14 thoughts on “Human Extinction”

    1. The one thing the Global Climate Warming Change cult refuses to identify is what would be the optimum temperature they want to achieve. Considering that we are in an interglacial period, and it appears that can end in a matter of decades, the cultists need to also define a lower bound that they would find acceptable.

      Or else come out and say that they have no problem with much of North American and Scandinavia and other areas being covered by ice a kilometer or more deep.

  1. “During the Late Pleistocene, modern humans spread outside of the African continents and other human species like Neanderthals began to go extinct. The Australian continent and the Americas also saw humans for the first time and the climate was generally cold. This era is best known for its massive ice sheets and glaciers that shifted around the planet and shaped many of the landforms we see on Earth today.. ”

    It was cold, but in last 100,000 years, it was colder.
    And Last Glacial Period [+20,000 years ago} had CO2 levels around 180 ppm {which is close to killing all plants} and lowest it’s known to have been.

  2. Arrow to the top of the bottleneck: woman realize the connection between men ejaculating in their vagina and childbirth.

    Arrow to the bottom of the bottleneck: men invent rape.

    I do wonder about the ratio of males to females during the bottleneck, as well as the overall population of non-breeders. Just kids and post-menopausal women? Or were there incels, lezzies and fruiters? I grew up in a household that included what were called “maiden aunts.”

    1. I recall reading a paper once by an anthropologist that uses that realization as the definition of ‘technology’….

      Which seemed then, and still does, seems somehow ….. odd, or wrong

      1. It assumes mothers don’t like their children.

        Children can be annoying sometimes, but as general matter, it’s only when get into their teens, that they can get more than challenging.

  3. Spock was right to warn, back in 1979, of the risk of a new Ice Age.

    We know weather is mathematically chaotic. If climate is also chaotic, then a “tipping point” in forcing can result in the system reversing itself. Numerous YouTube videos of waterwheels under dripping nozzles demonstrate — increase the size or frequency of the drippy forcings, and the wheel goes “backwards”.

    The most serious risk of climate change is ignored in the press and most of the scientific literature. Pushing, forcing, shifting the energy balance in the direction of “warming” might — and the science and math can’t say yes or not about it — trigger an ice age.

    If we have lots of nice new nuclear fission plants throughout the temperate zones, this is much less a problem than if we rely on wind, hydro, or even solar power.

    Choose wisely.

  4. Weather, nature…whatever you wish to call it, has a hell of a strong, albeit slow, corrective ability.

    Consider how many GHGs were put into the atmosphere during the eruption of Mt. Pinatubo – more than mankind has been able to produce in our history. And there was a short-term (2-3 year) effect: Global temps were slightly reduced.

    Then they warmed up again. And cooled off a bit again…

    We don’t know what we don’t know. And thinking that we do is suicidally stupid. “Suggestions” that we (somehow) build a giant space parasol to block the sun? Dumping iron oxide in gigaton quantities into the ocean? Modelling global nuclear winter off of a fire in the hills above Pasadena, CA – and then getting it wrong?

    Whatever is going to happen, will happen, on whatever timetable it happens to be. I doubt the 8-billion people can do much about it.

  5. “Or else come out and say that they have no problem with much of North American and Scandinavia and other areas being covered by ice a kilometer or more deep.”
    There was a mile of ice over where Chicago is now. It might be an improvement if that happened again.:-)

Comments are closed.