¶ 1 Leave a comment on paragraph 1 0 I am truly astounded by the almost universal lack of interest (and observable concern) in the potential (very near – 8 YEARS) “extinction” of humanity and much of Gaia. This includes most of those with access to the scientific forecasts and who know about the threats. You would think, that given the magnitude of the outcome, those warned would want to investigate, or at least learn more.
“Extinction”, in this forecast, would leave a few humans surviving in pockets. Total extinction of the species would come later.
My wonderment increases when the forecasted extinction is not for after most persons alive today are dead – but in 8 years! Many would automatically reject an 8 year forecast as nutty irresponsible (as would I), except that the “worst case” forecast comes from those scientists most knowledgeable of the relevant science and data. Yet, there is very strong resistance to even explore the possibility. Daily am getting reports of accelerated climate change.
The “extinction” process is already underway. The onset of runaway rapid acceleration of global warming and collapses may be delayed a few years and may stretch out for an uncertain duration.
The FACT is, EXTINCTION IS COMING, SOON! Yet no one cares. We live as if “things” will continue, indefinitely.
¶ 6 Leave a comment on paragraph 6 0 There is an even weirder phenomenon. All (to my knowledge) of those accepting a coming extinction report only on the suffering and death of living humans. Many have resigned to greet extinction with the same positive attitude one might greet personal death. I have yet to read about the end of the human species and the loss of its potentials. No more babies or music or love has yet to be mentioned. The total loss of major other species is just lumped with contemporary reports/lists of current species extinctions; as if they were movies we forgot to see. I will return to this later.
¶ 7 Leave a comment on paragraph 7 0 How many humans have any deep concerns/interests in the future of Earth/Gaia after they die, other than related to their friends and family (possibly to future generations)?
I would not be surprised if it were a minority. Some would be concerned about the continuation of specific things, processes, activities – but would have no interest in the long term survival of Earth/Gaia. A few will hope for a quick end. Thee attitudes would be related to a person’s specific scientific knowledge and their specific religious beliefs.
¶ 9 Leave a comment on paragraph 9 0 Why have so many human cultures, not only believed in personal afterlives, but went to great extremes to influence outcomes after death – and even to involve massive architecture, enormous rituals, including human sacrifices? Our contemporary theories are inadequate. I have speculated that powerful dreams is a main driver for belief is afterlife. There are many persons who don’t expect an afterlife and it doesn’t impact their lives. For some others, belief in an afterlife greatly impacts behavior (e.g., suicide bombers).
¶ 10 Leave a comment on paragraph 10 0 A small minority of humans fear personal death, which is treated as a psychological disorder. Most humans appear to have very distinct emotional and conceptual approaches to their possible death. We behave as if we were immortal, often risking our lives in sport and driving vehicles. We conceptually know we risk dying (if we think about it), but we have no emotional concern or fear. When we observe others taking risks, we seldom think of them dying.
¶ 11 Leave a comment on paragraph 11 0 I once read an explanation for this (but have lost the source). The claim was that humans (and other creatures) would not have evolved had they emotionally feared risk taking. Life is full of risks, including engaging in sex and reproduction. Those averse to risk taking would breed less, and evolution would select for risk takers – who would lack negative emotions when taking risks. Indeed, some have positive emotions associated with risk taking.
¶ 12 Leave a comment on paragraph 12 0 I have yet to fully comprehend suicide; nor have I researched it. To end unbearable suffering or to leap to the rewards of an afterlife are two rationales for suicide. Both are conceptual decisions.
¶ 13 Leave a comment on paragraph 13 0 Since death is the worst consequence of failed risk taking, normal humans have no strong concern or fear over their death. At 83, I conceptually know I will die, but death is not in my emotional future.
¶ 14 Leave a comment on paragraph 14 0 This conceptual/emotional distinction is “hardwired in our brains”. It is easy to speculate that this results in our attitude towards extinction. Our brains put death and extinction in the same category: final endings. I fully accept humankind’s coming extinction, if action isn’t taken immediately, yet I need to force myself to emotionally relate to it.
¶ 15 Leave a comment on paragraph 15 0 Related to this is our human difficulty relating to futures beyond a few days. Yet, a few persons seem to master futures thinking, even strategically. We don’t know whether there are genetic variations for futures thinking, as there are for most cognitive competencies; although learning is also involved. Most persons have difficulty adequately comprehending a complex and diverse humankind of 8 billion persons, let alone imagine the processes of disasters and collapses leading to species extinction. Indeed, many elect to continue living in places experiencing frequent natural disasters.
¶ 16 Leave a comment on paragraph 16 0 It is truly sad that “we” have let this crisis become super critical. Would all humans now come to accept our threat, we can avoid extinction – but there will be more destruction. However, even in normal circumstances humans are resistant to change; and we are far from living in normal circumstances.
¶ 17 Leave a comment on paragraph 17 0 I support the STUDY of any effort to avoid extinction, and some are quite severe (e.g., severe population reduction, intentional nuclear winter). ACCOMPANYING this, I have proposed that HUMANITY and much of higher Gaia can be “rescued” and “sustained”, even if climate change would make the land surface of Earth toxic to all life. Earthbound SpaceShip-like Systems can be imagined that would sustain some humans, animals, and plants for millennia; until Earth has cooled and can be “seeded” with a new biosphere. Even should humans engage fully to avoid extinction, they should also construct a sustainable rescue program, for backup.
¶ 18 Leave a comment on paragraph 18 0 I also claim that this will require a significant UPLIFTING of the global human population, as their participation will be required; much more than simple informing with hope for comprehension and integration into new collective behavior. The “highly educated” and the power elites are also in need of uplifting. We can’t wait for persons to be uplifted before we take action to survive. UPLIFTING can be the “context” for concurrent action. Humankind has all the “tools” to make this happen. We lack the vision and means to adequately Communicate/Collaborate/Coordinate our isolated/siloed Competencies/Knowledge/Technologies.