Just tangentially, zborg's mention of The Gordian Knot reminds me of the tale of Alexander encountering The (original) Gordian Knot ...
When confronted with the fabulous improbability of untying said Knot, Alexander briefly considered the immense tangle, drew his sword and then cleaved The Gordian Knot in two.
Good follow-on to the Gordian Knot story.
I like your W. Whitman quote, Timbeau. Much appreciated. Whitman has a similarly moving quotation about the US Civil War, in a large stone carving at the north-escalator-entrance to the Dupont Circle Subway Stop, in Washington DC.
We would all be better off reading more of Whitman's life and work. 
I'll certain be sure to check that out zborg . I'll even look it up in a book!!
When I was a kid, the Disneyland future had us all being served by robots by now, and writing poetry 3 days- a-week if we really really wanted a job. George Orwell had that different notion...
Personally, I really thought Earth would be a nuclear wasteland by 2001: the drifting dunes of radioactive dust aglow and unseen -except for those cockroaches. That one's still on the cards _ everyone seems to have forgotten about all the ICBMs still ticking away and still ready to go. Maybe they will beat climate-change to the apocalyptic-punch!
Thanks muchly for the Whitman tip. I hope he'll inspire the last decade or so I have left!
If you live in a region of the Northern Hemisphere that is not experiencing record-breaking heat waves this summer, consider yourself lucky. The US, the UK, Japan, Northern Europe, Western Europe, China and Mexico (phew!) are all suffering from abnormally hot and dangerous summer temperatures in 2018.
The vast majority of climate scientists agree that climate change is making these extreme temperatures more intense and more frequent, putting global public health at risk.
There will be a drastic reduction in coal consumption soon.
Accompanied by a drastic reduction in solar, wind turbine, oil, gas, and the energy produced by rubbing two sticks together.
I agree that negativity about nuclear is not fully justified by the facts. But, surprisingly, nuclear has quite a high carbon impact at present, due to the massive engineering involved. It is also only a short term solution, in terms of the future of mankind, and is one that leaves extremely unpleasant waste products that will cause problems (and harm) for thousands of years and longer.
As long as you tell people the problem will be someone else's in the future the response is kind of "meh".
The short term perspective on nuke plants is we should think of ourselves as having been painted into the corner of a room. The paint will kill you the instant you touch it, even through your clothes and the paint will never dry.
Have a race with someone. Try to find a vital part for the engine of a 1947 hudson, and try to find a not so vital but none-the-important part of almost any nuclear reactor and see who wins.
A person I know who encountered part replacement problems when he worked on Trojan had stories to make you tremble about finding replacement items for antique technology.
The stock piling of the nasty stuff of the nuclear age is how to build the mother of all time bombs.
There will be a drastic reduction in coal consumption soon.
Accompanied by a drastic reduction in solar, wind turbine, oil, gas, and the energy produced by rubbing two sticks together.
There is not going to be a reduction in solar and wind for the forseeable future. Indeed exponential growth will surely continue.
Take a look at where solar power was just 10 years ago compared to now. I feel few people comprehend the rate of change.
And how about wind? A little more mature, but still growing fast enough to double each 5-6 years.
There will be a drastic reduction in coal consumption soon.
Accompanied by a drastic reduction in solar, wind turbine, oil, gas, and the energy produced by rubbing two sticks together.
There is not going to be a reduction in solar and wind for the forseeable future. Indeed exponential growth will surely continue.
Take a look at where solar power was just 10 years ago compared to now. I feel few people comprehend the rate of change.
And how about wind? A little more mature, but still growing fast enough to double each 5-6 years.
My point sailed right over you :)
It is difficult to get a "point" that pretty much everyone would agree is false.
It is difficult to get a "point" that pretty much everyone would agree is false.
"Everyone" huh? You don't get around much do you?
My point is global warming is about to accelerate. When the polar ice is gone heating of the earth will accelerate due to instead of 90% of solar heat reflecting back into space only 10% will be. That, plus the fact that as long as the heat being received is mostly going into melting the ice, it doesn't raise temperature. It takes a half calorie per CC to convert 0 degree ice to 0 degree of water. When the ice is gone all that heat goes to raising the water temperature.
Shortly after that the human race will be extinct so no more coal burning etc.
I did think the only way to interpret you literally is that the human race will imminently become extinct.
It won't.
I did think the only way to interpret you literally is that the human race will imminently become extinct.
It won't.
RIght. And everyone agrees with you.
No, there are always people who will a proposition, however unlikely.
To be clear, I certainly wouldn't say it is impossible that humans will become extinct this century, say. Rather it is extremely unlikely: almost any disaster would leave some humans able to survive.
Yes, and the survivors will be burning a lot less coal. My original point.
As for the extreme unlikeliness I would happily wish you to be correct but evidence mounts exponentially as you say that indicates otherwise.
Elroch, I bend easily towards the fringe on many things e.g. I don't believe Oswald acted alone, I don't believe the gov't version of 911, however I do believe we landed a man on the moon, but I suspect Osama Bin Laden was dead sooner than we've been told and if not, photographs WERE taken despite the cockamamie story that none were so as not to stir up the emotions of terrorists.
I lean in the direction of the NTE crowd -
Humanity Is Getting Verrrrrrry Close to Extinction
We've had a good run, but the Near Term Extinction movement and others are saying that it's pretty much over for humans. Oh, well.
This is an ideal question for a wager. Care to take me up?
Pick a reasonable time scale and I will bet the stronger proposition that the human population will be greater than it is now.
The US should indeed lead, (via multilateral agreement), but our current Administration is clearly moving away from that position, don't you think?
Accept the "science," yes, but global politics remains the Gordian Knot for this planetary problem. Does it not? For "UN-insiders," this falls under the rubric of SDRs (Special and Differential Responsibilities). Briefly explained -- it's the devilish problem of how will all countries (both rich and poor) share FAIRLY the costs of mitigating GCC? That's the Gordian Knot inside the UN-system that has proven so difficult for the past 30 years.
P.S. -- I need to stay away from Elroch's "Evolution tread." They are ready to tar and feather me in that crazy thread. This GCC thread is (perhaps) a bit less nutty, don't you think?