not arbitrarily excluding some spheres of interest as “superstition”, — or metaphysics, for example, as “nothing but” genetic effluvia.
I question the popular assumption that our destruction of the environment and our
overpopulation are to be attributed to our religious beliefs. I am not sure we need any more explanation than small span of perception, narrow sphere of self-interest, and short time-horizon
— in other words a lack of imagination, or deficiency of thinking-span. (An aspect of our hardwiring, perhaps.) I confess to a dissatisfaction with the classical scientific framework, which confines discourse to what can be found within the realm of the five senses, i.e. the “material” realm.

Free Will cannot be found within this realm, for example, except as an illusory feeling that may or may not have advantages for genetic survival. The same with the experience of extra-sensory perception. I think it is time we left this pretense behind.
It does not correspond to how we think, and act, not even to our actual range of experience. See Gary Zukav (The Seat of the Soul), for example, on the evolutionary transition from the fivesensory human being to the multisensory human being. My suggestion may be heresy to the community of professional philosophers, but I find the “rigour” of the professional philosopher now not very useful.
About the Author:
Ray Jackson. Retired physicist, former Science Adviser with the Science Council of Canada 15
July 2000

The Incomparable Professor Smil. Energy Matters without the spin and The Late Professor Sir David MacKay, Energy Without Hotair.#GrubStreetJournal #GrubStreetScience #GrubStreetEnergy #TheExergist #TheExergyst. Exorcising the stupid from the discourse on Political Economy, Energy and ClimateChange Fanaticism.


created at TagCrowd.com



Vaclav Smil is an old favourite on this Blog and his work has figured in many discussions over the years with various Green SJWs in the CLimate Cult religion. This June Lecture, Smil’s JP Morgan Report above and some highlights from Smil’s Blog, A reader on All things Energy and Embodied energy.

Feeding the World. Malthus wasn´t such a miserable old misanthrope apparently.Vaclav Smil, Albert Bartlett Energy Economics and no Alarmism.

#SamizdisSamizdat #BrexitRebeliion #ConquestofDough #Web3BeattheBanStick

Three Main Actors Moon of Alabama branded them FUKUS ( Very Droll ) In Order of the Acronym
France ( Macron )

US ( Trump )
All are leaders with a questionable Mandate, Trumps is strongest arguably but May and Macron remain Establishment Choices. May the DUP supported Own goal Merchant and Macron the Man from Nowhere who the Slog cruelly characterises as a Mother Fucker.

Trump is talking about re looking at TPP, May is obviously Back Tracking on Brexit and Macron is facing challenges to his *Liberalisation reforms )

May and Trump are facing electoral tests Mid Terms in US and Local Elections for MAy.

In Short, all have challenging domestic agendas.

The biggies are not domestic agendas but International Ones.

If the Security Council meeting the main advocates supporting the action were The Netherlands, and Sweden both have been pushing the Syria Bashing.

Sweden has the oldest Central Bank and The Netherlands is, of Course, the beginnings of the modern worlds Capitalist system. The Colonialö/Imperialist International Banking Project runs strongly through this whole thing.

Israel has been fairly quiet I have news feeds from Jewish Chronicle and Haaretz the Israeli News Paper they have been observing keenly but apart from the Domestic Anti Semitism Schtick in Uk and of course the Israeli Strikes on Iranian Targets, Israel has a very Low profile here, in fact barely garner a mention? Staying in Shadows pulling Strings, BiBi is a class operator in the black arts of arm Twisting, he was as a younger man much more dashing and charming he has morphed into a rather unattractive slimeball but I must admit I found the Younger Netanyahu very convincing, not so now.
He has his hand up Trumps back though, all public appearances of the two together show this to be so.

We can usefully distinguish between events, and Characters as well as Domestic and International Dynamics.

Russia, Turkey, Saudi, Iran.

Here is Gets Very Complicated indeed.

3 players are steeped in the intrigues of Petro Dollar Hegemony and Turkey was a key creation of the Post WW1 treaties which brought in the age of Oil and FIAT/GoldStandard and the Fed (The Gold Standard was a FIAT system under the shining exterior, I will not go into that here But Zarlenga’s Lost Science of Money goes into it in depth)

Gas PipeLines Involve all of them.and in that respect we have to bring Ukraine into the Picture as well.

Israel is also a player with the Gas question in respect of the Leviathan fields and other fields in the Eastern Medetaranian this also brings Egypt into the picture. Of Course, Libya and Iraq come into the question from PetroDollar and Energy aspects of the question and lead back to General Wesley Walker.


Feeding the World. Malthus wasn´t such a miserable old misanthrope apparently.Vaclav Smil, Albert Bartlett Energy Economics and no Alarmism.

parmesan-cheese_1_orig (1)

A very Good deal of progress made towards exploring Energy and Entropy in Economics and the Psossibilities of Political Economy without Debt Based Money and a presumption of scarcity.

VACLAV SMIL 273 How restrictive are natural factors? Photosynthetic productivity depends on the availability of solar radiation, atmospheric carbon dioxide, plant nutrients, land, water, and sufficient biodiversity. Crop yields are almost never limited by the incoming solar radiation. Similarly, the current atmospheric concentration of CO2 (about 350 parts per million) is adequate for sustained high biomass yields, and increasing concentrations of the gas will tend to enhance the photosynthetic efficiency of nearly all well-watered and well-fertilized crops.37 Thus the four critical natural determinants of future crop productivity are the availability of land, nutrients, and water, and the protection of adequate biodiversity.

Extreme carrying capacity estimates go far outside the broad, fourfold range bracketed by the estimates just cited. They have been defined by true believers in the antipodal camps of catastrophist and cornucopian futures. A generation ago Ehrlich (1968) wrote that “the battle to feed all humanity is over” and that “hundreds of millions of people are going to starve to death” during the 1970s.2 Ehrlich’s global population maximum would have to be well below the 1970 total of about 3.7 billion people. In contrast, Simon (1981) maintained that food has no long-run, physi-cal limit. These extremes leave us either with the prospect of eliminating about half of humanity in order to return the worldwide count to a sup-portable level or with visions of crop harvests surpassing the mass of the planet itself.3 As Sauvy (1990[1949]: 774) noted crisply, “Lack of precision in data and in method of analysis allows shortcuts toward reaching an ob-jective predetermined by prejudice, shaped largely either by faith in progress or by conservative skepticism.” Unfortunately, less extreme estimates have been hardly more impressive. Because the question of the ultimate support capacity cannot have a single correct answer, assessing the value of past estimates must be done by looking at their assumptions. Too many of them are overly simplistic, and even the more elaborate ones are usually difficult to defend. In general, the capacity predictions assume too much-as well as too little. Most notably, they almost completely ignore the demand side of the question.

This content downloaded on Thu, 7 Mar 2013 19:26:32 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and ConditionsVACLAV SMIL 257

#155. The art of dark sky thinking. Climate Religion Cultists and Hysterics. Cool it, Bjorn Lomberg from 2009, Ten years on And still they wet the bed! #GrubStreetJournal




This is a great film full film on Bitchute. link above.



The Lomborg Deception
In 2010, Howard Friel wrote The Lomborg Deception, a book-length critique of Cool It, which traces Lomborg’s many references and tests their authority and substance. Friel has said he found “misrepresentation of academic research, misquotation of data, reliance on studies irrelevant to the author’s claims and citation of sources that seem not to exist”.[5]

“ Friel’s conclusion, as per his book’s title, is that Lomborg is “a performance artist disguised as an academic.”
I don’t want to be as trusting as the reviewers who praised Lomborg’s scholarship without (it seems) bothering to check his references, so rather than taking Friel at his word just as they took Lomborg at his, I’ve done my best to do that checking. Although Friel engages in some bothersome overkill, overall his analysis is compelling.

— Sharon Begley, Newsweek[6][7]
According to Lomborg, Friel’s book appears to be aimed primarily at the popular version of Cool It as opposed to the longer more thoroughly cited edition.[8]

The political backlash to Lombergs excellent Book is repeated by the experiences of Roger Pelke Junior and Judy Curry.

The extent of exaggeration and sheer aggressive bile aimed at Deniers is wholly up to the standards of the Salem Witch Hunts and the Spanish Inquisition, equally farcical and full of comedic potential as well I might add.

Clive Spashes Work is also well worth looking at and it was nice to see a long article of his on Wrong Kind of Green the other week.

The requirement for Growth in Financiaqlised Capitalism is due to Interest (Usury) and the way Money is created and what metrics it is assayed by are very important the work of Kreutz in the money Syndrome and of the late Magrit Kennedy is essential to understanding this point.
My Dialogue with Clive Lord a Founding Member of the Green Party of England and Wales on Money, Usury and CItizens Basic Income.


An Exchange with the Climate Church of Armageddon continues.

#153. One for the sceptics, Nothing to fear but fear itself the economy as an energy transformation machine. #Nafta #RossPerot #WrongkindofGreen #EnergyEconomic #8thwaytothink #ConquestofDough #ObjectiveKhunts #GrubStreetJournal #OIP #Alexanadria


Hi Tim,
Rather depressing reading in the comments if that sort of thing gets you down.
SEEDS is a part of the solution to the current problem. I personally think, as you know, that Seeds needs to be coupled with an embodied energy index that will then translate to an empirically falsifiable value scale for the pricing of monetary exchanges.

#153. One for the sceptics

1.oil, gas and coal remained, as they are now, the source of fourth-fifths of the energy that we consume.

There is nowhere else to start but at the beginning.

The scientists conclude that further economic damage from a potential bubble burst could be avoided by decarbonising early. “Divestment is a prudential thing to do. We should be carefully looking at where we are investing our money.(1)
(1)ED. This is the key misunderstanding, the whole basis of this analysis should look at Net Energy Surplus over cost of energy extraction, then in a real sense the Sentance , “We should be carefully looking at where we are investing our Energy ( qua, Energy )”, would have money taking the Debt based monetary unit as a referent renders the statement meaningless a per pro-energy capital allocation decisions.

Here is a Graph of World energy use in terms of TerraWatt Hours,

My own analysis and synthesis of the World Debt Money economy and the World Energy

Here is the Final Draft Spreadsheet available to download. ( Work In Progress)
Go to Sheet 3.


Here is my Working Draft spreadsheet for the synthesis of the Energy Production of the world in kilowatt-hours and the Debt Based world Financial economy based upon local dollar parity currency exchange rate basis from the CIA World Fact Book.


Fossil Fuels

Fossil fuels (coal, oil, gas) have, and continue to, play a dominant role in global energy systems. Fossil energy was a fundamental driver of the Industrial Revolution and the technological, social, economic and development progress which has followed. Energy has played a strongly positive role in global change.
2. Starting assumption.
In short, in a purely hypothetical situation in which it could be proved that the environmental activists were wrong, there’d be a huge collective sigh of relief, from government, business and the general public alike. Few people, after all, really like change and disruption.

3. Money, then, acts simply as a claim on the products of an economy which, itself, is an energy system.

Money is the nothing you get for something before you can get anything Soddy.


4.This divides the aggregate of available energy into two streams – the energy which has to be consumed in providing a continuity of energy supply, and the remaining (“surplus”) energy which powers all other economic activity.

Energy is an input that transforms other inputs or fuels other input streams. Those other streams cam me measured in some unit which should not be a variable, Wes Freeberg proposes Quanta in his big apple plan. The current Ruling financial Elite seems to want to base a unit upon Carbon emissions credits. ( See Spash for the shortcomings in this plan.)

5.We are, in short, stuck with monetary adventurism until it reaches its point of termination.

The process can be seen as not letting a good crisis go to waste or a planned centralisation of economic forces in accordance with UN Agenda 21 and 2030, or the Brandt report.

Shubick says this.

”The monetary and financial system of an economy are part of the socio-politico-economic control mechanism used by every state to connect the economy with the polity and society. This neural network provides the administrative means to collect taxes, direct investment, provide public goods, trade. The money measures provide a crude but serviceable basis for the accounting system which in turn, along with the codification of commercial law and financial regulation are the basis for economic evaluation and the measurement of trust and fiduciary responsibility among the economic agents. A central feature of a control mechanism is that it is designed to influence process. Dynamics is its natural domain. Equilibrium is not the prime concern, the ability to control the direction of motion is what counts.

6.The process which links rising ECoE to falling prosperity is illustrated in figs. 2 and 3. In America, prosperity per person turned down when ECoE hit 5.5%, whereas the weaker British economy started to deteriorate at an ECoE of just 3.4%.

Fig. 2 & 3.

EcoE & prosp US UK

World average prosperity per capita has declined only marginally since 2007, essentially because deterioration in the West has been offset by continued progress in the emerging market (EM) economies. This, though, is nearing its point of inflexion, with clear evidence now showing that the Chinese economy, in particular, is in very big trouble.

This is no more or less than a managed process towards a new Feudalism, a race to the bottom where the metric is relative levels of absolute poverty in the precariat. Prosperity is a redundant metric for the new Feudalism in the MMT Green new deal Gulag. The metrics will be utilitarian which will be similar to any metric used in concentration camps or slave colonies for Egyptian pyramid projects. What is the minimal sustenance budget for each economic human labour unit, what is the natural replacement rate and what level of control is required within the Pareto efficient distribution of Human labour unit classification? Think Brave new world and 1984.

7. Hidden behind increasingly desperate (and dangerous) financial manipulation, the world as a whole has been getting poorer since ECoE hit 5.5% in 2007. As more of the EM economies hit the “downturn zone” (ECoEs of 8-10%), the so-far-gradual impoverishment of the average person worldwide can be expected to accelerate.

  1. Who is your Average person worldwide? With Political Mathematics ( Statistics) it is important to define terms. Who is your constituency, Tim? Who are Agenda 21 and 2030 designed to raise up and at whose expense?



CALVIN SAID Belloc characterised the Reformation as

´´a rising of the rich against the poor´´,

´and indeed Calvin had written the unfortunate statement:

´´The people must always be kept in poverty in order that they remain obedient´´.

8.This calls for a thoroughgoing review of energy policy, and it seems bizarre that a system which can provide financial support for the banking system cannot do the same for the far more important matter of energy.

A healthy Dose of Bucky Fullmeister is what is needed vis the Production function for modern Industry and Industrial Agriculture also a look back into the concepts of Localism and Subsidiarity.

GFC2, Ephemeralisation, Doing More With Less. Bucky Fullmeister and Circular Economy.
rogerglewis Uncategorized June 7, 2018 9 Minutes

#128: GFC II


Ross Perot passed away the other day. NAFTA and the new Trade Deal obsession should be added as a lens through which to see the trajectory and direction of motion here, I believe the Words of  FDR   “We have nothing to fear but fear itself”.

Ying and Yang and the Climate Church Strawman. #GrubStreetJournal @wiki_ballot



Hello Stephen,
Thank you for responding here. My posts are moderated at Tims Blog and do not always appear. First here is the Post I made regarding Your Claim which I think you refer to in your first sentence.

on September 30, 2019 at 5:06 am said:
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
Hello Stephen,
Ken Wilber is an interesting Philosopher and Psychologist I find his ideas interesting. Rupert Sheldrake’s theory of Morphic Resonance is very interesting as well, and one which I believe has much to recommend it.
Regarding Philosophy of Mind, it is a huge subject and my own interests tend towards the work of Wittgenstein and Linguistics. Ultimately I am though most persuaded by the Father of American Pragmatism CS Pierce.
Here is a link to my Essay, why are we here which I wrote in reaction to David Malones Documentary series of the same title,

In all matters epistemological and philosophical I demure ultimately to C S Pierce and this made up quote from ´We Pragmatists ´

CHARLES SANDERS PEIRCE: ´´In order to reason well …. it is absolutely necessary to possess … such virtues as intellectual honesty and sincerity and a real love of truth (2.82). The cause [of the success of scientificinquirers] has been that the motive which has carried them to the laboratory and the field has been a craving to know how things really were … (1-34).[Genuine inquiry consists I in diligent inquiry into truth for truth’s sake(1.44), … in actually drawing the bow upon truth with intentness in the eye, with energy in the arm (1.235). [When] it is no longer the reasoning which determines what the conclusion shall be, but … the conclusion which determines what the reasoning shall be … this is sham reasoning…. The effect of this shamming is that men come to look upon reasoning as mainly decorative…´´. http://web.ncf.ca/ag659/308/Peirce-Rorty-Haack.pdfPierces seminal essay How to make our ideas clear is also a great starting off point for embracing such truth as we might be fortunate enough to encounter in our allotted time on this blue marble suspended in eternity.http://www.peirce.org/writings/p119.html

Davids Documentary is available on Curiosity stream. David and I are good friends and you may be familiar with some of his other Documentary Work for BBC Horizon ( Icon Earth) or Independently (Dangerous Knowledge) or of his Father Adrian Malone, Cosmos with Carl Sagan and The Age of Uncertainty with GK Galbraith.

Here is a link to My trilogy of Poems which informs my Novel Conquest fo dough which I have also made a web site for also linked.



Getting back to Wilber the Paper by the late great Bernard Lietaer Integral money
is hugely en-riching and AQAL analysis of monetary perspectives bears much fruit
Jain Many Sidedness and Maimonides souces of Contradiction are equally helpful templates for Making our ideas clear.


You had previously made this statement.

Steven B Kurtz
on September 29, 2019 at 3:29 pm said:

Wilber, despite being brilliant in some areas, has for decades assumed that non-physical/energetic things exist. He is far from alone, as theologians and some philosophers have done so for millennia. As appealing as those positions are to Homo superstitious (estimated 80+%), there is zero shareable evidence for such stuff. The attempted ‘proofs’ I’ve seen are either circular or tautological. https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/66/Circular-Reasoning.

Similar techniques have been used by those claiming disembodied mind and panpsychism. An Australian author, Reg Morrison, has written about mysticism as an evolved trait which has outgrown its usefulness now that we’ve become too successful. (overshoot) See:

And Tim had said this.

on September 29, 2019 at 4:17 pm said:
We do know of one non-physical, non-energetic thing that does exist – thought.

Moreover, the idea that mysticism (or anything beyond the tangible) has been rendered obsolete by advances in our knowledge seems to put a lot of faith in the concept of ‘advance’.

I’m not a subscriber to any established religion, but I certainly don’t dismiss the concept that there might be ‘something beyond us’. Perhaps the most rigorous philosophical investigation of this topic, carried out many years ago by a retired judge, concluded (a) that there probably is a driving intelligence behind the universe, but (b) that this is likely to bear no resemblance at all to the Deity postulated by religion. For one thing, this intelligence is likely to be subjective (akin to our subconscious minds), not objective (like our conscious minds). It might thus be likened to a “highest law of science”.

Followed by your statement here
Steven B Kurtz
on September 29, 2019 at 4:29 pm said:

Energy is physical. If anyone can evidence non-caloric thought, a Nobel likely awaits!


and then the Long response from me which I also added after Dons Comment here.

Don Stewart on September 30, 2019 at 3:44 am said:
Mind, God, the Universe, and Everything

on September 30, 2019 at 7:43 am said:
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
on September 30, 2019 at 5:06 am said:

That is the context of the Response you make above taking your points in turn.

1. I posted this on Roger’s blog (use his link). The reference to Lietaer is that Roger used his work on money as support for his position on non-physical reality.


You’ve not evidenced anything non-physical. Finding supportive writers is easy! 80+% of humans are superstitious or mystical to some degree. That and $3 will get you on the metro or bus!

The Leitaer paper on Integral money. referenced to Don
on September 29, 2019 at 12:24 pm said:
First Point the reasons for contradictions in esoteric writing Miamonides.

Notes for Contextual Search engine offering Integral Framework perspectives.

Guide for the Perplexed, Contradiction.

A sort of Guide for the perplexed.
News feeds in the corporate media have become esoteric these days and consulting Maimonides is not such a bad idea.


Anekāntavāda (Sanskrit: अनेकान्तवाद, “many-sidedness”) refers to the Jain doctrine about metaphysical truths that emerged in ancient India.

Affirmation: syād-asti—in some ways, it is,
Denial: syān-nāsti—in some ways, it is not,
Joint but successive affirmation and denial: syād-asti-nāsti—in some ways, it is, and it is not,
Joint and simultaneous affirmation and denial: syād-asti-avaktavyaḥ—in some ways, it is, and it is indescribable,
Joint and simultaneous affirmation and denial: syān-nāsti-avaktavyaḥ—in some ways, it is not, and it is indescribable,
Joint and simultaneous affirmation and denial: syād-asti-nāsti-avaktavyaḥ—in some ways, it is, it is not, and it is indescribable,
Joint and simultaneous affirmation and denial: syād-avaktavyaḥ—in some ways, it is indescribable.

Contrasted with Wilbers Integral theory and Lietaers AQAl Diagram in the integral theory of money.

Prof. Lietaer was very well versed in Eastern Philosophy and his

The diagram here points to this

rogerglewis Uncategorized July 25, 2016, 3 Minutes


Symbiosis Diversity and sustanable politics a Matrifocal Turn  https://longhairedmusings.wordpress.com/2016/07/25/symbiosis-diversity-and-sustanable-politics-a-matrifocal-turn-greenpartyleadership/  via @PMotels

Symbiosis Diversity and sustanable politics a Matrifocal Turn #GreenPartyLeadership

In Response to Tom Chances CoRONation validictory, I have made a counter-argument. Above   In a politics of participation, the Polity is the movement is the party, the leadership is merely an …


See GrubStreetJournal’s other Tweets

This was the context of Quoting Leitaer and not a rather juvenile appeal to Authority, and certainly not with respect to a binary materialism or Idealism meme. So far from an easy to find “supportive” writer I quoted Bernards work in a much more subtle sense and quite different to your apparent strawman as set out at point 1.
Bernard And I were also connected on Skype and I have quoted his work and employed his writing extensively and he was aware that I was a Disciple of sorts for his work. I have read pretty much everything Bernard has published and recommended his Blog to anyone.
Yin-Yang—the Taoist concept of relationship between polarities.

2. Lastly, neither you nor I can easily alter our views.

We are individuals and our lived contexts and viewpoints will be forever on different paths. Here we meet at a fork in the road Steven.

For myself, I take Osho’s essay on Ego the false center as my Sensai,

But First.
1. “I am also offended by the notion that one needs to be one or the other and that Materialism and Idealism are of necessity or custom mutually exclusive. I do not believe they are and there are more ways of being and acting than as through Matter or Thought in three dimensions of time and space.”

2. “Three modes of evolution have thus been brought before us: evolution by fortuitous variation, evolution by mechanical necessity, and evolution by creative love. We may term them tychastic evolution, or tychasm, anancastic evolution, or anancasm, and agapastic evolution, or agapasm. The doctrines which represent these as severally of principal importance we may term tychasticism, anancasticism,and agapasticism. On the other hand the mere propositions that absolute chance, mechanical necessity, and the law of love are severally operative in the cosmos may receive the names of tychism, anancism, and agapism.” — C. S. Peirce, 1893[2]

3. https://notthegrubstreetjournal.com/2017/01/08/why-are-we-here-an-essay-provoked-by-golem-xivs-david-malones-latest-documentary-series/

And Finally Osho


So you have two centers. One center you come with, which is given by existence itself. That is the self. And the other center, which is created by the society, is the ego. It is a false thing – and it is a very great trick. Through the ego the society is controlling you. You have to behave in a certain way, because only then does the society appreciate you. You have to walk in a certain way; you have to laugh in a certain way; you have to follow certain manners, a morality, a code. Only then will the society appreciate you, and if it doesn’t, you ego will be shaken. And when the ego is shaken, you don’t know where you are, who you are.

The others have given you the idea.

That idea is the ego.



Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature.

  1. Guide reproduction wisely — improving fitness and diversity.
  2. Unite humanity with a living new language.
  3. Rule passion — faith — tradition — and all things with tempered reason.
  4. Protect people and nations with fair laws and just courts.
  5. Let all nations rule internally resolving external disputes in a world court.
  6. Avoid petty laws and useless officials.
  7. Balance personal rights with social duties.
  8. Prize truth — beauty — love — seeking harmony with the infinite.
  9. Be not a cancer on the earth — Leave room for nature — Leave room for nature.



Reframing the war on Carbon/populationReframing the war on Carbon/population

Law of the Hammer/ and Sycle

Crop Rotation, Fixing Nitrogen.

Aristotle Ships by Nature?

Pierce Sham reasoning. Talking head and lip synch

Twiteer thread, Source of Quotes.

I particularly Like this old Quote from Jeremy Bentham’s anonymous pen on the Self Evidentiary Nature of the Rights to Liberty claimed in the USA Declaration of Independence.

They are about “to assume,” as they tell us, “among the powers of the earth, that equal and separate ( 120 ) station to which” — they have lately discovered — “the laws of Nature, and of Nature’s God entitle them.” What difference these acute legislators suppose between the laws of Nature and of Nature’s God, is more than I can take upon me to determine, or even to guess. If to what they now demand they were entitled by any law of God, they had only to produce that law, and all controversy was at an end. Instead of this, what do they produce? What they call sell-evident truths. “All men,” they tell us, “are created equal.” This rarity is a new discovery; now, for the first time, we learn, that a child, at the moment of his birth, has the same quantity of natural power as the parent, the same quantity of political power as the magistrate.

You have only to produce the Evidence Glyn, that you do not is I think because you can not, it does not in fact exist and this is a Work in progress.


Roger Lewis

Roger Lewis This is very interesting what strikes me as obvious is the confession in the opening paragraphs. ( “We analysed the observational data by fitting all June temperature observations to a distribution that shifts proportional to the smoothed global mean temperature. This method assumes that global warming is the main factor affecting local temperatures on the 100-yr time scale.” )

This sort of speculation is very interesting but what most Statistical Modellers end up doing is believing their model represents the thing in itself. In this Study, they not only take their model to be the thing in itself but go further in Reducing the thing in itself to the Temperature record of the last 100 years. What is striking about this sort of Pseudo-Scientific alarmism is how desperately amateurish it is.

The Weather System is complicated, The Climate System is whole orders of magnitude more so especially when one pretends one can extrapolate to a whole earth model and make sensible predictions.

I build computer models for sounds particularly of Guitar Timbres and have for many years marvelled at the inability of those who have note been fully inducted into my own Nerdy world, to get their head around the limitations of Probabilistic Modelling. The Maths is actually quite simple once the necessary logic switch is located in ones brain, until then though it is actually hugely confusing. I remember the first early lectures I attended on Fluid Dynamics and back then as a Younger man I had not cottoned on to the Abstract nature of the pursuit of mathamaticaL Description. The worse offenders on these sorts of questions are not in fact in my experience Climate alarmists but actually, a certain breed of Economics half-wit usually touting a newly minted MBA fro some Ivy League Business school or another. To them, I always recommend this lecture from John Mirrlees the Nobel prize winning economist.

European Heat — June 2017

Record June Temperatures in Western Europe June 29 — Key Points Record-breaking heat…




James Mirrlees – Mathematics and Real Economics

Chomsky, Linguistics, Philosophy, Poetry, Music and…


  Save as PDF  My Authors


This is mainly going to be a thread of books i’ve found useful in developing my own environmental philosophy, focused mainly on resource management, econ, and food systems since that is mainly what im into 🥂🦈 


Please be mindful of how i use the word “useful”; i strongly believe in reading about views outside my own so I have a robust understanding of the attitudes that shape modern environmental policy. In no way do i endorse 100% of what these authors write or say 


GOVERNING THE COMMONS by Elinor Ostrum, to be read in conjunction with THE TRAGEDY OF THE COMMONS by Garrett Hardin

everybody whose talked to me for 5 minutes knows i despise garrett hardin, a known eugenicist, who coined “the tragedy of the commons” mainly as a [cont]

1 [cont]/??

pro-eugenicist argument masquerading as environmental policy. Its gained an unfortunate amount of traction, which is why I really love Ostrom’s alternative takes that lean toward localized collective action, for which she won a nobel prize. Its dense but foundational 



I was really surprised by this book! The author brings a really nuanced, indigenous-focused view of ecocapitalism in africa. I REALLY liked it



This is where we get into some econ, I think this is a really good primer as to how fisheries/fish production within the US is changing and the pitfalls that come along w it



I think this is on every ecology reading list, it won the pulitzer prize a few years ago. Anyway, its a good primer contrasting natural cycles of evolution and extinction w the current human impacted era



Another fisheries book; provides a good overview of our extremely broken seafood industry and current efforts to fix it. Special attention is paid to the native sockeye salmon fishery in AK


I also recommend Paul Greenberg’s other book FOUR FISH, if youre interested in the evolution of the seafood industry, aquaculture, fish farming, etc!



Its hard to talk about this book–its foundational and informative in MANY ways but also very much a product of its time. I think its valuable to read, especially when analyzing ur own pov wrt environmental issues



If you like to get angry over stuff you didnt even know you should be angry about, this book is for you.



A really nice light read by a new england fisherman, its surprisingly tender, w thoughtful attention paid to the eel’s significance to indigenous cultires

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh.

Philosophy, Physics, Mathematics – “Dangerous Knowledge”

Philosophy, Physics, Mathematics – “Dangerous Knowledge”: “”

Great Video on Google regarding infinity and uncertainty Godel Turin Cantor and Boltzmann



On the present discontents, Burke opined #Conquest of Dough

mais par impatience de souffrir
On the present discontents, Burke opined
Putin ,Trump and Farage set courses un-entangled
Edmund Burke was born at Dublin on the first of January, 1730.  His father was an attorney, who had fifteen children, of whom all but four died in their youth.  Edmund, the second son, being of delicate health in his childhood, was taught at home and at his grandfather’s house in the country before he was sent with his two brothers Garrett and Richard to a school at Ballitore, under Abraham Shackleton, a member of the Society of Friends.  For nearly forty years afterwards Burke paid an annual visit to Ballitore.

Exorcising #Greta the Sequel to #TheExergist .Marvel at The #Gore Scream and the Lurking beasties of #DeepAdaptation



Energy Returned on Energy Invested, Surplus Energy Economics DataBase ( SEEDS) Embodied Energy Circular Economy. Exorcising the stupid from the discourse on Po… https://longhairedmusings.wordpress.com/2018/03/10/energy-returned-on-energy-invested-surplus-energy-economics-data-base-seeds-embodied-energy-circular-economy/ 

View image on Twitter
See GrubStreetJournal’s other Tweets
At this point things like Leitaers TERRA currency proposals come to mind but most of all this quote from Benjamin Franklin which fits the polarised and binary state of the renewables versus legacy fuels debate.
In 1729 Benjamin Franklin wrote a pamphlet ´´A modest Enquiry into the nature and the necessity of a paper Currency.”
a modest enquiry,
”There is no Science, the Study of which is more useful and commendable than the Knowledge of the true Interest of one’s Country; and perhaps there is no Kind of Learning more abstruse and intricate, more difficult to acquire in any Degree of Perfection than This, and therefore none more generally neglected. Hence it is, that we every Day find Men in Conversation contending warmly on some Point in Politicks, which, altho’ it may nearly concern them both, neither of them understand any more than they do each other.
Thus much by way of Apology for this present Enquiry into the Nature and Necessity of a Paper Currency. And if any Thing I shall say, may be a Means of fixing a Subject that is now the chief Concern of my Countrymen, in a clearer Light, I shall have the Satisfaction of thinking my Time and Pains well employed.
To proceed, then,
There is a certain proportionate Quantity of Money requisite to carry on the Trade of a Country freely and currently; More than which would be of no Advantage in Trade, and Less, if much less, exceedingly detrimental to it.
This leads us to the following general Considerations.”

What are the economic principles of taxation?

Hi, Tim Seasons Greetings.
On the post, I do not think it is one of your best.
It says that seeds predicts all of this and then gives a straightforward monetary analysis.
I find this disappointing. I am going to download the resources and look for the correlations you are claiming but which you have not explained here.

One glaring point missing from your analysis, even though you give per capita GDP and Debt figures are that wealth redistribution and increased inequality is not stripped out of your figures.
I have become increasingly persuaded that the precariat is a matter of political Design and not some accident or necessity due to energy constraint realities. I believe it is explained by the oldest cause of want and that is the greed of a corrupted elite.

Since 2008 net wealth of the very top 1% has increased in the UK by better than 185%, the bottom part of society is much worse off. This is of course in solely Monetary measures.

To go some way to adding to the analysis I found this excellent paper at the House of Commons online library the other day.


15. Taxation comprises three fundamental economic parts:

l Creation of the medium of taxation and issue into the economy

l Distribution of the medium of taxation through the economy

l Collection of the medium of taxation

17. Modern taxation systems are still based around the creation, distribution and collection of tokens, but the tokens now take electronic rather than physical form. These tokens are bookkeeping entries in the banking system. The structure of the taxation system and the economy it controls is determined by the rules under which these electronic bookkeeping tokens are created, distributed and collected. Coins and notes are still issued in small quantity but are subsidiary to the banking system’s bookkeeping entries.

19. “Contemporary governments grant the exclusive power to issue the medium of taxation to a state-sanctioned banking cartel. The banking cartel comprises a central bank and private member banks. The central bank is responsible for price-fixing, information sharing, promoting member interests and preventing member defaults. Serving the public interest is not a primary goal of a central bank. The cartel holds the exclusive power to set the price of and issue the medium of taxation. Governments generally prohibit the issue of alternative media for exchange and mandate payments of taxes only in the cartel-issued medium.”


52. Development of the tax system has been constrained by political reality and driven by the demands of vested interests in finance and real estate. The fundamental principles of tax policy should explicitly incorporate the money system and the welfare system. The tax system is not fit for purpose and is beyond repair. It should be replaced by an efficient, neutral and distortion-free system based around clearly defined recurrent payments from owners of land, immovable property and natural resources based on contract law. Means-tested welfare should be replaced by a Citizens’ Dividend distributing the financial surpluses of government arising from such reforms.

53. The transition to a new, principled tax system should be on an “opt-in” basis where people can choose to permanently leave the old system when they can benefit from so doing. The effect of such a transition would be an rapid and dramatic revival in economic performance without battling political headwinds.

54. The principles outlined here fully meet all the objectives of the OECD tax report and the Mirrlees Review. They meet Smith’s canons of taxation and adhere to orthodox and common heterodox academic analysis. They are comprehensible and achievable.

January 2011

The Author was a Cambridge computer scientist who tragically killed himself a few years back. He also wrote convincingly on carbon-based credits in conjunction with his Georgist Land Value ideas.

Anyway, I thought you might be familiar with Dr Wrigley as he is from you Alma Mater’s home town.
Others here may not be.
Merry Christmas again and I hope you can spell out the explicit data supporting your interpretation of the monetary measures depended upon to make your analysis.

All the best


Take Mr Kurz up on his invitation to explain this and why it is relevant to the Belief System I think we have established he is whether knowingly or not Advocating for.

  • In many countries, property taxes have been the rule for generations. What would be different with your (Georgist?) scheme?

    Also, re:
    “Means-tested welfare should be replaced by a Citizens’ Dividend distributing the financial surpluses of government arising from such reforms.”

    As most governments are in deep, maybe unrepayable debt, wouldn’t surpluses from any activity be sucked into that black hole?


    Steven B Kurtzon  said:

    “Steve Kurtz, The Sovereign Debt crisis emerges straight out of the GFC, it exists because in 2008 the banks were bailed out to the tune of Trillions by the treasuries of Nation States, of course, the who enterprise is farcical and imaginary.
    What merely happened is that Losses were socialised ( Socialism for the Rich) and Profits were previously privatised and remained in the hands of the Privileged Oligarchical classes.
    Regarding Georgist single land, taxation read a book.even do a google search. His ideas remain relevant and workable today and fit very well with incorporating SEEDS realism into our political Economy.”

    Gee, R.L., thanks for assuming that I haven’t known all the above for many decades. The GFC wasn’t time of the first gov’t bailout, more than banks have been saved, and it won’t be the last. Chrysler maybe 40 years ago comes to mind. I’m against *all* bailouts.

    “I.R. Sprague, in his book, Bailout: An Insider’s Account of Bank Failures and Rescues, notes 200 bank failures in 1984-1985, which accounted for more than all the failures in a forty-year period from World War II to the 1980s. Sprague also recounts eight high profile government bailouts in the 1970s and 1980s, four of which were of banks. Four “congressionally approved [corporate] bailouts” included Chrysler, Lockheed Corporation, New York City, and Conrail. The banks included Unity Bank and Trust of Boston in 1971, Bank of the Commonwealth of Detroit in 1972, First Pennsylvania Bank in 1980, and Continental in 1984. Bailouts are controversial because not all banks will be saved—large banks are generally saved before smaller ones—and there is no single criteria determining which banks are worthy of saving.

    The savings and loan crisis of the 1980s saw hundreds of savings and loans associations bailed out by the government to the tune of over $160 billion. The Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation (FSLIC), a government agency charged with insuring the savings and loan deposits, went bankrupt largely because it had charged the same premium to all institutions regardless of risk (Ely, 2008). Savings and Loans were at risk as the result of heavy investments in real estate, restrictions on interest rates, and by high inflation. The deregulation of savings and loans and improper supervision allowed risky investments leading to failure.”

  • R.L. Forgot to add that I’ve known Harry Pollard (head of Henry George School in California) for 3 decades, and I asked you to explain to the list how your scheme differs from current high property taxes in the US o land and unmovable real property that you mentioned.

Hi, Stephen, I do not claim ownership of The Ideas of the Late Dr Adrian Wrigley.
I do not claim either to be A Henry George or Single Land Tax Expert. I have Read George and also some developments of his ideas. Mainly I have been into the work of GK Chesterton and Hillaire Belloc and Distributism which is an Honest hybrid of Market and Social ideas that is neither Left or right but founded in the Catholic Christian tradition.
My won work on all of these ideas of political economy is on my blog anyone can search the concepts I mention and with respect to elaborating here, I prefer not to as persons such as yourself have made it quite clear that you will brook no discussion only passive submission to your own settled minds. Tim our host is I must say not included in that remark but you certainly are.

Ah, so Your refusal to explain your scheme to the blog members is my problem. And then you cloak your muddled thinking with a religious doctrine. Must be greatly self-satisfying, however the list learns nothing from it.

Social Conditioning and Conventional Pieties. #Conspiracy #Hypothesis #Theory #Crime #StateCrimesAgainstDemocracy #SCADS Conspiracy of Context!

Who ate all the pieties.or ´Now is not a time for soundbites´

The Conspiracy of Contexts , Political Correctness, Peer review and Peer Pressure.
  1. Who ate all the pieties or ´Now is not a time for soundbites´.

”Say I get up on Nightline, I´m given whatever it is , 2 Minutes and I say Gaddafi is a terrorist Khomeini is a murderer. Whatever it is etc.etc. The Russians , you know invaded Afghanistan all this sort of stuff, everyone just nods, you simply don’t need any evidence. But suppose you say something thats not just re-gurgitating ”conventional pieties”, say you say something the least bit unexpected or controversial . Suppose you say ………….

( insert Green Party Policies on Basic Income, reform of debt based money or not renewing Trident here )”
(Equally, insert Jeremy Corbyn´s heterodox politics to Blu Labour and Neo liberal austerity )

Quote from Noam Chomsky starts at 1min 48 s
or click link Regurgitating conventional pieties

Social Conditioning

Related very closely to the concept of Groupthink is a process called Social Conditioning.  However, where Groupthink relates to cognitive issues in a small group, Social Conditioning is concerned more with broad social implications – typically nationwide.
Click for Image
Social conditioning is the sociological process of training individuals in a society to respond in a manner generally approved by the society in general and peer groups within society.
Manifestations of social conditioning are vast, but they are generally categorized as social patterns and social structures including nationalism, education, employment, entertainment, popular culture, religion, spirituality and family life. The social structure in which an individual finds him or herself influences and can determine their social actions and responses.

Helical Solar System Motion Through the Galaxy: Heretical Revelation or Well-known Fact? – Part 2

Summary of Part 1

So . . . . in a similar manner to my experience, we have someone (DjSadhu) discover a fact that:
  1. was never before shared with him in any form (school, documentaries, books, web sites, etc.), and
  2. was a revolutionary idea totally different from what he did learn, so he had to share his “aha” moment with others.


Plasma Cosmology, Big Bang, Hannes Alfven. Nobel Prize Winner 1970. The Electric Universe.

I wish to thank you very much for your
kind introduction
it is a great pleasure to be here and to
listen to so many interesting lectures
and especially I am glad to note that

Re-framing the War on Carbon. The Carbon Surplus Question?

On Global Warming and the War on Carbon , or what I would re-frame as the Carbon Surplus Problem.

The Carbon Surplus Problem is a subject I am just writing a kids book about for helping my Children understand the Carbon Cycle. I will enumerate a framework of reference for the re-framing of the Carbon Surplus problem as an alternative to the War on Carbon position presently in vogue, (surprisingly, to me, also in Green Circles). Those framework headings are Scientific, Political, Economic & stakeholder representation.
Scientific questions should be the easiest to broach as science is objective, one could not argue with that proposition surely? Sadly, the human relationships aspects of science turn out to be as fraught with status based psychology as any other field of human endeavour, cognisant of this I would recommend this excellent slide collection from Anand Gnanadesikan.
There is a pedagogical deficit in public education on Climate evidenced by ignorance of the Carbon Cycle, this is hampering debate on solutions such as those proposed by Tony Lovell in the soil carbon video (At the end of this post). Partial solutions are often attacked vigorously as a climate (no pun intended) of ad hominem dominates responses to anything not fitting the bag of nails demanded of the War on Carbon, ´´CO2 as pollution´´, hammer.
Corporate capture of highly centralised government structures and the Government tendency to look for shiny photo op type solutions crowds out the incremental and sustainable holistic solutions which seem to be viable and easily mobilised. Husbandry of the problem as opposed to the undeclared War on Carbon. The Wars on Drugs, Wars on Terrorism , are analogues to the climate that politicians have fostered vis anthropogenic CO2 emissions, sadly this style of Government is synchronous with the identification and onset of the problem of raised CO2 levels. I will not graph a correlation of this hypothesis, as we know correlation is not a reliable proof of causation.
Economic aspects of the problem are as fraught with the problem of the Law of the instrument
as political responses. Economics and finance as practised in Financialised Capitalism will of course seek to apply its own false metrics of monetary price measures. These measures are not consistent with value or utility concepts. The Money measure of utility is bound in artificial scarcity of the measure, ignorant of the availability of resources to allocate. Economists and Bankers were a large component of the fourth UK carbon budget report,
If ever one needed confirmation that cap and trade is the financial hammer seeing all Carbon as an anthropogenic CO2 nail that simply must be monetised , this document should do it.
Stakeholder perspectives.
With respect to Stake-holders, I would like to speak up for the poor and those without a voice to speak for the Landless Peasants and the continuing ravaging of self-provisioning local economies by Global demands for monoculture cash crop and debt based economic solutions. These stake-holders are as important as any of us and their voices are unrepresented it is also true that the skills and smaller scale permaculture and local vernacular specific methods are an untapped resource in utilising the surplus of CO2 currently seen as a problem and not a misapplied surplus resource.
Discourse and Selection Biases.
Ad hominem and appeals to consensus or Authority typifies even Green Party discourse on these issues. Ecological solutions will best solve ecological problems by ignoring the carbon cycle and submitting to an emissions centric financialised narrative the discourse obscures potential holistic solutions to a very natural problem ( of course human emissions are man made but the emissions are natural chemical compounds extracted from natural matter). This talking past and at one another generates much more heat than light and will all end in tears.
I have also been working on a more detailed but focused structured position argument with full references which is likely to take a few more weeks to complete. The occasional guffaw or cry of anguish will continue to emit from under my little rock here in Rural Sweden in the mean-time , I will try to muffle the volume but can not possibly hold it all in.
Two very good short videos on Carbon Cycling.
Soil carbon — Putting carbon back where it belongs — In the Earth | Tony Lovell | TEDxDubbo

Tony Lovell will explain the reasoning behind how more green growing plants means more captured carbon dioxide — more water — more production — more biodiversity — more profit. Did you know that a 1% change in soil organic matter across just one-quarter of the World’s land area could sequester 300 billion tonnes of physical CO2.

TEDxDubbo focused attention on what we call FACETS — Food, Agriculture, Climate, Energy, Topsoil and Sustainability. These FACETS are actually potent ideas shared by everyday people with an interest in these disciplines. In many of these topics there is an awareness campaign; the aim of bringing our community together united against catastrophic failures in our food-chain, environment and health. It is worth mentioning that we are also indebted to our natural systems for our economic wealth. Failures in Food, Agriculture, Climate, Energy, Topsoil and Sustainability are not just a local issue — they are a global concern. http://tedxdubbo.com/

Carbon Cycle, part 1

Creating a future that works
Carbon Cycle, part 1
About Peter Donovan.  has hands-on experience with land and stock management, low-stress stock handling, Holistic Management, community development, consensus-building, and more. He also does freelance media work; see his resume and portfolio. He completed Holistic Management International’s Holistic Management Educator course in 1997, but chose not to pursue certification. He was instrumental in bringing Enterprise Facilitation to Wallowa County in eastern Oregon, U.S.A., where he lives.
Joy Livingwell enjoys simplifying and clarifying regenerative land management so that ordinary people can understand it. She writes on a variety of topics, including ecology and sustainable agriculture. She co-authored How to Build With Grid Beam: A fast, easy, and affordable system for building almost anything (New Society Publishers, 2008).

Chesterton’s fence is the principle that reforms should not be made until the reasoning behind the existing state of affairs is understood. The quotation is from G. K. Chesterton’s 1929 book The Thing, in the chapter entitled “The Drift from Domesticity”:

Chestertons fence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Chesterton%27s_fence

In the matter of reforming things, as distinct from deforming them, there is one plain and simple principle; a principle which will probably be called a paradox. There exists in such a case a certain institution or law; let us say, for the sake of simplicity, a fence or gate erected across a road. The more modern type of reformer goes gaily up to it and says, “I don’t see the use of this; let us clear it away.” To which the more intelligent type of reformer will do well to answer: “If you don’t see the use of it, I certainly won’t let you clear it away. Go away and think. Then, when you can come back and tell me that you do see the use of it, I may allow you to destroy it.”[1]

Chesterton’s admonition should first be understood within his own historical context, as a response to certain socialists and reformers of his time (e.g. George Bernard Shaw).

As usual, you make a large assumption regarding “The Settled Science” this is an issue for Environmentalists such as myself, and # WrongKindofGreen, in that the envisioned something else, in the Green New Deal and Modern Monetary Theory, is Authoritarian Command and Control Based. In yesterday article you put it this way.

“A movement towards true health will look like everyone waking up to the reality that we’re all being driven toward extinction via climate collapse or nuclear war by a ruling class who used propaganda to trick us into thinking that its suicidal trajectory was the moderate path. Obviously, when we create our new model we won’t all agree with each other about the best direction to take it, but we’ve got to overhaul the old one first.”


irginia Abernethy (born 1934) is an American anthropologist and activist. She is professor emerita of psychiatry and anthropology at Vanderbilt University School of Medicine. She has published research on population demography and immigration. She ran for Vice President of the United States in 2012 alongside Merlin Miller for the American Freedom Party, a party that promotes white nationalism.[1][2][3]

In 2012, the Anti-Defamation League referred to Abernathy as an “unabashed white supremacist”, and the Southern Poverty Law Center called her a “full-fledged professor of hate,” adding her to a list of 30 new activists heading the radical right.[4] Abernethy denied that she was a “white supremacist,” preferring to describe herself as an “ethnic separatist.”


The Simon–Ehrlich wager was a 1980 scientific wager between business professor Julian L. Simon and biologist Paul Ehrlich, betting on a mutually agreed-upon measure of resource scarcity over the decade leading up to 1990. The widely-followed contest originated in the pages of Social Science Quarterly, where Simon challenged Ehrlich to put his money where his mouth was. In response to Ehrlich’s published claim that “If I were a gambler, I would take even money that England will not exist in the year 2000″ Simon offered to take that bet, or, more realistically, “to stake US$10,000 … on my belief that the cost of non-government-controlled raw materials (including grain and oil) will not rise in the long run.”

Simon challenged Ehrlich to choose any raw material he wanted and a date more than a year away, and he would wager on the inflation-adjusted prices decreasing as opposed to increasing. Ehrlich chose copperchromiumnickeltin, and tungsten. The bet was formalized on September 29, 1980, with September 29, 1990, as the payoff date. Ehrlich lost the bet, as all five commodities that were bet on declined in price from 1980 through 1990, the wager period.[1]


To summarize this brief essay, determination of an “optimum” world population size involves social decisions about the lifestyles to be lived and the distribution of those lifestyles among individuals in the population. To us it seems reasonable to assume that, until cultures and technologies change radically, the optimum size of the human population lies in the vicinity of 1.5 to 2 billion people. That number also is our approximate best guess of the continuous standing crop of people, if achieved reasonably soon, that would permit the maximum number of Homo sapiens to live in the long run. But suppose we have underestimated the optimum and it actually is 4 billion? Since the present population is over 5.5 billion and growing rapidly, the initial policy implications of our conclusions are still clear.

In this interview, Dr. Tarpley reviews the writings of John P. Holdren, the current White House science advisor. This interview conclusively exposes scientific .

Dr. Tarpley reviews the writings of John P. Holdren, the current White House science advisor. This interview conclusively exposes scientific elite’s true agenda, .


In this interview, Dr Tarpley reviews the writings of John P. Holdren, the current White House science advisor. This interview conclusively exposes scientific.

The Tragedy of the Tragedy of the Commons

The man who wrote one of environmentalism’s most-cited essays was a racist, eugenicist, nativist and Islamaphobe—plus his argument was wrong

The Tragedy of

Fifty years ago, University of California professor Garrett Hardin penned an influential essay in the journal Science. Hardin saw all humans as selfish herders: we worry that our neighbors’ cattle will graze the best grass. So, we send more of our cows out to consume that grass first. We take it first, before someone else steals our share. This creates a vicious cycle of environmental degradation that Hardin described as the “tragedy of the commons.”

It’s hard to overstate Hardin’s impact on modern environmentalism. His views are taught across ecology, economics, political science and environmental studies. His essay remains an academic blockbuster, with almost 40,000 citations. It still gets republished in prominent environmental anthologies.

But here are some inconvenient truths: Hardin was a racist, eugenicist, nativist and Islamophobe. He is listed by the Southern Poverty Law Center as a known white nationalist. His writings and political activism helped inspire the anti-immigrant hatred spilling across America today.

And he promoted an idea he called “lifeboat ethics”: since global resources are finite, Hardin believed the rich should throw poor people overboard to keep their boat above water.

To create a just and vibrant climate future, we need to instead cast Hardin and his flawed metaphor overboard.

People who revisit Hardin’s original essay are in for a surprise. Its six pages are filled with fear-mongering. Subheadings proclaim that “freedom to breed is intolerable.” It opines at length about the benefits if “children of improvident parents starve to death.” A few paragraphs later Hardin writes: “If we love the truth we must openly deny the validity of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.” And on and on. Hardin practically calls for a fascist state to snuff out unwanted gene pools.

Or build a wall to keep immigrants out. Hardin was a virulent nativist whose ideas inspired some of today’s ugliest anti-immigrant sentiment. He believed that only racially homogenous societies could survive. He was also involved with the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), a hate group that now cheers President Trump’s racist policies. Today, American neo-Nazis cite Hardin’s theories to justify racial violence.

These were not mere words on paper. Hardin lobbied Congress against sending food aid to poor nations, because he believed their populations were threatening Earth’s “carrying capacity.”

Of course, plenty of flawed people have left behind noble ideas. That Hardin’s tragedy was advanced as part of a white nationalist project should not automatically condemn its merits.

But the facts are not on Hardin’s side. For one, he got the history of the commons wrong. As Susan Cox pointed out, early pastures were well regulated by local institutions. They were not free-for-all grazing sites where people took and took at the expense of everyone else.

Many global commons have been similarly sustained through community institutions. This striking finding was the life’s work of Elinor Ostrom, who won the 2009 Nobel Prize in Economics (technically called the Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel). Using the tools of science—rather than the tools of hatred—Ostrom showed the diversity of institutions humans have created to manage our shared environment.


Will (Matt Damon): “Of course that’s your contention. You’re a first year grad student. You just got finished readin’ some Marxian historian — Pete Garrison probably. You’re gonna be convinced of that ’til next month when you get to James Lemon, and then you’re gonna be talkin’ about how the economies of Virginia and Pennsylvania were entrepreneurial and capitalist way back in 1740. That’s gonna last until next year — you’re gonna be in here regurgitating Gordon Wood, talkin’ about, you know, the Pre-Revolutionary utopia and the capital-forming effects of military mobilization… Wood drastically — Wood drastically underestimates the impact of social distinctions predicated upon wealth, especially inherited wealth.’  got that from Vickers, ‘Work in Essex County,’ page 98, right? Yeah, I read tYouhat too. Were you gonna plagiarize the whole thing for us? Do you have any thoughts of your own on this matter? Or do you…is that your thing? You come into a bar. You read some obscure passage and then pretend…you pawn it off as your own idea just to impress some girls and embarrass my friend? See, the sad thing about a guy like you is in 50 years you’re gonna start doin’ some thinkin’ on your own and you’re gonna come up with the fact that there are two certainties in life. One: don’t do that. And two: You dropped a hundred and fifty grand on a f—-n’ education you coulda’ got for a dollar fifty in late charges at the public library.”

Howard Zinn (August 24, 1922 – January 27, 2010) was an American historian, playwright, and socialist thinker. He was chair of the history and social sciences department at Spelman College,[1] and a political science professor at Boston University. Zinn wrote over 20 books, including his best-selling and influential A People’s History of the United States. In 2007, he published a version of it for younger readers, A Young People’s History of the United States.[2]

Zinn described himself as “something of an anarchist, something of a socialist. Maybe a democratic socialist.”[3][4] He wrote extensively about the Civil Rights Movement and anti-war movement, and labor history of the United States. His memoir, You Can’t Be Neutral on a Moving Train (Beacon Press, 2002), was also the title of a 2004 documentary about Zinn’s life and work. Zinn died of a heart attack in 2010, at age 87.[5]

After two years as a post-doctoral fellow in Williamsburg, Virginia, and a year teaching at the University of Wyoming in Laramie, Vickers was appointed to a permanent position at Memorial University in 1984. The family flourished in Newfoundland, but in early 1999 Vickers was diagnosed with non-Hodgkins lymphoma. The high reputation of the doctors at the University of California, Dan Diego was a factor in Vickers accepting an offer to join the UCSD History Department later that year.

By this time Vickers was well known to historians throughout the States. His award-winning 1994 book Farmers and Fishermen: Two Centuries of Work in Essex Country, Massachusetts, 1630-1830, had delineated through painstaking analysis of archival records of entire communities the extent to which the development of New England had depended on labor that was largely unfree—with workers held in check not by slavery but by onerous burdens of debt. It had been hailed by reviewers as “one of the best works yet written on the early American economy” and as a book that explained “the deepest inner workings of New England society.”


Chuckie: …How ya like me now?!



Jeff Glassman | March 3, 2011 at 1:27 pm |
Re Agreeing(?) 2/26/11
When an individual is assessing [Zeke’s statements], the epistemic level of the assessor is relevant. I propose the following levels:
1. Research scientist publishing papers on relevant topics
2. Individual with a graduate degree in a technical subject that has investigated the relevant topics in detail.
3. Individual spending a substantial amount of time reading popular books on the subject and hanging out in the climate blogosphere
4. Individual who gets their climate information from talk radio
Note: personally, I would rate an epistemic level of 1 on some of the topics, and level 2 on others.
The context is clear enough: assessor means a voter contributing his opinion to Zeke’s (and IPCC’s) pole of subjective likelihoods, quantified with equally subjective probability numbers. In that setting, and for some sense of purity in the art of opinion surveying, the assessor levels might be relevant. That poll could be scientific in the field of opinion sampling, but not in the sense of the substantive, climate elements in Zeke’s statements. The poling process would be equally valid for the proposition “multiple supreme beings exist” (to enlist the monotheist reader in the argument), and the supporting statistics of opinion.
Zeke and Curry agree that there is no serious challenge to Keeling’s measurements … . Does this agreeing mean that they are unaware of any Level 1 challenge in a peer-reviewed climate journal? Is the operative word serious? Are Z&C distinguishing between concentration measurements at MLO and the reconstructions accepted by IPCC and widely known as the Keeling Curve? AR4, Figure 2.3(a), p. 138. Do Keeling’s measurementsinclude the isotopic measurements, and IPCC’s reductions to fingerprints? Id., Figure 2.3(b). Do they include the missing wind vector by which samples were deemed valid for the reconstruction? Have Z & C considered the fact that MLO lies in the exhaust plume of massive oceanic outgassing in the Eastern Equatorial Pacific, and that Keeling cautioned against relying on measurements near sources or sinks?


Click to access CFJ_JeffGlassman_LectureNotes090425.pdf

Hans Rosling: Global population growth, box by box
1,073,297 views•9 Jul 2010


Custom Search
Sources for data shown in DON´T PANIC
DON´T PANIC, is a one-hour documentary film produced by Wingspan Productions for This World on BBC2 and others. The film covers world population, income distribution and the use of fossil fuel. The presenter, Professor Hans Rosling, is the co-founder of Gapminder Foundation, and Gapminder also supplied the data shown in the program and the educational concepts on which the program’s graphics are based.

The video can be found here.

The film contains 12 different graphic data presentations. This document list below the sources of the data used in each of these presentations. Where possible the link to data sources is given as well as brief summaries of how Gapminder´s work in merging, curating and rounding-up the numbers to enable clear visualization of major global trends.

  1. The changing size of the world population from 10 million in 10,000 BC to 7 billion in 2012

The estimates for the time period up to 1950 are mainly based on

Atlas of the World Population History. McEvedey C, Jones R. Penguin 1978, and Biraben JN, An Essay Concerning Mankind’s Evolution, Population, Selected Papers, Dec 1980, Table 2.

The estimates for the period from 1950 up to the present are mainly from “World Population Prospect: The 2012 revision”, published by UN Population Division in 2013 http://esa.un.org/unpd/wpp/index.htm

  1. The average number of babies born per woman (total fertility rate) and lifespan (life expectancy at birth) in Bangladesh and in all countries of the world from 1963 up to 2012

This link take you to the interactive bubble graph called “Gapminder World” with the above indicators pre-selected: http://www.bit.ly/17e5QVc

The data for each indicator are compiled from various sources, and you find information by clicking on the data sheet symbol at the beginning of each axis.

Fertility rate: //www.gapminder.org/data/documentation/gd008/

Life expectancy: //www.gapminder.org/data/documentation/gd004/

Population: //www.gapminder.org/data/documentation/gd003/

  1. UK public knowledge about the average number of babies born per woman in Bangladesh

The source is from a web-survey – the first of its kind – that was done by Gapminder in collaboration with two survey companies as described in the “Highlights” document published here (question 6):


  1. Average number of babies born per women in the world and proportion of these babies that died before growing up to become parents themselves in 1800, 1960 and at present

The details of the surviving off-spring is based on the following:


Chance of survival to 35 years of age were calculated for each country-year by selecting a model life table which matched the life expectancy for that country-year. This chance were multiplied with the total fertility rate for that country-year. The estimates utilized the following data.

Gapminder life expectancy: //www.gapminder.org/data/documentation/gd004/

Gapminder total fertility rate: //www.gapminder.org/data/documentation/gd008/

World population prospect Model Life table: (UN general, females) http://esa.un.org/unpd/wpp/Model-Life-Tables/download-page.html

  1. Projection of the size of the world population as well as the number of children aged 0-14 in the world from 1800 to 2012 and the projection up to 2100

The estimates for the time period up to 1950 are mainly based on

Atlas of the World Population History. McEvedey C, Jones R. Penguin 1978, and Biraben JN, An Essay Concerning Mankind’s Evolution, Population, Selected Papers, Dec 1980, Table 2.

The estimates for the period from 1950 up to the present are mainly from and and for future projections are entierly from “World Population Prospect: The 2012 revision”, published by UN Population Division in 2013 http://esa.un.org/unpd/wpp/index.htm

  1. The big inevitable fill-up of adults showing present and projected age distribution of the world population in 15 years age group and rounded-up to the nearest full billion

The source is “World Population Prospect: The 2012 revision”, published by UN Population Division in 2013


  1. Distribution of present world population as well as projected world population for years 2050 and 2100

The countries of the world are divided into four regions: the Americas; Europe (including Turkey, the nations in Caucasus, and the whole of Russia); Africa; and Asia; with population number rounded up to the nearest one billion.

The source is the last “World Population Prospect: The 2012 revision”, published by UN Population Division in 2013


  1. The range of average income per person between each of the world´s seven billions when ranked from lowest to highest income and expressed in purchasing power parity dollar.

The income distribution within countries is based on data that is yet only partly published made available by the work of: Van Zanden JL, Foldvari P, Van Leeuwen B, Baten J. The changing shape of Global Inequality – exploring a new dataset http://ideas.repec.org/p/ucg/wpaper/0001.html .

Some additions & modifications are done by Gapminder and this is a work in progress. The rough rounded numbers are based on the population and GDP per capita in Purchasing Power Parity USD adjusted and corrected for inflation with base year 2005 from the default graph in Gapminder World http://www.gapminder.org/world

GDP/capita in PPP: //www.gapminder.org/data/documentation/gd001/

Population: //www.gapminder.org/data/documentation/gd003/

  1. UK public knowledge in the UK about the percentage of adult literacy in the world population

The source is from a web-survey – the first of its kind – that was done by Gapminder in collaboration with two survey companies as described in the “Highlights” document published here (question 2):


  1. Life expectancy & GDP/capita in purchasing power parity for all countries from 1800 up to 2012.

The data sources are those used in the default graph in http://www.gapminder.org/world

The data for each indicator compiled from various sources, and to find information on this you click on the data sheet symbol at the beginning of each axis.

  1. Income distribution of the populations in America, Europe (countries as in presentation 7), Africa and Asia from 1963 to 2012

The main source is: Van Zanden JL, Foldvari P, Van Leeuwen B, Baten J. The changing shape of Global Inequality – exploring a new dataset http://ideas.repec.org/p/ucg/wpaper/0001.html

  1. The estimated percentage of the global fossil fuel consumption used by each of the world´s 7 billion when ranked according to the income of each billion.

The main source of the use of fossil fuel is from International Energy Agency;


The distribution across the seven billion have been done using country data for population and GDP/capita as referred to above, except for China for which data on each of five income quintiles were used and fossil fuel consumption was distributed between these quintiles assuming that fuel use related to income level in china as it does in the world as a whole based on national data.

General note: At Gapminder we are continuously updating our data. Hence, some of the data you see might be based on an earlier revision of our data. We compile and curate data to make major global trends easy to understand. We strongly advice against using our compiled and curated data from different sources for analytic or official purposes. As we do considerable simplifications and gap-filling in order to gain in understanding we welcome critique, comments and advice re the data we have used.

Stockholm 6 Nov 2013 by Hans Rosling,

mail: info@gapminder.org

Why are we here, An essay provoked by Golem XIv´s David Malones latest Documentary Series.

Why are we here, An essay provoked by Golem XIv´s David Malones latest Documentary Series.

The four films are:
1) Meaning Seeking Beings
2) The Reality of Ideas
3) The Animal Within
4) The Moral Compass
Hi David I Look forward to finding a torrent in due course, looks fascinating.I really enjoyed the previews, stunning images, we expect nothing less from your lens. Rather silly that the Beeb or Channel 4 will not be showing it especially in these days of I Player on demand, it begs the question why did they air Hyper-Normalization, what is Curtis´s secret sauce?
I do not know why I am here at this moment in time, let alone who ,´´We´´are? or what ´WE´is? Who, where, when and why???. What everyone else is doing let alone why they are doing it ( personally I would not know where to start finding out).
Universals escape my possibility of imagination, let alone perception or understanding.


Red Lines, Settled Science, The end of History and entitled Facts. If Truth were subject to Patent Law.

 If  Truth were subject to  Patent Law.

Red Lines, Settled Science, The end of History and entitled Facts.

I did a blog about Boris Johnson at the United Nations General Assembly on the last occasion of the periodic scolding  of both the truth and of Bashar Assad, (http://letthemconfectsweeterlies.blogspot.se/2016/09/syria-cui-bono-incitatus-boris-johnson.html )
Since then the catechism of fake news has developed into a higher art form and as such I have been musing over the idea that, how would Claims made in newspapers or television media look if they were subject to the same rigors as claiming a patent over an invention, or innovation, what would the patent clerk turned truth clerk make of it all when he looked at his in-tray (inbox) of the hopeful claimants to a unique claim to some previously unasserted or unknown truth. We are further asked to bow to expert opinion, what constitutes an expert these days? Further how much better is an experts opinion than any other opinion where the content is speculation even common sense.

´´if it were easy to set standards for judging judgment that would be honoured across the opinion spectrum and not glibly dismissed as another sneaky effort to seize the high ground for a favourite cause, someone would have patented the process long ago.´´
Tetlock, Philip E. (2005), Expert Political Judgment: How Good Is It? How Can We Know?

´´If we want realistic odds on what will happen next, coupled to a willingness to admit mistakes, we are better off turning to experts who embody the intellectual traits of Isaiah Berlin’s prototypical fox—those who “know many little things,” draw from an eclectic array of traditions, and accept ambiguity and contradiction as inevitable features of life—than we are turning to Berlin’s hedgehogs—those who “know one big thing,” toil devotedly within one tradition, and reach for formulaic solutions to ill-defined problems.3´´


Gate Keepers Double Agents False Trails. The Topsy Turvy Helter Skelter of The International Lies Based Order.


Final Note

231. Throughout this article we’ve made imprecise statements and statements that ought to have had all sorts of qualifications and reservations attached to them; and some of our statements may be flatly false. Lack of sufficient information and the need for brevity made it impossible for us to formulate our assertions more precisely or add all the necessary qualifications. And of course in a discussion of this kind one must rely heavily on intuitive judgment, and that can sometimes be wrong. So we don’t claim that this article expresses more than a crude approximation to the truth.

The CEC follows the LaRouche line of scepticism towards the theory of anthropogenic global warming, having lobbied the ABC to screen the film The Great Global Warming Swindle,[24] then packed the audience for a post-program audience discussion with members who made comments about “carbon 14, eugenics, Plato’s cave and Nazism”, referring to fears of global warming as “Hitler-Nazi race science… this will destroy Africa”.[25]

The CEC also makes claims “the Crown, its oil and resource cartels and media assets are responsible for looting Australian Citizens”.[26] And declares the party’s opposition to “synarchists“, which they define as “a name adopted during the Twentieth Century for an occult freemasonic sect, known as the Martinists, based on worship of the tradition of the Emperor Napoleon Bonaparte…twentieth-Century and later fascist movements, like most terrorist movements, are all Synarchist creations”.[27] In opposition the CEC stands for “…a Republic and a government that governs for all the people…”[26]

In its campaign literature, the CEC claims to associate itself with “a tradition” including such Australian figures as the Rev John Dunmore LangKing O’MalleyWilliam Guthrie SpenceFrank AnsteyDaniel DeniehyJack LangBen Chifley and John Curtin. The CEC also seeks to associate itself with a “bygone tradition” of the Australian Labor Party, by which it appears to mean the democratic socialist and protectionist policies abandoned by the ALP since the reforms of Gough Whitlam in the 1960s and 1970s.[28]

The CEC website advocates a number of positions of the worldwide LaRouche movement, including that the Port Arthur massacre, in which Martin Bryant murdered 35 people and injured 37 others, was instigated by mental health institute the Tavistock Institute on the orders of the British Royal Family.[29] and that the Australian Liberal party was founded by pro-Hitler Fascists.[30]

The Grass Roots Myth, #WrongKind of Green’s, latest expose of Media Agent Provocateur Trojan Horses and Fifth Columnists of the Fourth Estate. #WRONGKINDOFGREEN @COMPROMISEDNGOS #8THWAYTOTHINK #GREENPARTYUK #EXTINCTIONREBELLION @GRETATHUNBERG



James Corbett  is an independent journalist who has been living and working in Japan since 2004. He has been writing and producing The Corbett Report, an online multi-media news and information source, since 2007.[CR 1][CR 2]“an independent, listener-supported alternative news source” featuring “podcasts, interviews, articles and videos about breaking news and important issues from 9/11 Truth and false flag terror to the Big Brother police state, eugenics, geopolitics, the central banking fraud and more.”[CR 3]

Joël van der Reijden is an independent researcher into the deep state, born in the Netherlands. His theories are independent of a lot of other such work on the internet and focus upon hidden power. He has assigned a “global superclass index” to key individuals in an effort to simplify the importance of people and organisations.[1]

agreeing(?A) ( Two Disagree, when Now becomes Won, Part Two.) An Act of Five Parts

Glassman Diag


Agreeing(?) https://judithcurry.com/2011/02/26/agreeing/  via @curryja


by Judith Curry On Lucia Liljegren’s Blackboard (commonly categorized as a “lukewarmer” site), Zeke has a post titled “Agreeing.”    Zeke’s motivation for this i…


See GrubStreetJournal’s other Tweets


Out of the Memory Hole.
Dr G A Glassman on a pre-Recusant Judith Curry’s Blog.

More from Dr Glassman can be expected on this blog over the next few days,

Climate debate Know your CO2. Pseudo progressive bullshit. SJW´s Value Signalling useful idiots for Neo Liberalism.

A Face Book Discussion. Know your Atmospheric and ocean Chemistry.I have become frustrated at the unthinking repetition of parrot fashion dogma. For people who wish to implement radical policy changes based on empirical and proveable data then make sure the data supports your argument. Where one is acting on Faith then say so. My contention is that the CO2 belief dogma of climatism and AGW Climate Change Alarmism is damaging the environmental movement. The Green Party will, as the data increasingly shows AGW CO2 conjecture to be unsupported, be lead into disrepute by  its political leadership being exposed as indulging in Dog Whistle hysteria. This reputational damage  will actually damage the valid arguments against extraction damage. The problem is not the CO2 already this is clearly shown by data now, there are many porblems with Tar sands and Fracking also Oil spills and the like. The CO2 alarmism opens the question as to how trustworthy or knowledgeable are so called experts on those other issues, with CO2 being so comprehensively discredited who will be iopen to looking at valid evidence on environmental damage?

This discussion I think proves the point it applies very well to the EMO type teenaged angst that seems to have lived into middle age in many politicians and agit/prop operatives for ´´Pseudo Environmentalism´´.

“The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of doubt, what is laid before him.” Tolstoy, from the Wikipedia article of Confirmation Bias.

Probably a good idea to save stuff like this… before the new Fossil Fools ‘Administration’ deletes it…
Models that account only for the effects of natural processes are not able to explain the warming observed over the past century. Models that also account…


BBC Alarmism, Why?

Climate change: World heading for warmest decade, says Met Office

The world is in the middle of what is likely to be the warmest 10 years since records began in 1850, says the Met Office.












Sighs… just 17% worse that you thought…
Glyn Goodwin
Glyn Goodwin You do understand that we are adding 30-40 billion tons of CO2 to the system every year don’t you Roger? The way this is panning out we are heading for a Permian extinction event. Research has shown that the little ice age was stated by a decrease in co2 of only 17 billion tons. The oceans health is crucial to the planet, but the only way that can plausibly be helped long term is by reducing CO2 emissions.
Roger Lewis

Roger Lewis Glyn, the accumulation arguments regarding human emissions are being re-visited based upon empirical research as I linked to that report is a few weeks old. I understand the more dire claims based upon the modelling, I understand modelling on computersvery well and expect the predictions to be scaled back and not dialled up as per the dire climate catastrophe porn which the OP article represents. The IPCC reports if you read them are actually measured and proportionate, the science is scientific and sober and does not make truth claims which can not be substantiated. If one engages in the full spectrum of the scientific fields encompassed within Climate Science one finds that there are many aspects of Climate change which are wholly more influential than CO2 let alone man’s emissions and contributions thereto. How long Anthropogenic CO2 emissions remain in the atmosphere as so called well mixed green house gases is a bit of a finger in the air effort I am afraid and I am persuaded by empirical data from Bomb test curves and the study I link to above and not by the early modelling hypothesis, and estimates adopted as starting assumptions for early modelling efforts. One has to start somewhere with ones assumptions and then tune parameters as empirical evidence is collected and appropriate time tables observed. So yes Glyn I have studied the science both in the IPCC reports and elsewhere and find the science bears little resemblance when you read it to the sensationalist porn in this linked to article. From what I have learned about the science I personally see absolutely no objection to CO2 at 400PPM and getting the genie back in the bottle is frankly not within our gift . I think we should pursue alternative energy as so-called fossil fuels and nuclear energy as so very old fashioned and do not promote decentralised and autonomous community-based government. I find most so-called Climate Change policy coercive and poorly supported empirically and it seems to me to mask a push for a stronger more authoritarian centralised government. My arguments from a Political economy perspective are made above. A simple point of disagreement between us Glyn might be that you consider CO2 to be pollution and I categorically do not. I do think that the Hydro Carbons industry is a polluting industry and environmentally damaging but their crimes lie in other chemical compounds and despoilation not CO emissions. Monetising Carbon actually lets polluters off the hook how more people who claim to be environmentalists do not see this is beyond me.,https://drive.google.com/…/0B6ZHfkDjveZzXzVnTll…/view…

Roger Lewis

Roger Lewis John Porter Peta grammes Carbon 1 petagram = gigatonne


In Rest Day/Theory

April 25, 2010

PDF Article

The CrossFit Journal is proud to present this extraordinary article by Dr. Jeff Glassman. Formerly the Division Chief Scientist for Missile Development and Microelectronics Systems Divisions for Hughes Aircraft, Dr. Glassman has dedicated his career to improving the quality of science methodology among his peers and the community at large.

For years he has been disturbed by the lack of credible science identifying human activity as a cause of global warming. This paper is the latest of six papers published on his blog, Rocket Scientist’s Journal, and the first to advance the Sun as the cause of global climate change in the fine detail of the temperature record since the invention of the thermometer.




I should certainly be the last to underrate the part which the self-assertion of the individual has played in the evolution of mankind. However, this subject requires, I believe, a much deeper treatment than the one it has hitherto received. In the history of mankind, individual self-assertion has often been, and continually is, something quite different from, and far larger and deeper than, the petty, unintelligent narrow-mindedness, which, with a large class of writers, goes for “individualism” and “self-assertion.” Nor have history-making individuals been limited to those whom historians have represented as heroes. My intention, consequently, is, if circumstances permit it, to discuss separately the part taken by the self-assertion of the individual in the progressive evolution of mankind. I can only make in this place the following general remark: — When the Mutual Aid institutions — the tribe, the village community, the guilds, the medieval city — began, in the course of history, to lose their primitive character, to be invaded by parasitic growths, and thus to become hindrances to progress, the revolt of individuals against these institutions took always two different aspects. Part of those who rose up strove to purify the old institutions, or to work out a higher form of commonwealth, based upon the same Mutual Aid principles; they tried, for instance, to introduce the principle of “compensation,” instead of the lex talionis, and later on, the pardon of offences, or a still higher ideal of equality before the human conscience, in lieu of “compensation,” according to class-value. But at the very same time, another portion of the same individual rebels endeavoured to break down the protective institutions of mutual support, with no other intention but to increase their own wealth and their own powers. In this three-cornered contest, between the two classes of revolted individuals and the supporters of what existed, lies the real tragedy of history. But to delineate that contest, and honestly to study the part played in the evolution of mankind by each one of these three forces, would require at least as many years as it took me to write this book.


Eric Zuesse

December 14, 2019
© Photo: Wikimedia

The official celebration of America’s victory and Britain’s defeat in the Revolutionary War occurred on 25 November 1783, in Manhattan’s Fraunces Tavern, at the corner of Pearl and Broad Streets. This was reported in Rivington’s New-York Gazette, the following day, and is described in Ray Raphael’s 2009 FOUNDERS: The People Who Brought You a Nation (p. 416). General George Washington was the hero on the occasion, and delivered the speech. It was “13 Toasts” (honoring the thirteen states). Numbers 9-13 asserted the basic values that the new nation was intended by the former colonists to have established in their new nation:

  1. May justice support what courage has gained.
  2. The vindication of the rights of mankind in every quarter of the globe.
  3. May America be an asylum to the persecuted of the earth.
  4. May a close union of the states guard the temple they have erected to liberty.
  5. May the remembrance of this day be a lesson to princes.

Everyone present was toasting those five goals — goals that were entirely consistent with the 1776 Declaration of Independence, and that may reasonably be considered to reflect the Founders’ vision, just as that Declaration had reflected.

No one can honestly say that today’s America reflects those men’s vision and goals. Perhaps the most blatant way in which today’s America violates these “toasts” is #11: “May America be an asylum to the persecuted of the earth.” Today’s America tells the persecuted to stay out.

mentions@DavidGolemXIV @financialeyes @JoeBlob20 The Intervention of Dennet is very funny. #TheScienceDelusion #RupertSheldrake 
Download a high-resolution profile with key demographic indicators with plots, data table and sources for the selected location
Medium-variant data is shown as coloured bars, and uncertainty is shown in gray for 95 per cent prediction intervals.

Disclaimer: This web site contains data tables, figures, maps, analyses and technical notes from the current revision of the World Population Prospects. These documents do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the United Nations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries.


A Death-Dealing Famine: The Great Hunger in IrelandPrinter-friendly versionPDF version


A Death-Dealing Famine: The Great Hunger in Ireland
Christine Kinealy
London and Chicago, Pluto Press, 1997, ISBN: 9780745310756; 200pp.; Price: £40.00


Professor L.A. Clarkson
Queen’s University of Belfast


Professor L.A. Clarkson, review of A Death-Dealing Famine: The Great Hunger in Ireland, (review no. 43)
Date accessed: 15 December, 2019

A surprising weakness of A Death-Dealing Famine is its treatment of demographic matters. There are nearly forty references to mortality in the index, all of them brief and most incidental. Dr Kinealy repeats several times that at least one million people died between 1845 and 1851 (and another million emigrated), but she does not explain how these totals are derived. According to Dr Kinealy (p. 59), “no one died during the first year of shortages [1845-6]”, which is plainly nonsense. On p. 63, the statement is elaborated: “no excess mortality was recorded during this time.” This is better, but it obscures the fact that no mortality – neither normal nor excess – was officially recorded in Ireland until 1864. All mortality totals and rates before then are the constructions of historians. As for the effects of the Great Famine on marriage and fertility, there is no discussion at all. The treatment of emigration is scarcely any better. The is a section entitled “The Flight from Ireland: Emigration”, on pp. 146-8, but it is largely concerned with the horrors of the coffin ships and the perils awaiting emigrants if they survived their journeys.

Does this lack of discussion matter? Not so much if Dr Kinealy’s purpose is to write a history of policy; but it matters a great deal if A Death-Dealing Famine is intended as an account of a great disaster. The central characters in the Great Famine were those whose fleshless bones perished in the fields alongside their blighted potatoes or who were forced to flee Ireland to escape starvation. It was their suffering and their legacies that have shaped the history of Ireland. Trevelyan and his tribe are useful targets to throw mud at, but they were the spear-carriers in the dolefully unfolding pageant.

In the historiography of the Great Famine, famine as “Ireland’s destiny” is a recurring thread, particularly among those who take a Malthusian view of the crisis. Insofar as Christine Kinealy shows her hand, she is not a Malthusian. There is a longish section (pp. 42-48) on “Pre-Famine Famines” that might suggest otherwise, but its purpose is to demonstrate “a long history of state involvement in famine relief”. It is meant to emphasise that the state in 1845-9 could have behaved differently had it chosen to do so. But the section can equally be read as highlighting the uniqueness of the Great Famine and therefore the inappropriateness of earlier policies.

A question that Dr Kinealy avoids is whether Ireland was more prone to famine than other European countries. She has some useful things to say about the impact of the potato blight in the 1840s in Scotland and on the Continent; again the intention is to contrast the failure of the UK government to do much that was useful with more effective actions elsewhere. The famines that afflicted parts of Sweden, Finland and Russia later in the century are not mentioned.

I asked earlier whether it is possible to write a history of The Great Famine that is comprehensive, balanced and compelling. On the evidence of A Death-Dealing Famine the answer is no. Dr Kinealy is not clear about her purpose. She seemingly wants to synthesise, but instead she has written a morality tale. Its plot is policy and it has a cast of villains and victims. If I were certain that her book is intended to be a history, not of the Great Famine but of famine relief, I would qualify my judgement, although I would then protest that the title is misleading. If A Death-Dealing Famine is meant to stir my indignation, then, for me, it fails, not because I have only English blood coursing through my veins, but because the language is flat and the methodology flawed. Still, as the curate said, “parts of it are excellent”.

Great Famine (Ireland)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Great Hunger)

Jump to navigationJump to search

Great Famine
an Gorta Mór/Drochshaol
Skibbereen by James Mahony, 1847.JPG

Scene at Skibbereen during the Great Famine, by Cork artist James Mahony (1810–1879), commissioned by The Illustrated London News, 1847.
Country United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland
Location Ireland
Period 1845–1849
Total deaths 1 million
Observations Policy failure, potato blight
Theory Corn Laws, Poor Law Amendment Act, Gregory clauseEncumbered Estates’ CourtCrime and Outrage Bill (Ireland) 1847Young Irelander Rebellion of 1848Three Fs
Relief see below
Impact on demographics Population fell by 20–25% due to mortality and emigration
Consequences Permanent change in the country’s demographic, political and cultural landscape
Website See List of memorials to the Great Famine
Preceded by Irish Famine (1740–41) (Bliain an Áir)
Succeeded by Irish Famine, 1879 (An Gorta Beag)

The Great Famine (Irishan Gorta Mór [anˠ ˈɡɔɾˠt̪ˠə ˈmˠoːɾˠ]), or the Great Hunger, was a period of mass starvation and disease in Ireland from 1845 to 1849.[1] With the most severely affected areas in the west and south of Ireland, where the Irish language was dominant, the period was contemporaneously known in Irish as An Drochshaol,[2] loosely translated as the “hard times” (or literally, “The Bad Life”). The worst year of the period was 1847, known as “Black ’47”.[3][4] During the famine, about one million people died and a million more emigrated from Ireland,[5] causing the island’s population to fall by between 20% and 25%.[6]

potato infected with late blight, showing typical rot symptoms.

The event is sometimes referred to as the Irish Potato Famine, mostly outside Ireland.[7][8] The proximate cause of the famine was a natural event, a potato blight,[9] which infected potato crops throughout Europe during the 1840s, also causing some 100,000 deaths outside Ireland; the food crisis influenced much of the unrest in the widespread European Revolutions of 1848.[10] Longer-term causes included the system of absentee landlordism[[[Wikipedia:Citing_sources|<span_title=”This_citation_requires_a_reference_to_the_specific_page_or_range_of_pages_in_which_the_material_appears. (September_2018)”>page needed]]]_11-0″ class=”reference” style=”line-height: 1; unicode-bidi: isolate; white-space: nowrap; font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; font-size: 14px;”>[11][[[Wikipedia:Citing_sources|<span_title=”This_citation_requires_a_reference_to_the_specific_page_or_range_of_pages_in_which_the_material_appears. (September_2018)”>page needed]]]_12-0″ class=”reference” style=”line-height: 1; unicode-bidi: isolate; white-space: nowrap; font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; font-size: 14px;”>[12] and single-crop dependence,[13][14] and the impact of the blight was exacerbated by government laissez-faire capitalism economic policy, common in the world at that time[15][16] though in the case of Ireland in the mid-19th century, this was tempered by some interventionist policies also.[17]

The famine was a watershed in the history of Ireland,[1] which from 1801 to 1922 was ruled directly by Westminster as part of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland. On a scale comparable to the Napoleonic Wars, the Great Famine in Ireland was amongst the greatest losses of life in 19th-century Europe.[18][19] The famine and its effects permanently changed the island’s demographic, political, and cultural landscape, producing an estimated two million refugees and spurring a century-long population decline.[20][21][22][23][19] For both the native Irish and those in the resulting diaspora, the famine entered folk memory.[24] The already strained relations between many Irish and the British Crown soured further both during and after the famine, heightening ethnic and sectarian tensions, and boosting Irish nationalism and republicanism in Ireland and among Irish emigrants in the United States and elsewhere.

The potato blight returned to Europe in 1879, but by that point the Land War, described as one of the largest agrarian movements to take place in 19th-century Europe, had begun in Ireland.[25] The movement, organized by the Land League, continued the political campaign for the Three Fs, issued in 1850 by the Tenant Right League and initially developed during the Great Famine. When the potato blight returned in the 1879 famine the League boycotted “notorious landlords” and its members physically blocked evictions of farmers; the consequent reduction in homelessness and house demolition resulted in a drastic reduction in the number of deaths.[26][27][28]


From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to navigationJump to search

Голодомор в Україні

Starved peasants on a street in Kharkiv, 1933
Country Soviet Union
Location Central and eastern Ukraine
Period 1932–1933
Total deaths from 3 to 12 million; see death toll most likely estimate is about 3.5 million
  • Considered genocide by 16 countries
  • Considered as a criminal act of Stalin’s regime by 6 countries
  • Considered a tragedy or crime against humanity by 5 international organizations
Relief Foreign relief rejected by the State. Respectively 176,200 and 325,000 tons of grains provided by the State as food and seed aids between February and July 1933.[1]
Part of a series on the
History of Ukraine
Arms of Ukraine
Flag of Ukraine.svg Ukraine portal

The Holodomor (UkrainianГолодомо́р; Голодомо́р в Украї́ні;[a][2] derived from морити голодом, “to kill by starvation”)[3][4][5] was a man-made famine in Soviet Ukraine in 1932 and 1933 that killed millions of Ukrainians. It is also known as the Terror-Famine and Famine-Genocide in Ukraine,[6][7][8] and sometimes referred to as the Great Famine[9] or the Ukrainian Genocide of 1932–33.[10] It was part of the wider Soviet famine of 1932–33, which affected the major grain-producing areas of the country. During the Holodomor, millions of inhabitants of Ukraine, the majority of whom were ethnic Ukrainians, died of starvation in a peacetime catastrophe unprecedented in the history of Ukraine.[11] Since 2006, the Holodomor has been recognized by Ukraine[12] and 15 other countries as a genocide of the Ukrainian people carried out by the Soviet government.[13]

Early estimates of the death toll by scholars and government officials varied greatly.[14] According to higher estimates, up to 12 million[15] ethnic Ukrainians were said to have perished as a result of the famine. A U.N. joint statement signed by 25 countries in 2003 declared that 7–10 million perished.[16] Research has since narrowed the estimates to between 3.3[17] and 7.5[18] million. According to the findings of the Court of Appeal of Kiev in 2010, the demographic losses due to the famine amounted to 10 million, with 3.9 million direct famine deaths, and a further 6.1 million birth deficits.[19]

Some scholars believe that the famine was planned by Joseph Stalin to eliminate a Ukrainian independence movement.[11][20][21] However the western part of today’s Ukraine where the independence movement was the strongest was not affected by the famine since it was then part of Poland. Using Holodomor in reference to the famine emphasises its man-made aspects, arguing that actions such as rejection of outside aid, confiscation of all household foodstuffs, and restriction of population movement confer intent, defining the famine as genocide; the loss of life has been compared to that of the Holocaust.[22][23][24][25] The causes are still a subject of academic debate, and some historians dispute its


Nevertheless, history, if it makes claim to be an academic discipline, should never lead with moral judgments. To do so creates the risk of distorting history to make it comport with our preferences. Any kind of ideology that heightens distinctions among groups of human beings, that extols the virtues of one group while demeaning the humanity of another group, will rob an individual human being, somewhere, of his or her unique dignity. Therefore I hope we can agree that racism, anti-Semitism, chauvinist nationalism, or group hatreds of any kind are incompatible with a just and life-affirming approach to our brief and contingent human existence. Even so, these negative aspects of human thought are not kept in check by carefully crafted historical narratives, or by laws, or by the police. They are only defeated by their opposite, which manifests itself in a libertarian and egalitarian mood, which respects and tolerates difference, and which recognizes the dignity of the individual human being, who has the right to think, to speak, and even the right to be wrong.


Hysteria and “modern” illnesses[edit]

Showalter’s controversial take on illnesses such as dissociative identity disorder (formerly called multiple personality disorder), Gulf War syndrome and chronic fatigue syndrome in her book Hystories: Hysterical Epidemics and Modern Media (1997) has angered some in the health profession and many who suffer from these illnesses. Writing in the New York Times, psychologist Carol Tavris commented that “In the absence of medical certainty, the belief that all such symptoms are psychological in origin is no improvement over the belief that none of them are.”[2] Showalter (who has no formal medical training) admits to receiving hate mail, but has not been deterred from her position that these conditions are contemporary manifestations of hysteria.[3]

Showalter’s best known works are Towards a Feminist Poetics (1979), The Female Malady: Women, Madness, and English Culture (1830–1980) (1985), Sexual Anarchy: Gender and Culture at the Fin de Siecle (1990), Hystories: Hysterical Epidemics and Modern Media (1997), and Inventing Herself: Claiming a Feminist Intellectual Heritage (2001). In 2007 Showalter was chair of the judges for the prestigious British literary award, the Man Booker International Prize.






lingFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to navigationJump to search

Carl O. Nordling (1919 – February 15, 2007) was a Finnish born architecturban planner and amateur historian. He graduated as an architect from the Helsinki University of Technology in 1939[1] and immigrated to Sweden after the end of the Continuation War in 1944. Nordling published an article on the HolocaustHow Many Jews Died in the German Concentration Camps?, in the Holocaust denial publication Journal of Historical Review.[2]

Nordling has also published an article entitled Did Stalin deliver his alleged speech of 19 August 1939? in the Journal of Slavic Military Studies.

As a statistician, he applied statistical methods to a number of scientific problems and published a large number of articles, mainly in his native Swedish. His most notable work is in scientific disciplines outside his professional expertise. Internationally he is best known for the small number of papers he published in English language peer reviewed scientific journals.

In his later years he wrote mainly about issues in Nordic and Germanic history, contributing among other to the debate on Shakespeare’s identity [3]



  • Gåtorna kring Birger jarl, Ösel och Borgå: Omvärdering av historiska teorier rörande svensk östpolitik och finsk och estnisk kolonisation under tidig medeltid Faktainformation (1976) ISBN 978-91-85494-00-2
  • Den svenske Runeberg Ekenäs tryckeri aktiebolags förlag (1988) ISBN 978-951-9001-20-3




Len WilsonCreativityStoryWriting67 Comments

A Jumble of letters

T here are only seven stories in the world. I used to think there were a lot more than that, based on visits to Blockbuster and my school reading list, but my high school Creative Writing teacher, Mrs. Post, which is an awesome name for an English teacher, corrected my ignorance. She said that all plots are a variation of one of seven basic themes. She used a list made by Sir Arthur Thomas Quiller-Couch. Here they are:

  1. man against man
  2. man against nature
  3. man against himself
  4. man against God
  5. man against society
  6. man caught in the middle
  7. man and woman

(You ‘ll have to forgive his misogynistic, pre-PC, British empire sensibilities.)

Some of these never made much sense to me, but fortunately someone else made a more recent list, which I like better. So here are the new and improved seven basic plots:

Overcoming the Monster: The hero learns of a great evil and goes on a journey to destroy it. Star Wars qualifies. BraveheartJaws. Any movie with Nazis in it. Some of the Rocky movies. (Is it obvious I am a guy?)

Rags to Riches: A sad-sack beginning that leads to a happily ever after.  A lot of Dickens’ stuff fits here. Disney princess movies. Harry Potter. Most every rom-com.

The Quest: Everybody loves a quest where the hero goes on a journey to find something, which can be a Lost Ark (literal of figurative), a body (Stand By Me), or even something unknown and unseen, which is known in Hollywood as a MacGuffin. Sometimes the hero brings his entourage, too. A lot of epics are Quest stories. Like The Goonies. Some of my favorite biblical stories are quests, like Abram and The Wise Men.

Voyage and Return: Like The Wizard of Oz, where Dorothy goes to a weird place with weird rules but ultimately returns home better off. I suppose I like Oz alright, but I’d rather give props to Back to the Future, because I’m of that ilk.

Comedies get their own category, too. For some reason, two people can’t be together, which creates all sorts of antics. They eventually figure it out, though. Again, most every rom-com ever, like When Harry Met Sally, or The Money Pit. (Note: you can make anything into a comedy. For example, Monty Python is a funny Quest movie, but the category here refers to a specific kind of plot, not just anything with humor.)

Tragedies are like riches to rags, where the villian gets it in the end. MacBeth and King Lear are classic examples. Or most slasher pictures if you go for that sort of thing.

Rebirth is like a tragedy but where the hero realizes his error before it’s too late, like in It’s a Wonderful Life. Which makes me wonder, are there any slasher movies where the bad guy cleans up and catches a ray of sun at the end?

You can also mix and match types, for example a lot of Quest movies throw in a monster to overcome. The original Rocky is a rags to riches quest movie. Star Wars is a rags to riches quest where the hero overcomes the monster on a voyage and return while the Villain experiences rebirth at the end. Oh, and throw in some Jar Jar for the comedy.

10 Inventive Myths About Einstein, Debunked


In his 76 years, Albert Einstein was many things. He was a romantic poet, an avid fisherman, a trained violinist, the inventor of one very fashionable blouse—and, of course, he was also the remarkable genius behind one of the pillars of modern physics, The Theory of General Relativity, which celebrates its 100 year anniversary this month. But sometimes the legend was bigger than the actual man. With the help of the recently released An Einstein Encyclopedia, we separate fact from fiction.

From The Ultimate Quotable Einstein p. 170, Einstein said of this work:

If I were wrong, then one [author] would have been enough!

Einstein’s retort with regard to his theory when he heard that a book titled 100 Authors against Einstein was published in Germany. Quoted in Stephen Hawking, A Brief History of Time (London: Bantam, 1988), 178


From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to navigationJump to search

Pair of black swans swimming

This photo corroborates the basic statement “On this day, there were black swans on this waterway”, which contradicts the law “All swans are white”, but the contradicting basic statement alone makes the law falsifiable: it would still be falsifiable, even if there were only white swans.

statementhypothesis, or theory is falsifiable if it can be demonstrated to be false by observation. The concept is also known by the terms refutable and refutability. More technically, a hypothesis is falsifiable if it is contradicted by a basic statement, which, in an eventual successful or failed falsification, must respectively correspond to a true or hypothetical observation.[1][2] For example, the claim “all swans are white and have always been white” is falsifiable since it is contradicted by this basic statement: “In 1697, during the Dutch explorer Willem de Vlamingh expedition, there were black swans on the shore of the Swan River in Australia”, which in this case is a true observation.[3][4]

The concept was introduced by the philosopher of science Karl Popper. He saw falsifiability as the logical part and the cornerstone of his scientific epistemology, which sets the limits of scientific inquiry. He proposed that statements and theories that are not falsifiable are unscientific. Declaring an unfalsifiable theory to be scientific would then be pseudoscience.[5]


Author: rogerglewis

https://about.me/rogerlewis Looking for a Job either in Sweden or UK. Freelance, startups, will turń my hand to anything.

15 thoughts on “Draft Work in progress Notes for One for the Septics

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: