Global collapse of ecosystems by 2100?

[Ahmed]

Aside from your first sentence, I do not agree with what you're saying.
I see less a set of "immense" "defects" than a simple consequence of the increasing specialization of our societies which prevents (in any case, strongly limits) any global vision outdoor and condemns us to circular reasoning.

Your anecdote about the boson of Higgs seems pretty interesting to me.
Hyper-specialization leads to this kind of thing: enormous resources allocated to prestigious researches and which illustrate the capabilities of our societies, but which serve to mask the disdain of everyday life and the reality of social antagonisms, individual ....

[raymon]

Good sorry I am optimistic despite all the disasters announced every day. The positive evolution is slow but it exists. The state of mind of people is slowly changing personally I have evolved a lot on these problems since 30 years. A 20ans I loved to ride a motorcycle in free exhaust now I ride an electric bike and I grow my organic garden. This evolution is different for each individual but I think it is real.
Of course the machine to destroy is launched but even so in the mass media con it is talking about more and more ecology. The development of carpooling or the purchase of small vehicles for example is not only for the sake of economy but also thinking about our planet.
The owners of 4x4 are becoming more and more considered fat dirty. Yes of course it will require more radical changes.
I recommend a great film of Hill Serreau; "beautiful green".

[Obamot]

It is not false.

Aside from your first sentence, I do not agree with what you're saying.
I see less a set of "immense" "defects" than a simple consequence of the increasing specialization of our societies which prevents (in any case, strongly limits) any global vision outdoor and condemns us to circular reasoning.

Your anecdote about the boson of Higgs seems pretty interesting to me.
Hyper-specialization leads to this kind of thing: enormous resources allocated to prestigious researches and which illustrate the capabilities of our societies, but which serve to mask the disdain of everyday life and the reality of social antagonisms, individual ....

Puree what you write and explain well! So inevitably to arrive at this exercise: it requires a full capacity for fine and objective analysis of things! It's not said often I think ... Well, it's done ...!

Well, well, ... my purpose was not so much to find exact and absolute reasons (since the very ethymology of this word is jostled ... ahahahahah) as to attempt a clumsy approach to the paradoxes which influence the "march of humanity" (inevitably awkward considering their number and the fact that many conclusions contradict and collide)

[Ahmed]

@ Raymon:

Of course, the machine to destroy is launched, but despite everything, even in mass media con, we talk more and more of ecology.

Everything is perfectly summarized in this sentence!
It is because ecology has become a pretext for the development of the "green" economy that it is talked about in "the stupid mass media"! There is no longer any contradiction between the machine to destroy and ecology, simple "tranxene" (or "soma", variant Huxley!) which is the condition of the continuation of the operation of the first ...

@Obamot: thank you for your appreciation; synthesis is a difficult exercise, thanks to you all I think I have progressed.

[Woodcutter]

Still, a truly change of lifestyle is necessary and urgent. The 22 scientists of the study propose to governments to undertake four immediate actions: drastically reduce the demographic pressure; to concentrate the populations on the areas already recording high densities in order to let the other territories try to find natural balances; adjust the living standards of the richest to those of the poorest ; develop new technologies to produce and distribute new food resources without consuming more resources.

Audrey Garric

Oue ... Well, that's not a thing of the past ...

[raymon]

It is because ecology has become a pretext for the development of the "green" economy that it is talked about in "the stupid mass media"! There is no longer any contradiction between the machine to destroy and ecology, a simple "tranxene" (or "soma", Huxley variant!) Which is the condition for the continued functioning of the first ...

Of course still many people believe that by buying a "clean" car or by using products supposedly greened by multinationals will save the world is enough. Of course they are wrong. more "work" or necessary change is more than that.
But for many people awareness is there and things are moving forward ... slowly. The strong awareness began a little while ago 10ans.
To change the way people think is long. In addition the machine severe flu.

[Flytox]

Hello Woodcutter

Still, a truly change of lifestyle is necessary and urgent. The 22 scientists of the study propose to governments to undertake four immediate actions: drastically reduce the demographic pressure; to concentrate the populations on the areas already recording high densities in order to let the other territories try to find natural balances; adjust the living standards of the richest to those of the poorest ; develop new technologies to produce and distribute new food resources without consuming more resources.

Audrey Garric

Oue ... Well, that's not a thing of the past ...

It's true, it's a proposal that will be unanimous ... against!

[sen-no-sen]

The state of mind of people is slowly changing personally I have evolved a lot on these problems since 30 years. A 20ans I loved to ride a motorcycle in free exhaust now I ride an electric bike and I grow my organic garden. This evolution is different for each individual but I think it is real.

The problem is that in parallel with this realization, the standards of consumption are considerably increased.
A lot of people are "aware" of environmental issues, but how many are ready to go without a trip abroad, a steak, or the latest smart phone?

The owners of 4x4 are becoming more and more considered fat dirty. Yes of course it will require more radical changes.

So there are more and more big sales!
Here too, it is the same, we retort purchasing behavior (ex 4X4) but in the end and from a purely mathematical point of view, we can only see the ever increasing increase ... of what he do not do it!

green ideology is very fashionable, but the practice is something else, except the practice counts.
As said Jean Yanne: "Everyone wants to save the planet, but no one wants to empty the trash!"

[sen-no-sen]

I see less a set of "immense" "defects" than a simple consequence of the increasing specialization of our societies which prevents (in any case, strongly limits) any global vision outdoor and condemns us to circular reasoning.

Circular reasoning very well framed by the lobbies who see in this collapse an immense pactole to the key (hypothetical pactole, because in case of climatic hysteresis it will sound the end of the business).
As we say in the penal environment, there is "culpable intention of the perpetrator", the more the ecosystems will be damaged, and the more the populations will be dependent on the technical solutions "proposed".
So I do not see its destruction as a mere accident of civilization, but more like a new fledgling market on the ashes of others.
The merchant system being tainted by nature, it will adapt to the destruction it has caused and will propose only ersatz as a solution ... (if all citizens of the world let it, especially if the biotopes are not destroy).

Hyper-specialization leads to this kind of thing: enormous resources allocated to prestigious researches and which illustrate the capabilities of our societies, but which serve to mask the disdain of everyday life and the reality of social antagonisms, individual ....

This is unfortunately one of the consequences of the totalitarian merchant system: the technological middle age (as Jean Ziegler).
In a society where profit is a priority, it is logical to see technological and ideological gaps.

[Ahmed]

@ Raymon:

The strong awareness began just a decade ago.

No! It is much earlier, which began since that date is the recovery of ecological ideas emptied of their contentious content, and this for manipulative purposes!

@ Sen-no-sen:

The green ideology is very fashionable, but the practice is something else, except only the practice counts.

I understand what you mean, but I would not say it that way, because if we analyze it a little bit, it is formally illogical: it is not because the ecological ideology is not followed a practice correlating with it that things are not going in the direction we want; it is because the ecological ideology rests on deceptive foundations that its application, in line with its assumptions, can not be satisfactory.
Many would like to prioritize the action on the reflection (taxed of immobilism), but the extreme urgency is to define clearly the ends sought from the analysis of a present situation.
This is the real difficulty, this accomplished preliminary, the rest would be pure formality!

So I do not see these destructions as a mere accident of civilization, but more like an umpteenth emerging market on the ashes of others.

There are two phases (chronologically speaking): in the first there is not really a clear perception of the consequences and the metaphysical desire to destroy nature remains unconscious.
In the second, the negative aspect becomes a new opportunity to seize: there is no emergence of an internal contradiction, since the real goal of the economy is to create scarcity.