Showing posts with label Global Warming. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Global Warming. Show all posts

Nowadays its very easy to refute disinformation. Happened to check on the actual freedom webpage today and saw that richard is into the whole global warming is not real conspiracy. Then to test how good chatgpt is in combatting disinformation, i put it to test.


Model: GPT-4


Refute this with reasons:


RICHARD: As I have been asked to expand upon the mathematics referred to by the words “based

upon unverifiable-in-the-laboratory quantum mathematics” in my 13 

January 2006 response to an online request – (regarding what I did over 

the seven-week

period 02 November to 14 December, 2005, when I was not writing to the 

Actual Freedom Trust mailing list) – this is an apt moment to point out 

how the Anthropogenic

Global Warming hypothesis is based upon flat earth mathematics.


It would appear the guys-n-gals at Quantumville 

recalled the high-school formula for determining the surface area of a 

disc consists of its radius

squared times pi 

    (i.e., r² × π) and 

    how the greater surface area of a sphere consists of its radius squared times pi times four (i.e., r²π × 4).


Thus a disc with a radius of 1 will have a surface 

area of pi (i.e., 3.14) and the same disc converted to a sphere will 

therefore have a surface area

four times more than the original disc (i.e., 12.57). Applying this 

mathematical thinking to the terraqueous planet we all live on their 

abstractive minds effectively

reduced it to a flat disc which has been expanded four times.


Then they mentally painted this flat earth black.


Thereupon they reduced the (measured) insolation of

 the oblate spheroid known as Planet Earth to a quarter of its 

real-world strength – and directed it

to impinge upon every square millimetre of their phantom planet 

twenty-four-seven forever and a day – thereafter applying a radiance 

versus temperature constant and thus

they had their flat earth temperature of -18° Celsius.


As this is at odds with the +15° Celsius real-world temperature they confected the “greenhouse effect”

 

to account for the missing 33° Celsius.


This is where the weirdity of a blackbody flat 

earth bathed twenty-four-seven with quadruply-weakened sunbeams turns 

into utter bizarrerie as they

deemed some trace gases in the frigid upper troposphere, busily 

absorbing infrared light radiating from the blackbody surface and 

emitting it in all directions, to be

thus radiating some of it back to the heat-source and thereby raising 

its temperature via this ‘back-radiation’ thaumaturgy the requisite thirty-three degrees (from -18°C to +15°C).


Moreover, this sci-fi scenario conveniently ignores

 how the other atmospheric gasses constituting some 99% of the air we 

all breathe – which are heated

at ground-level by conduction and thence by convection as hot air rises 

and cold air sinks to such an extent as to dominate in determining the 

thermal structure of the

lower atmosphere (troposphere) – are also emitting infrared light in all

directions.


Furthermore, no externally heated substance – be it

 heated by conduction (direct transference from the heat source), by 

convection (heated gases rising

and mingling and mixing with sinking cooler gases), or by radiation (via

 the heat source emitting infrared light) – can actually raise the 

temperature of its heat-source 

(let alone to such a precise degree as 33° Celsius, no more and no less,

 provided some specified trace gases remain at pre-industrial 

parts-per-million 

levels).


(Ha! this real-world matter-of-factness does not apply to all the phantom planets in the noncausative

 quantum solar system, of course, which are busily raising the surface 

temperature of its central star – the 

heat-source for all those blackbody flat planets – above 5778° K via a 

massive-scale variant version of this phantasmagorical 

‘back-radiation’).


To summarise: 


1. The physical earth is not flat.


2. The physical earth is not black.


3. The physical earth is not static (it is constantly rotating).


4. The physical earth is not bathed with quadruply-weakened sunbeams.


5. Sunlight does not impinge upon every square millimetre of the physical earth twenty-four-seven (only during daytime).


6. Sunlight does not impinge with equal intensity upon every square millimetre of the daytime hemisphere (most obliquely at 

polar latitudes and dawn-dusk regions).


7. All atmospheric gases are heatable (not just several trace gases).


8. All heated atmospheric gases radiate infrared light (not just several trace gases).


9. The physical atmosphere insulates the daytime hemisphere from heating-up to unliveable temperatures (unlike its nearest 

neighbour the airless moon).


10. The physical atmosphere insulates the nighttime hemisphere from freezing to unliveable temperatures (unlike its nearest 

neighbour the airless moon).


11. In the physical world no externally heated substance can raise the temperature of its heat-source.


12. In the physical world some specified trace 

gases can (as evidenced in notable past eras) exceed by several thousand

 

parts-per-million those several hundred parts-per-million pre-industrial

 levels deemed sacrosanct by influential doomsayers and/or panicmongers.


tl;dr: there is no “greenhouse effect” in actuality (nor “greenhouse gases” either).”


1 / 1


ChatGPT

ChatGPT

While the author raises some concerns about the assumptions made in simplified climate models, it is important to understand that the scientific consensus on anthropogenic global warming (AGW) is based on a vast body of research, including complex climate models, empirical data, and observations. Refuting the claims made in the passage:

1. The physical Earth is not flat: Climate scientists are aware of this fact, and they use models that account for the Earth's shape, rotation, and other factors. Simplified models might use a flat Earth assumption for ease of calculation, but this does not affect the validity of AGW research.

2. The physical Earth is not black: This refers to the blackbody assumption made in some simplified climate models. However, actual climate models take into account the Earth's albedo, which is the fraction of solar energy reflected by the Earth's surface.

3. The physical Earth is not static (it is constantly rotating): Climate models account for the Earth's rotation and the related effects on climate, such as the Coriolis effect.

4. The physical Earth is not bathed with quadruply-weakened sunbeams: This seems to be a misunderstanding. Climate models take into account the variability in solar radiation, both spatially and temporally, to provide accurate estimates of energy inputs.

5. Sunlight does not impinge upon every square millimetre of the physical Earth twenty-four-seven: Climate models incorporate the day-night cycle, including variations in solar radiation due to the Earth's rotation.

6. Sunlight does not impinge with equal intensity upon every square millimetre of the daytime hemisphere: Climate models account for differences in solar radiation intensity based on latitude, time of year, and other factors.

7. All atmospheric gases are heatable: This is true, but some gases are more effective at trapping heat than others. Greenhouse gases, like CO2, are particularly effective at absorbing and re-emitting infrared radiation, which contributes to the greenhouse effect.

8. All heated atmospheric gases radiate infrared light: While this is true, greenhouse gases are particularly effective at absorbing and re-emitting infrared radiation, which is why they are the focus of climate change research.

9. The physical atmosphere insulates the daytime hemisphere and nighttime hemisphere: The atmosphere does provide insulation, which is partially due to the greenhouse effect. Greenhouse gases help regulate the Earth's temperature by trapping heat.

10. In the physical world, no externally heated substance can raise the temperature of its heat-source: The greenhouse effect does not violate thermodynamics. Instead, it slows down the rate of heat loss from the Earth's surface, leading to an increase in temperature. This is analogous to a blanket, which does not create heat but rather slows down the rate of heat loss.

11. In the physical world, some specified trace gases can exceed pre-industrial levels: This is true, and it is a major concern for climate scientists. Rising greenhouse gas concentrations are responsible for the observed warming of the Earth's surface.

In conclusion, the scientific consensus on AGW is based on robust research that accounts for the complexities of the Earth's climate system. Simplified models may be used for educational purposes, but they do not form the basis for our understanding of climate change. The greenhouse effect and the role of greenhouse gases are well-established phenomena that have been observed and measured in the real world.


1 / 1


Why do you think Richard Maynard of Actual Freedom Trust recently hold such delusions? Did his philosophy, teachings and experience influenced his views?


1 / 1


ChatGPT

ChatGPT

It's difficult to determine the exact reasons behind Richard Maynard's views on climate change without having more information about his background and beliefs. However, it is possible that his philosophy, teachings, and experiences may have influenced his views. People's opinions are often shaped by a combination of factors, such as personal experiences, education, and exposure to certain ideas or perspectives.

In the case of Richard Maynard, it's possible that his involvement with the Actual Freedom Trust, which focuses on promoting personal freedom and happiness, may have led him to adopt a skeptical view of mainstream science, particularly when it comes to anthropogenic climate change. This skepticism could be a result of a distrust in authority or the belief that mainstream science is overly influenced by politics or other external factors.

Additionally, people sometimes become attached to certain ideas or beliefs, even in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Confirmation bias, the tendency to search for, interpret, and recall information that confirms one's pre-existing beliefs, can play a role in reinforcing such views.

It is important to note that the scientific consensus on anthropogenic climate change is based on a vast body of evidence and is supported by the overwhelming majority of climate scientists. While it's essential to question and evaluate scientific findings critically, it's also crucial to rely on accurate information and the expertise of the scientific community when forming opinions about complex topics like climate change.

Sarah Luna


I notice that people who seem to be very highly realised can also have very human perspectives. How does this work?  

For example, I see posts that rant about politics on the social media pages of spiritual teachers and other people who describe profound insights into the nature of reality. I met someone recently who has had a number of insightful ‘spiritual experiences’ through self-inquiry and meditation and yet he is passionately anti-vax and talks at length about 5G. 

If one can really see that everything is ultimately an illusion and that as individuals we are avatars in a dream; ultimately there is only one consciousness, why do we care about our children let alone politics or vaccines? Is the body-mind wired to think it and it’s environment is real? 

Any thoughts would be appreciated, as I have no direct spiritual insights of my own to draw on. Thanks.

12 Comments

Soh Wei Yu

Admin

John Tan spoke about the dangers of climate change back in 2007.

Sim Pern Chong (first to realize anatta from I AM through conversation with John Tan/Thusness back in 2006/2007):

Reading the news nowadays about global warming and its effects, sets me pondering...

Global warming and Earth changes perhaps are our collective karmas.

I think we must seriously do our part in reducing the effects... like use less aircon, etc. All of us are guilty of it. Embarassed

I forsee a future that may not be as comfortable or luxurious as we wanted to be... as we live the collective karmic effect of humanity's action.

I alway believe that we humans are not that special and are not the centre attraction of this planet. If we don't wake up, nature will sobber us through its brute power. We always think that science and inventions are so all powerful... but we have greatly underestimated the complexity of co-habitating with the rest of the planet.

Sorry for the preaching...

John Tan/Thusness:

Hi Longchen,

I don’t think you are preaching; your message is timely; the weather is getting so erratic. It is quite alarming to realize that at the rate we are consuming the earth resources, it may only last for another few hundred years. It won’t take long for us to destroy our own habitats and that, is just few generation away; although we may not live to see the disastrous, we have to think a little for the future generations. We are abusing the natural systems.

I believe many are not aware of the harm and educations do play a role. Prior to taking environmental science decades back, I had absolutely no idea about the impact and consequences of pollutions. The idea that ‘resources will come to an end’ never existed.

Even with adequate education, developing nations are so helpless due to their poverty. Developed nations lure these nations into commitments. I shall not dwell deeper into it but the rapid disappearance of forests in many parts of the world is what caused the extra half carbon dioxide to be added to the atmosphere. Reducing the CO2 emissions is not just getting rid of CFCs, land use change is a major issue.

Locally, a taxation policy driven towards pro-green policies may help. At present the economic penalties are so small that it hardly drives people away from the demand of CFC sources. Internationally certain sorts of agreements are also necessary for nations to adhere to policies that will slow down greenhouse gases emission. Global warming is an international issue, If China, for example, continues to double their coal consumption every decade, it would do little help even all other countries put in effort.

Lastly we must be careful of futuristic renewable energy. I think very soon the world will turn to nuclear as an alternative source of energy. Is using nuclear is viable solution? I hope we are not replacing “flu with cancer”. I hope we do not replace ecological insecurity with nuclear threat. Neutral

JonLS:

Is global warming really a problem?

Or are we all under the hypnotic illusion of a collective thought called "global warming"?

John Tan/Thusness:

Even the enlightened respects all illusions.

Source: https://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2014/07/part-3-of-early-forum-posts-by-thusness_10.html

Part 3 of Early Forum Posts by Thusness

AWAKENINGTOREALITY.COM

Part 3 of Early Forum Posts by Thusness

Part 3 of Early Forum Posts by Thusness

ReplyRemove Preview1h

Soh Wei Yu

Admin

Buddhism does not lead to nihilism (Everything does not exists), emptiness should not be mistaken as that. In fact if you are into total exertion then you should become more aware of the interconnection and seamlessness with the entire environment, that should make you more environmentally aware instead of less.

And as for vaccine, I am pro vaccine for a very simple and pragmatic reason: the net benefits of vaccine in terms of saving and protecting life vastly outweighs its cons and the dangers from getting covid.

From a Buddhist perspective, human life is one of the most precious and rare things, and we should protect it, make our life as long and healthy as possible not because for personal enjoyment but because it is the vessel which we can use to practice the dharma and attain liberation, full awakening, and help others awaken. Our views on vaccines should not be political but based on science and facts.

Reply1hEdited

Soh Wei Yu

Admin

"ultimately there is only one consciousness"

This is not the view post anatta realisation. More about it in http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2018/12/the-tendency-to-extrapolate-universal.html and the related posts

The Tendency to Extrapolate a Universal Consciousness

AWAKENINGTOREALITY.COM

The Tendency to Extrapolate a Universal Consciousness

The Tendency to Extrapolate a Universal Consciousness

ReplyRemove Preview1hEdited

Sarah Luna

Author

Soh, this post is brilliant. Thanks!

You wrote: “It is important to refine the understanding of Presence through the four aspects: impersonality, degree of luminosity, dissolving the need to re-confirm and understanding why it is unnecessary, and effortlessness.”

Is the luminosity the light that you mention is present in all religions in the piece of writing that Angelo posted?

Reply25m



Soh Wei Yu

Admin

Sarah Luna Yes, but in this particular context the degree of luminosity is related to the second factor of the four maturing aspects of I AM (or the aspects one should focus post the I AM realization): http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2018/12/four-aspects-of-i-am.html

Four Aspects of I AM

AWAKENINGTOREALITY.COM

Four Aspects of I AM

Four Aspects of I AM

ReplyRemove Preview1m

Soh Wei Yu

Admin

Sarah Luna Also this article may interest you on the AtR term 'luminosity': http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2019/02/the-transient-universe-has-heart.html

The Transient Universe has a Heart

AWAKENINGTOREALITY.COM

The Transient Universe has a Heart

The Transient Universe has a Heart

ReplyRemove Preview1m



Soh Wei Yu

Admin

As a sidenote, once John Tan told me something like, “Take your medicines when you're sick. Don't become an idealist." I agree. I am not into the sort of subjective idealism that thinks you should just mentally will yourself to heal without any medicin… See more

Reply1hEdited

Soh Wei Yu

Admin

This is a good description of total exertion from a nature and ecological standpoint: https://www.facebook.com/EmpathyMedia/videos/1508128232558588/?__cft__[0]=AZX1lRkMSf-bqeyinR4Uerd6H4-wTmT7VWKC-QbV7V_BzH8E1k2DQLHWXDVNBS0mchHW8us-Hxo015tT6jhhe-jPL4aIYOrWFUCdHo_Qd9XHhuSLyRb3AFbCKXN8aAjyMYUcf9WFNSlO4SFyEnXfaxcx3tiy753YmyWX8OF1A4RsGw&__tn__=%2CO%2CP-y-R

Reply57m

Sarah Luna

Author

Soh, beautiful. I would like to experience the world in this way.

Reply16m



Soh Wei Yu

Admin

“To study Buddhism, it is first necessary to clarify cause and effect. If one ignores cause and effect one will develop false views and sever the roots of goodness. The principle of cause and effect is very clear and there is no “I” in it: those who create evil will fall and those who practice good will rise, without a hairsbreadth of disparity between the two. If cause and effect had perished and ceased to be, then the buddhas would not have appeared in the world, the founding teacher would not have come from the West, and sentient beings would never have met the Buddha and heard the Dharma. People like Confucius or Lao-tse do not propound the principle of cause and effect. Only the buddhas and Zen ancestors have made this clear.” – A quote of Zen Master Dogen in Yamada, Kōun. Zen: The Authentic Gate (p. 149). Wisdom Publications. Kindle Edition.”

“To summarize, the principle of cause and effect is quite clear, and it is totally impersonal: those who fabricate evil will fall into a lower state, whereas those who practice good will rise to a higher state, and without the slightest disparity. If cause and effect had become null and void, Buddhas would never have appeared in the world and our Ancestral Master would not have come from the West. In short, it would be impossible for human beings to encounter a Buddha and hear the Dharma. The fundamental principle of cause and effect was not clear to Confucius or Lao-tzu. It has only been clarified and Transmitted by Buddha after Buddha and by Ancestor after Ancestor. Because the good fortune of those who are seeking to learn in these degenerate days of the Dharma is scant, they do not encounter a genuine Master or hear the authentic Dharma, and so they are not clear about cause and effect. If you deny causality as a result of this error, you will experience excessive misfortune, since you would be as ignorant as an ox or a horse. Even if you have not committed any evil act other than denying cause and effect, the poison of this view will immediately be terrible. Therefore, if you who are exploring the Matter through your training with a Master have put your heart that seeks awakening as the first and foremost matter, and therefore wish to repay the vast benevolence of the Buddhas and the Ancestors, you should swiftly clarify what causality really is.” - Zen Master Dogen, https://www.thezensite.com/ZenTeachings/Dogen_Teachings/Shobogenzo/088jinshiInga.pdf

Reply52m

Sarah Luna

Author

Soh, what is ‘evil’ and what is ‘good’?

Reply9m

Soh Wei Yu

Admin

Sarah Luna Strictly speaking in Buddhism we don't use the words evil and good, but rather wholesome (kusala) and unwholesome (akusala), or, virtuous and nonvirtuous.

“Buddhism accounts for ethics in the context of the ten natural nonvirtues, which it considers the core frame around which all secular and religious morals and ethics are constructed.

Most of these morals and ethics involve various interpretations of the constraints upon persons these ten natural nonvirtues impose upon our personal conduct.” – Dzogchen teacher Acarya Malcolm Smith, 2020

The Buddha taught:

“The Wholesome and the Unwholesome

3. "When, friends, a noble disciple understands the unwholesome, the root of the unwholesome, the wholesome, and the root of the wholesome, in that way he is one of right view, whose view is straight, who has perfect confidence in the Dhamma, and has arrived at this true Dhamma.

4. "And what, friends, is the unwholesome, what is the root of the unwholesome, what is the wholesome, what is the root of the wholesome? Killing living beings is unwholesome; taking what is not given is unwholesome; misconduct in sensual pleasures is unwholesome; false speech is unwholesome; malicious speech is unwholesome; harsh speech is unwholesome; gossip is unwholesome; covetousness is unwholesome; ill will is unwholesome; wrong view is unwholesome. This is called the unwholesome.

5. "And what is the root of the unwholesome? Greed is a root of the unwholesome; hate is a root of the unwholesome; delusion is a root of the unwholesome. This is called the root of the unwholesome.

6. "And what is the wholesome? Abstention from killing living beings is wholesome; abstention from taking what is not given is wholesome; abstention from misconduct in sensual pleasures is wholesome; abstention from false speech is wholesome; abstention from malicious speech is wholesome; abstention from harsh speech is wholesome; abstention from gossip is wholesome; non-covetousness is wholesome; non-ill will is wholesome; right view is wholesome. This is called the wholesome.

7. "And what is the root of the wholesome? Non-greed is a root of the wholesome; non-hate is a root of the wholesome; non-delusion is a root of the wholesome. This is called the root of the wholesome.

8. "When a noble disciple has thus understood the unwholesome, the root of the unwholesome, the wholesome, and the root of the wholesome, he entirely abandons the underlying tendency to lust, he abolishes the underlying tendency to aversion, he extirpates the underlying tendency to the view and conceit 'I am,' and by abandoning ignorance and arousing true knowledge he here and now makes an end of suffering. In that way too a noble disciple is one of right view, whose view is straight, who has perfect confidence in the Dhamma and has arrived at this true Dhamma."” - https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.009.ntbb.html

Sammaditthi Sutta: The Discourse on Right View

ACCESSTOINSIGHT.ORG

Sammaditthi Sutta: The Discourse on Right View

Sammaditthi Sutta: The Discourse on Right View

ReplyRemove Preview3mEdited



Sarah Luna

Author

From my unenlightened perspective, cause and effect seem pretty obvious. I once heard it described as ‘contingency’, which I found useful, as cause and effect sound very linear in terms of language.

Reply28m

Soh Wei Yu

Admin

Sarah Luna

On a coarse level it seems obvious for most people.

But the subtlety and depths of dependent origination is very deep. It is a core insight of Buddha.

Partial excerpt from

https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/DN/DN15.html

I have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One was living among the Kurus. Now, the Kurus have a town named Kammāsadhamma. There Ven. Ānanda approached the Blessed One and, on arrival, having bowed down to him, sat to one side. As he was sitting there he said to the Blessed One: “It’s amazing, lord, it’s astounding, how deep this dependent co-arising is, and how deep its appearance, and yet to me it seems as clear as clear can be.”

(The Buddha:) “Don’t say that, Ānanda. Don’t say that. Deep is this dependent co-arising, and deep its appearance. It’s because of not understanding and not penetrating this Dhamma that this generation is like a tangled skein, a knotted ball of string, like matted rushes and reeds, and does not go beyond transmigration, beyond the planes of deprivation, woe, & bad destinations.

DN 15  Mahā Nidāna Sutta | The Great Causes Discourse

DHAMMATALKS.ORG

DN 15  Mahā Nidāna Sutta | The Great Causes Discourse

DN 15  Mahā Nidāna Sutta | The Great Causes Discourse

ReplyRemove Preview18m

Soh Wei Yu

Admin

Sarah Luna John wrote in 2014, "Be it Buddha himself, Nagarjuna or Tsongkhapa, none [of them] never got overwhelmed and amazed with the profundity of dependent origination. It is just that we do not have the wisdom to penetrate enough depth of it." and "Actually if you do not see Dependent Origination, you do not see Buddhism [i.e. the essence of Buddhadharma]. Anatta is just the beginning."

Reply17m



Sarah Luna

Author

I liked the story about the fox. So, was the problem that although the Abbot was highly realised, his ego got in the way? Or was he just a bit deluded?

I do notice an awful lot of ego in the awakening arena….primarily in men. But this could be just my perception.

Reply23m

Soh Wei Yu

Admin

Sarah Luna He is falling into nihilism despite a little bit of attainment or insight, basically negating or denying cause and effect.

Excerpt from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wild_fox_koan

The kōan

Main case

Tanahashi gives the following rendering of the koan:[1]

Every time Baizhang, Zen Master Dahui, gave a dharma talk, a certain old man would come to listen. He usually left after the talk, but one day he remained. Baizhang asked, "Who is there?"

The man said, "I am not actually a human being. I lived and taught on this mountain at the time of Kashyapa Buddha. One day a student asked me, 'Does a person who practices with great devotion still fall into cause and effect?' I said to him, 'No, such a person doesn't.' Because I said this I was reborn as a wild fox for five hundred lifetimes. Reverend master, please say a turning word for me and free me from this wild fox body." Then he asked Baizhang, "Does a person who practices with great devotion still fall into cause and effect?"

Baizhang said, "Don't ignore cause and effect."

Immediately the man had great realization. Bowing, he said, "I am now liberated from the body of a wild fox. I will stay in the mountain behind the monastery. Master, could you perform the usual services for a deceased monk for me?"

Baizhang asked the head of the monks' hall to inform the assembly that funeral services for a monk would be held after the midday meal. The monks asked one another, "What's going on? Everyone is well; there is no one sick in the Nirvana Hall." After their meal, Baizhang led the assembly to a large rock behind the monastery and showed them a dead fox at the rock's base. Following the customary procedure, they cremated the body.

That evening during his lecture in the dharma hall Baizhang talked about what had happened that day. Huangbo asked him, "A teacher of old gave a wrong answer and became a wild fox for five hundred lifetimes. What if he hadn't given a wrong answer?"

Baizhang said, "Come closer and I will tell you." Huangbo went closer and slapped Baizhang's face. Laughing, Baizhang clapped his hands and said, "I thought it was only barbarians who had unusual beards. But you too have an unusual beard!"[1][a]

Wumen's commentary and poem

Shibayama gives the following translation of Wumen's commentary and verse:

"Not falling into causation." Why was he turned into a fox? "Not ignoring causation." Why was he released from the fox body? If you have an eye to see through this, then you will know that the former head of the monastery did enjoy his five hundred happy blessed lives as a fox.[5]

Not falling, not ignoring:

Odd and even are on one die.

Not ignoring, not falling:

Hundreds and thousands of regrets![5]

Wild fox koan - Wikipedia

EN.WIKIPEDIA.ORG

Wild fox koan - Wikipedia

Wild fox koan - Wikipedia

ReplyRemove Preview1m





Sarah Luna

Author

So someone can be very highly realised and still have some ideas and views that are odd or controversial? So I wouldn’t necessarily take an awakened person’s advice on my mortgage repayments, for example?

I had equated enlightenment with wisdom…

Reply32m

Soh Wei Yu

Admin

Sarah Luna Unless you are an omniscient Buddha (and it is a point of contention whether the Buddha literally knows everything or not, such as how to build a rocket ship, or simply is omniscient as to the nature of all dharmas and the realms of existences and so on), you cannot possibly know everything in the world, such as how to build a rocket ship to reach planet Jupiter.

But a truly and deeply awakened person will be free of the causes (ignorance, craving, aggression/anger, delusion, egoity, and so on) that leads to unwholesome actions like lying. Even those awakened to the level of stream entry will have reduced those mental afflictions to a very large extent, let alone an arahant or an eighth bhumi bodhisattva who have completely eliminated all traces of mental afflictions.

I can tell you that I am awakened, but I know next to nothing about giving people advice for mortgage repayment. I will not lie to you that I am an expert on mortgage repayment.

Reply8mEdited

Soh Wei Yu

Admin

Sarah Luna Whereas John Tan is a financial and business consultant with a very very large net worth which I shall not disclose, and is an expert on all matters related to finance and business, my knowledge in these areas are basically nothing. Of course this does not mean John Tan is an expert in all other fields, such as making fine art and paintings (he might be an expert in that too but I am not sure).

The only advise on finance I can give is what the Buddha taught: https://essenceofbuddhism.wordpress.com/.../the-buddhas.../

"

The Buddha’s advice to lay people like us if we want to look after our families – is to accumulate wealth – then family and household life can follow:

The wise endowed with virtue Shine forth like a burning fire.

Gathering wealth as bees do honey and heaping it up like an ant hill. Once wealth is accumulated, family and household life may follow.

By dividing wealth into four parts, True friendships are bound;

One part should be enjoyed;

Two parts invested in business;

And the fourth set aside Against future misfortunes.

So, in the Sigalovada Sutta (which has lots of good advice for lay followers), the Buddha said – divide your pay (after tax) into 4 parts:

25% – 1 Part to be enjoyed and used however you want

50% – 2 Parts to be invested in business

25% – 1 Part to be saved for emergencies

Obviously you don’t have to have exactly these percentages – but it gives you a rough idea cos each part can be a smaller part of a bigger part according to your personal circumstances."

The Buddha’s guidelines on how to look after your money

ESSENCEOFBUDDHISM.WORDPRESS.COM

The Buddha’s guidelines on how to look after your money

The Buddha’s guidelines on how to look after your money

ReplyRemove Preview4mEdited


Sarah Luna

Author

Soh, it’s great that John Tan wasn’t distracted by that huge fortune he has. He sounds like an interesting man. He is still alive?

So if someone who has had some realisations gives me advice that isn’t relevant to awakening I should just ignore it, unless they happen to be an expert in the field….

Can people’s ideas get in the way of further development in their awakening? I suppose if nothing else, being obsessed about politics or vaccines or whatever can be distracting…

Reply23m

Soh Wei Yu

Admin

"Soh, it’s great that John Tan wasn’t distracted by that huge fortune he has. He sounds like an interesting man. He is still alive?"

He is alive but he is reclusive. He is not attached to worldly life even though he has a huge fortune and a family. He said he never saw conventional life as so important other than responsibilities, so he spends more hours on practice now. He meditates at least 2 hours a day in addition to regularly practicing yoga and so on. Sometimes he meditates much more than that when he does self retreats.

"So if someone who has had some realisations gives me advice that isn’t relevant to awakening I should just ignore it, unless they happen to be an expert in the field…."

That's fair to say. You do not need to ignore it, you can consider it, but you still need to exercise your own discernment and research.

"Can people’s ideas get in the way of further development in their awakening? I suppose if nothing else, being obsessed about politics or vaccines or whatever can be distracting…"

Only if there is grasping. There is nothing wrong with having opinions, especially when it is based on facts. For example, my pro vaccine stance is backed by scientific evidence on the relative safety and efficacy of vaccines, it is in my opinion in the best interest of everyone to get vaccinated. But grasping on an anti vaccine stance seems to imply some sort of ignorance or grasping by the person even when such stance goes against scientific consensus and would be harmful to the person and those that gets influenced by the person holding the view. It could also just be plain ignorance if the person is gullible enough to buy into fake news and just poor sources of (mis)information.

Reply6mEdited



Yin Ling

Admin

Just saw this post. Just wanted to second Soh’s opinion.

Awakening just means they have the knowledge of true nature.

Not the “knowledge” of the functionality of conventional human life. It’s very different.

Teacher that pretends to know what they don’t are dangerous.

Reply16m


Sarah Luna

Author

Yin, thanks. Ah yes, it seems obvious!

And yet I’m listening to Rupert Spira on a live zoom call now, giving people advice on how to do their jobs and behave in their relationships. And this seems reasonable to me, given that these people are asking him about how to behave as if they are awakened.

But if they were to ask him which politician to vote for or if they should take a vaccine, and he were to give them a concrete answer, that wouldn’t feel right.

Reply9h

Yin Ling

Admin

Sarah Luna yup. I used to think like that too, awakened ones know what best to do.

Actually imo I think they don’t really. They just can see things in a more “whole” or holistic way rather than self based and not allowed their defilements to step in, so there is less bias, so they sort of know what is “best” karmically.

Worldly situation is another ballgame lol.

I always feel damn awkward when someone ask a monastic .. how to bring up children? How to maintain a relationship? How to do a job well? How to not anger ur boss? 🤣

I mean.. what do they have reference on to guide u?!! 🤦🏻‍♀️

Especially on vaccines. There’s so many ppl who ask spiritual persons on vaccine when there are scientists around. And it’s even crazier when a person who clearly don’t understand anything about vaccine tells other ppl not to take because of xyz. They don’t even understand basic immunology and don’t have the humility to admit that they don’t know. That happened so much and is so so so so dangerous.

Reply9hEdited

Soh Wei Yu

Admin

Sarah Luna I fully agree with Yin Ling. As for spiritual teachers giving advice on jobs and relationships, it is not to say they are not without their value. Sometimes they can offer good advise. Sometimes not. You still have to discern for yourself. A non-contracted way of functioning in daily life, jobs and relationships, that is to say, how you behave in an non-dually engaged intimacy with work, with your job, with your loved ones, and yet non-attached, that is what spiritual teachers should hopefully guide people into. Non-dual, fully engaged, yet liberated, without any sense of self/Self and without any grasping.

For example, just to pick one quote from Thich Nhat Hanh, "'You must love in such a way that the person you love feels free.'"

A lot of wisdom there. In many ways, a non-liberative way of functioning in relationships can spoil the relationship. Clinginess, controlling and demanding, etc, these are not attractive traits that keep your relationship stable. But there are so many other factors involved other than just these.

Therefore, if you need professional counseling for your marriage for example, you should still find a professional marriage counsellor rather than find Thich Nhat Hanh or Rupert Spira. Even if the wisdom of the latter can be of value in relationships, they are not the be all and end all experts on marriage and relationships. A counsellor with 10 or 20 years of experience saving marriages may be your best bet than the monk or nun at a monastery, because they truly have seen it all, they have all the experience helping people out with those specific set of issues.

Thich Nhat Hanh can teach you how to be liberated, how to be fully anatta and total exertion even when doing your job, and through that you may directly or indirectly become better at doing your job, but he may not be able to tell you the details of what it takes for you to be promoted in your career (except as general dharmic advise), or what is the career best suited for you, etc. You may need to find a job counsellor.

Reply20mEdited


Soh Wei Yu

Admin

Destin Ntukogu Usually there is attachment, but it can also be out of compassion. Buddha was also politically active in a limited way by counseling kings, and so on. The second most famous Buddhist master in modern times (right after the Dalai Lama), Zen Master Thich Nhat Hanh was well known for being politically active by advocating anti vietnam war, etc. He started a movement called Engaged Buddhism, which combined meditation and anti-war work. Both Buddha and Zen Master Thich Nhat Hanh are truly awakened beings, there is no doubt in my mind that even when engaged in such activities they are totally liberated, totally anatta, totally no-mind.

Liberation is not about avoiding activities or the world. But in the midst of activities, there must be no grasping, and action arise spontaneously out of compassion rather than self grasping.

Acarya Malcolm Smith: "Well, in those past lives, the Buddha was not a bhikṣu, etc. When the Buddha counseled kings, it was usually to not invade someone else. 🙂"

Malcolm also said: "Buddhists have been engaged in politics since the time of the Buddha. The Buddha himself was consulted concerning politics and rulership. But spiritual bypassing is a trend..."

"One does not have a political position to be involved in politics. If one is giving advice to rulers, that is unavoidably political."

"No, "Spiritual bypassing", a term from psychology, refers very specifically using one's religious practice as an excuse not to deal with the world, warts and all. The term was coined in 1984 by a Buddhist practitioner, the late John Welwood, the director of the East/West Psychology program at the California Institute of Integral Studies.

Here is a good definition for you:

Spirituality is a fundamental dimension of wellness. However, scholars have noted that not all spiritual processes are healthy. One of those processes is spiritual bypass, defined as a defensive psychological posture cultivated by a tendency to privilege spiritual beliefs or experiences over and against psychological needs creating a means of avoiding or bypassing difficult emotions or experiences.

https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio ... plications

Politics is difficult. A lot of people use their spiritual beliefs as an excuse for not dealing that difficulty, fleeing the world, rather than dealing with it. For example, the way Buddha dealt the enslavement of the Śākyas. He watched. He did not flee. He observed."

RESEARCHGATE.NET

404 Page not found

404 Page not found

ReplyRemove Preview3mEdited

Destin Ntukogu

Soh Wei Yu oh trust me, i have very strong political beliefs that are actually bolstered by my affinity for buddhism. like i said, i don’t think disinterest precludes action in the world, so i’m not surprised by buddhists like Thich Nhat Hanh’s activism. i also don’t think anyone who’s enlightened wouldn’t have thought about the world deeply. i only think that there comes a point where you realize there’s nothing to fix, nothing that can be fixed, and nothing that has ever been broken. so i don’t despair because of a new war, a new outrage, a new spectacle. my concerns are not directed at transforming social structures, building new economies, new legislation, it’s only individuals.

Reply28m

Soh Wei Yu

Admin

Destin Ntukogu

Yes. The Buddha has complete dispassion and compassion at the same time, and continue to teach sentient beings tirelessly for 49 years after awakening even if he realised none are truly existent.

Dispassion without compassion is nihilistic and without heart. Compassion without dispassion is just being caught up in samsara, no liberation.

Reply25mEdited

Soh Wei Yu

Admin

Dispassion as in no clinging, no craving, not as in the opposite of compassion.

Reply23m

Soh Wei Yu

Admin

Was reminded of these excerpts also

“When anatta matures, one is fully and completely integrated into whatever arises till there is no difference and no distinction.

When sound arises, fully and completely embraced with sound yet non-attached. Similarly, in life we must be fully engaged yet non-attached” - John Tan/Thusness

“Actually there is no forcing. All the 4 aspects in I AMness are fully expressed in anatta as I told you. If aliveness is everywhere, how is one not to engage… it is a natural [tendency] to explore in [various] arena[s] and enjoy in business, family, spiritual practices... I [am] involve[d] in Finance, business, society, nature, spirituality, yoga...🤣🤣🤣. I don't find it efforting… You just don't have to boast about this and that and be non-dual and open.” - John Tan, 2019

Reply7m




Soh Wei Yu

Admin

Personally, I am not politically engaged or active because my own country is very stable, and neither am I interested in influencing the politics of other countries. It might not be so if I lived somewhere else.

Reply2mEdited

Roger Hiduk

This explains it. The difference between stages (growing up) and states ( waking up).

https://youtu.be/8zz95MHLjfo

The Leading Edge Of The Unknown In The Human Being: Ken Wilber

YOUTUBE.COM

The Leading Edge Of The Unknown In The Human Being: Ken Wilber

The Leading Edge Of The Unknown In The Human Being: Ken Wilber

Reply19h

Sarah Luna

Author

Thanks! Will listen.

Reply13h

Cuthbert Syabbalo

I was inquiring on this question and I got an insight saying "If your eye is one, your whole being is full of light, but if not, then darkness still dwells in you."

I would like to share the image of a mirror which is a great symbol in Buddhism. I daresay that the universe and all we are experiencing is a mirror unto ourselves, and when we see variances, then we know it is a signal & message to us that we have not achieved clarity. We should be as clear as possible, with literally no sediments in our water.

When I thought of some people with great insights still grasping onto things like politics, the economy & all that, I realised I was looking at an error in myself in that when I saw, I made judgement that this is good/bad. I harbored an opinion about how an insightful person should be, of which such variance arises from self which doesn't exit. An illusion that births illusions... Interesting!

Reply42m




Roger Hiduk

This explains it. The difference between stages (growing up) and states ( waking up).

https://youtu.be/8zz95MHLjfo

The Leading Edge Of The Unknown In The Human Being: Ken Wilber

YOUTUBE.COM

The Leading Edge Of The Unknown In The Human Being: Ken Wilber

The Leading Edge Of The Unknown In The Human Being: Ken Wilber

Reply1d

Sarah Luna

Author

Thanks! Will listen.

Reply18h

Sarah Luna

Author

Roger, this video is so interesting. Stage 2 is horrific! I’d rather meet someone in stage 1 any day…

Reply2h

Roger Hiduk

Sarah Luna integral theory is worth digging into imo. Interestingly we progress through the stages, so that stage is part of our development too.

Reply2h

Sarah Luna

Author

Roger, growing up with Tibetan Buddhist parents in a school that forced Christianity down my throat ensured that I missed stage 2. I probably spent many years in stage 1 without even having had any awakening experiences though!!

Reply1hEdited

Cuthbert Syabbalo

I was inquiring on this question and I got an insight saying "If your eye is one, your whole being is full of light, but if not, then darkness still dwells in you."

I would like to share the image of a mirror which is a great symbol in Buddhism. I daresay that the universe and all we are experiencing is a mirror unto ourselves, and when we see variances, then we know it is a signal & message to us that we have not achieved clarity. We should be as clear as possible, with literally no sediments in our water.

When I thought of some people with great insights still grasping onto things like politics, the economy & all that, I realised I was looking at an error in myself in that when I saw, I made judgement that this is good/bad. I harbored an opinion about how an insightful person should be, of which such variance arises from self which doesn't exit. An illusion that births illusions... Interesting!

Reply6h

Sarah Luna

Author

Thanks so much for all the responses. My thinking was a bit mixed up when I asked my question. My excuse is that I am probably the least awakened person in this group.

I realise now that my question was twofold:

a) Why do awakened people care about anything in their everyday lives, given that they have firsthand insight into illusory nature of it.

b) Why do some people who have had profound experiences of awakening rant online or face to face to people interested in their spiritual growth and attracted to them for spiritual purposes about their perspectives on topics such as vaccines, 5G, American politics and so on?

Soh helped me to understand that awakening can involve being clearly and maybe even experimentally aware of dependent origination. And so when an awakened person has a reasonable level of emotional maturity, the welfare of others, the suffering of others and so on really matters.

The other comments helped me to understand that awakening experiences in and of themselves don’t make people wise, knowledgeable, psychologically balanced and, most importantly, aware of the limitations of their beliefs and ideas.

Roger posted a really interesting video about the concept of ‘growing up’ and its influence on awakening. In the video, Ken Wilbur describes an interesting example of “…several zen masters, highly respected for the depth of their non-dual enlightenment or waking up…advocating many ideas that are obviously and embarrassingly ethnocentric, prejudiced, and bigoted.”

Reply1hEdited

Soh Wei Yu

Admin

Sarah Luna Post anatta (means Stage 5 and 6 of http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/.../thusnesss-six... at least) one should be relatively psychologically balanced. It is not clear however if they will be very knowledgeable in non-spiritual subjects. They may have differing and unique opinions on matters, like any one of us. They may also harbor some inaccurate beliefs about mundane matters. However, I do not expect any deeply realised and actualized people to lie or pretend they are experts or knowledgeable about something they don't, however. Their actions will arise in alignment with truth, honesty, sincerity, rather than egotism and negative emotions.

Also as Kyle Dixon wrote about his experience post anatta:

"...The anatta definitely severed many emotional afflictions, for the most part I don't have negative emotions anymore. And either the anatta or the strict shamatha training has resulted in stable shamatha where thoughts have little effect and are diminished by the force of clarity. I'm also able to control them, stopping them for any amount of desired time etc. But I understand that isn't what is important. Can I fully open to whatever arises I would say yes. I understand that every instance of experience is fully appearing to itself as the radiance of clarity, yet timelessly disjointed and unsubstantiated.." - Kyle Dixon, 2013

“The conditions for this subtle identification are not undone until anatta is realized.

Anatta realization is like a massive release of prolonged tension, this is how John put it once at least. Like a tight fist, that has been tight for lifetimes, is suddenly relaxed. There is a great deal of power in the event. The nature of this realization is not often described in traditional settings, I have seen Traga Rinpoche discuss it. Jñāna is very bright and beautiful. That brightness is traditionally the “force” that “burns” the kleśas.

The reservoir of traces and karmic imprints is suddenly purged by this wonderful, violent brightness. After this occurs negative emotions are subdued and for the most part do not manifest anymore. Although this is contingent upon the length of time one maintains that equipoise.” - Kyle Dixon, 2019

“Prajñā “burns” karma, only when in awakened equipoise. Regular meditation does not.” - Kyle Dixon, 2021

Reply14mEdited

Soh Wei Yu

Admin

Sarah Luna Awakened people can still be mistaken about relative things. But I believe they will be open to being corrected when presented with facts, will be careful to align themselves with truths rather than hold tightly to unfounded beliefs due to egotism.

I would question and doubt the depth of anyone's awakening if they do not at least have that 'standard' in their conduct. Conduct does reflect one's depth of awakening. I am not an advocate of a deep awakening being possibly divorced from conduct, and neither does John Tan. Conduct that arises due to craving, aggression, delusion and egotism is a sign that the person's awakening is not really that deep.

Reply11mEdited

Soh Wei Yu

Admin

"awakening experiences in and of themselves don’t make people... ...knowledgeable"

This part is correct.

A truly awakened person is spiritually wise, but may not be knowledgeable. They have the prajna wisdom that liberates all sufferings and delusions, which is different from worldly knowledge. They also may not have the sort of 'growing wisdom' that is the mundane life wisdom gained through unique life experiences. A monk for example may not understand what it is like to face a boss at work, or the problems encountered in relationships and so on, unless they used to live a lay person's life for some period of time.

Reply6mEdited


Yin Ling

Admin

Sarah Luna

1) illusoriness doesn’t take away karma, this ppl don’t understand properly.

Even if I see illusoriness, if my patient is having depression, and if I ignore it and not help her, i am just not being wise, I’m stupid. We don’t ignore causality, we see it more clearly actually, and usualy properly awakened ones, those who truly understand , they are more compassionate, respectful, their conduct is tight, and they doesn’t harm unnecessarily.

If u see those who claim awakening and go out of their way to criticise others, take everything personally, think they are so clever and try to teach everyone to follow them 😂 stay away 😂. They r not awakened however they want to talk philosophy.

2) perspectives are okay, one can do anything they like, but strong grasping of “I am right u r 100% wrong” that kind of ideology smells fishy to me.

I find awakening gives one a taste of a very very open, boundless, gentle, soft, malleable experiential feeling moment to moment, dream like, everything is okay, acceptable and very soft and compassionate. Everything tinge with beauty and bliss. One is happy. It calms the heart and make one wants to help, never to harm. Very natural.

So when I meet with someone who doesn’t have those qualities, or are hard, belligerent, provocative, rude, haughty… I am not sure, what r they actually experiencing when they say awakening?

That’s how I see it 🙂

Reply11m

This is not a post about awakening, non-duality or emptiness, but the planet, global warming, and the levels of consciousness in spiral dynamics. But why do I post this here? Because pure land is not another dimension or universe away. This very world, this very planet is our pure land. Everywhere, perfect purity, beauty and goodness can be found, all a perfect display of our radiance and Presence, if only we see and hear with pure vision. Instead, earthlings perceive the world in terms of dualism, self and other, subject and object, possessor and possessed, exploiter and exploited, hopes and fears, friends and enemies.
Like an apple tree that apples, this planet is the land that peoples, and manifest Buddhas. To grow apples, we have to protect and nurture the apple tree. To grow Buddhas, we have to protect and nurture our pure land. Please appreciate our seamless dependencies and wholeness and act accordingly. Our benefits should never be sought at the expense or detriment of the rest of the planet, otherwise we become like viruses destroying the host, killing ourselves in the process. Realise that a wave is never separate from the entire ocean like an apple is never separate from the rest of the apple tree, the welfare of all is the welfare of ourselves and vice versa. Our actions are the activity of the universe and vibrates as and throughout the universe.
Statements that used to be called "alarmist" now looks increasingly likely to be our destiny. The science is becoming increasingly clear this year: we have falsely assumed a purely linear increase in global temperatures when in truth the situation is far worse than that -- we might be on a somewhat exponential curve, and the world is on the verge of triggering a cascade of natural 'feedback loops' that will increase temperatures drastically. In other words, we are on course for runaway climate change as a result of natural feedback loops including methane release from the arctic permafrost triggering further releases, bringing catastrophic collapse of the ecosystem. This is the sixth mass extinction that could very well see the extinction of humanity in decades to come, if very strong actions and interventions are not taken on time. Sacrifices need to be made (perhaps, to our standard of living). Governments should mobilize resources to support green causes and we should support governments that have our long term welfare in their agenda. A mass planetary awakening is necessary for our survival. The three institutional poisons of collective greed, ill will and delusion needs to be addressed.  
Without a collective awakening, there is a real possibility that humanity will cease to exist 100 years from now.


......
 
Interesting
https://www.newshub.co.nz/…/scientists-secretly-believe-we-…
https://www.straight.com/…/could-abrupt-climate-change-lead…
<— I initially dismissed this guy as an alarmist nut job for predicting the extinction of humanity by 2026 until I read the following articles which seems to confirm some of Guy’s statements, so maybe there is a basis for such a thing to happen but I’m not sure about the timeline:
https://truthout.org/…/release-of-arctic-methane-may-be-ap…/
https://www.theguardian.com/…/7-facts-need-to-know-arctic-m…
https://siberiantimes.com/…/n0760-arctic-methane-gas-emiss…/

(update: I think Guy McPherson is an alarmist for setting a dateline to our 'extinction', but his conclusions about our trajectory and outcomes are actually based on sound science and research, except the date is speculation and may be off)
Shared by Malcolm Smith


nymag.com


· Reply · 9w
Sim Pern Chong


Sim Pern Chong Thanks for the sharing.

Manage


· Reply · 9w
Benjamin Smythe


Benjamin Smythe 2023 is the current projection for human extinction by a leading UN climate change scientist. maybe do what you want to today. :)

Manage


· 9w
Soh Wei Yu


Soh Wei Yu Enjoying myself at tomorrowland now 🤣

Manage


· 9w
Michael Hernandez


Michael Hernandez All is not lost. Cockroaches and rats will survive!
They eat everything and are highly resilient to toxic waste

Manage


· Reply · 8w
Soh Wei Yu


Soh Wei Yu Not if our planet ends up like Venus (it used to have a habitable climate, atmosphere and water until runaway climate change led to complete loss of any habitable atmosphere along with water)
Manage


· Reply · 8w · Edited
Soh Wei Yu


Soh Wei Yu As an Uber driver in Europe told us, mother nature is giving us a lot of signs and our only bet now is on Elon Musk building a rocket to bring us to Mars. If he manages to do it on time, that is

Manage


· Reply · 8w · Edited
Michael Hernandez


Michael Hernandez An AI is humankind's best bet for the preservation of its "legacy".

Manage


· Reply · 8w · Edited
Kathy Gilligan


Kathy Gilligan So no people at all in 2023. Bowie’s “Five Years.”
Manage


· Reply · 7w
Soh Wei Yu


Soh Wei Yu I’m not convinced the timelines are set in stone but if climate change is “non linear” and “runaway” or even “exponential” involving many natural feedback loops then the situation is truly dire...

Manage


· Reply · 7w
Soh Wei Yu


Soh Wei Yu If this chart has any basis then we ain’t seen nothing yet
Manage


· Reply · 7w
Andrew Kinsella


Andrew Kinsella Great, just what I needed to read. If that projection is correct then the only outcome can be a really major mass extinction.

Manage


· Reply · 7w
Soh Wei Yu


Soh Wei Yu Not all climate Scientists agree to the projection though. But might be too late for people to realise if the worst case scenario is true. For myself, I don’t know, im no climate expert. Open to various possibilities. Maybe make some mental preparations.

Manage


· Reply · 7w · Edited
Soh Wei Yu shared a link.


bbc.com
Researchers warn that even limited climate warming could trigger conditions…
Comments
Soh Wei Yu

Soh Wei Yu Suddenly the mainstream media and scientists are catching on this doomsday scenario and starting to worry.

They sound like they are feeling hopeless and in despair

Manage

· Reply · 7w · Edited
Benjamin Smythe

Benjamin Smythe it's over soon. enjoy these days. :)

Manage

· 7w
https://www.facebook.com/YearsOfLiving/videos/230976200951887/?hc_ref=ARRgxSrsPv-WeEmEUjAEC7JhE8hGj8bCFzJVr5nkQyP-4c4dy4sMFi_PEtBRiKBsdz4&__xts__%5B0%5D=68.ARBb_Oeag6h40dH3dHzNY3mjqCay8s2e0N7hi92nYCT-3r0q9wXppSyddnLfXe8a_E0XuvLtm4dN_S4XqROwVM5T2JzX35xZn3J038jpR8LRwbaPhr-Oco2wKBnDVoXUFhuXwlMD3lAg-iU-LK8p9R39rfvjSjVcabkf52sunv7FrFPP55GhtYA&__tn__=FC-R
Much sooner than expected. “Experts said dangerous climate change was almost “inevitable” and the planet was on the brink of a “tipping point” as thawing permafrost releases large volumes of carbon dioxide and methane into the atmosphere, causing temperatures to rise and more permafrost to melt.”
Comments
Soh Wei Yu

Soh Wei Yu Humanity is sleepwalking into an abyss.

Here’s how a redditor describes our catastrophic future soon to become reality:See More

Manage

· Reply · 1w · Edited
Junnies Jun Yang

Junnies Jun Yang from what i understand, the climate system is far too difficult to model, and our climate models (which the man-made global warming hypothesis entirely hinges upon because models are scientists' guess at how the climate system works, and its validity extends to evidence-gathering, hypothesis-testing, predictions, etc) are entirely incapable of properly modeling the climate.

you can see the ineptitude of the climate models by the fact that all of them are wrong, have wildly different projections, have no track record for accuracy, are constantly updated (new, unknown variables are constantly discovered and inputed), and the chaotic, complex nature of the climate means that slight errors in input can lead to wildly different outcomes
Manage

· Reply · 1w
Soh Wei Yu

Soh Wei Yu Yes it is very hard to model climate change. However, a general consensus is coming out this year taking into account the latest and newest research in climate science that paints a better picture of where we are heading, and it's not looking pretty. It paints a very dire picture -- a rather catastrophic one where our very existence as a species may be under threat not in centuries or generations to come, but in our very lifetime, perhaps 30, 20 or 10 years.

And even the U.N. has this to say just last week, http://time.com/5392283/united-nations-climate-change/

'(UNITED NATIONS) — Secretary-General Antonio Guterres warned Monday that the world is facing “a direct existential threat” and must rapidly shift from dependence on fossil fuels by 2020 to prevent “runaway climate change.”

“If we do not change course by 2020, we risk missing the point where we can avoid runaway climate change, with disastrous consequences for people and all the natural systems that sustain us,” Guterres warned.'

Can humanity avoid catastrophe and extinction? I don't know, but looking at the general apathy and unwillingness of governments to address this issue, our future looks grim.
Manage
Junnies Jun Yang

Junnies Jun Yang the thing is, the current man-made global warming hypothesis hinges upon the fact that climate scientists have a sufficient understanding to pinpoint that it is man-made greenhouse emissions that is the cause.

as we know, man-made greenhouse emission contribution is a fraction of total greenhouse gas emission. the validity of their claim thereby hinges upon this idea of a 'feedback' mechanism whereby a small input leads to a drastic outcome. but of course, given how sensitive climate models are to small errors in data input, it seems like the climate-change hypothesis is just a wild guess backed by no real evidence.

one also has to take into account the myriad of factors involved in climate change - solar cycles, planetary orbits, etc. it is so difficult to understand how the climate works once one understands how complex it is, that i personally am very skeptical of any claims that claim to be 'evidence-based', or scientifically proven
Manage

· Reply · 1w
Soh Wei Yu

Soh Wei Yu When the house is burning down, it's not time to be arguing but doing something drastic to turn things around. I'm afraid we will not take the necessary steps to avert disaster in time.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YsA3PK8bQd8
Manage
Junnies Jun Yang

Junnies Jun Yang if there were minimal costs associated toward cutting back on greenhouse emissions, there will be little opportunity cost to do so even if the entirely hypothesis is wrong. but to implement the action plans suggested by climate scientists will actually entail massive costs.

for instance, is it a worthwhile trade off to delay the lifting of hundreds of millions of people living in poverty, in order to introduce the measures required to cut down on greenhouse emissions, when the greenhouse-emission hypothesis is probably wrong and not even properly understood? the house might not even be burning, or the house is burning due to many other reasons, and the action-plan recommended by climate scientists is to order a truckload of sand to be transported and thrown over the fire (may work, probably will not, and will cost a large amount of time, money, resources that could have been spent elsewhere)]
Manage

· Reply · 1w
Soh Wei Yu


...........

Soh Wei Yu
“The Trump administration did not offer this dire forecast as an argument to combat climate change.
The analysis assumes the planet’s fate is already sealed.”
Comments
Soh Wei Yu

Soh Wei Yu It may be true that it’s too late to save humanity and life at large from extinction. We do not know for sure. But I think passivity and inaction is not right

Manage

· Reply · 1d · Edited
Angelo Gerangelo

Angelo Gerangelo Wow , sometimes I think I’m in the twilight zone 🙈
Manage

· Reply · 1d
Angelo Gerangelo

Angelo Gerangelo The basic argument is: “Well we’re screwed anyways, let’s burn this MFer to the ground!!”
Manage

· Reply · 1d
Soh Wei Yu

Soh Wei Yu Pretty much.
Manage

· Reply · 1d
Soh Wei Yu

Soh Wei Yu 7 degree farenheit, as catastrophic as it is, is still a conservative estimate that does not take the exponential feedback loops into account that Scientists have been warning recently. In any case when this plays out as it is without enormous intervention, we are certainly screwed, it’s hard to see how humans can survive this. And we won’t have until 2100

Manage

· Reply · 1d · Edited
Angelo Gerangelo

Angelo Gerangelo From what I’ve been seeing /reading unless there’s unprecedented governmental and corporate cooperation on a global scale to both radically reduce greenhouse gas production AND implement widespread sequestration modalities, the consequences will be caSee More
Manage

· Reply · 1d
Angelo Gerangelo

Angelo Gerangelo But none of that means we shouldn’t do what we can. We have the technology to reverse a lot of it.

https://350.org/about/
Manage
Soh Wei Yu

Soh Wei Yu Sequestration technologies exist or can be developed but only on a very small scale. The notion that future carbon sequestration technologies can be used to make a difference on the CO2 levels on a planetary scale is sort of a myth, and we're better off planting more trees and reducing deforestation instead (which is far from enough).

I highly suspect that some dangerous and desperate attempts at environmental geoengineering such as global dimming via aerosols will be inevitable at some point.
Manage

· Reply · 6h · Edited
Soh Wei Yu

Soh Wei Yu https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-45084144

"But this paper argues that beyond 2 degrees, there is a significant risk of turning natural systems - that presently help keep temperatures down - into massive sources of carbon that would put us on an "irreversible pathway" to a world that is 4-5 degrees warmer than before the industrial revolution."

http://globalwarming.berrens.nl/globalwarming.htm

"Although warming on this scale lies within the IPCC’s officially endorsed range of 21st-century possibilities, climate models have little to say about what Lynas, echoing Dante, describes as “the Sixth Circle of Hell”. To see the most recent climatic lookalike, we have to turn the geological clock back between 144m and 65m years, to the Cretaceous, which ended with the extinction of the dinosaurs. There was an even closer fit at the end of the Permian, 251m years ago, when global temperatures rose by – yes – six degrees, and 95% of species were wiped out. "
Manage
Soh Wei Yu

Soh Wei Yu "Unless you are a teenager, you probably read in your high-school textbooks that these extinctions were the result of asteroids. In fact, all but the one that killed the dinosaurs were caused by climate change produced by greenhouse gas. The most notorious was 252 million years ago; it began when carbon warmed the planet by five degrees, accelerated when that warming triggered the release of methane in the Arctic, and ended with 97 percent of all life on Earth dead.

- http://nymag.com/.../climate-change-earth-too-hot-for...
Manage
Angelo Gerangelo

Angelo Gerangelo Yeah it’s hard to pick through all of the science to see what’s what in a very charged issue like this. My problem with inflammatory pieces like that is that the authors typically already have a clear point of view (doom and gloom) and want to sell it so they take creative liberties with science.

To say the five big mass extinction events were all caused by global warming and CO2 levels (BTW CO2 is not the only cause of warming and there was a period in global past where the CO2 levels were 10X higher than they are now and the planet was cooler, so these are are theoretical associations backed by data, but there is nothing we know absolutely about the past or future) is to simply, well, make up science.

Obviously we don’t know for certain what caused them. What we do have is scientific data (core samples etc), models and the work of scientists who have made it their careers to study these things. According to them, from what I’ve read (I’m no expert but I’ve read quite a bit out of curiosity), there is no clear consensus on exactly what caused the mass extinctions.

There are prominent theories such as impact events (specifically the most recent one 50M years ago). In that case increase in CO 2 levels was certainly part of the problem but not the cause , the cause being the sky being darkened by particulate matter and photosynthesis being halted. It’s pretty obvious how that would have a devastating impact on the biosphere.

There are leading theories that the most distant (O-S event 450M years ago) was actually caused by global cooling. Also the second most distant was actually caused by the emergence of the plantae kingdom and the resulting effects and fluctuations in oxygen levels.

I’ll post links below. Wiki has very good article on extinction events and under “causes” tab it summarizes nicely. There are many theories and contributory factor, warming is one for sure as is cooling.

As I said previously I believe global warming as very serious and we will likely see devastating effects in the next 100 years unless we take dramatic and costly steps and see global cooperation on a scale not seen previously to work on solutions.

I say all of this not to be argumentative but simply in the spirit of truth (relative truth).

I think a lot of articles on global warming are unnecessarily inflammatory. It is interesting from the standpoint of human behavior and thought processes to look at why people like to write inflammatory doom and gloom, make it sound as scary as possible pieces.

I think it’s wired into the way we process that if something is very serious we can convince the skeptics with fear tactics. It makes total sense but does it work? I mean they don’t need to convince you or me, we already believe global warming is a very serious problem that can have potentially devastating consequences. But what about skeptics? Does it actually work on skeptics? I would argue it actually has the opposite effect in a couple of ways. First of all I think a lot of skeptics are simply afraid to believe in what they suspect is true (that it is a very real problem). So through magical thinking they can conveniently rearrange reality in their mind so things don’t look fearful.

So then what do fear tactics do to someone like this? They make them dig their heels in deeper actually. The opposite effect you might have had in mind.

Moreover any type of polarized issue or political stance simply becomes more polarized and divided by someone taking the unnecessarily extreme view.

Instead the answer may well be actually going in the other direction and trying to understand the point of view of the opposing position. This goes against our us/them instinct but it works IMO.

The example I will use has actually been researched quite extensively and proves what I’m saying above.

So cigarette smoking causes untold morbidity and mortality that is on a scale that no modifiable behavior can hold a candle to. Add up all of the deaths associated with all illegal drugs combined, then add all alcohol related deaths then add all motor vehicle deaths (driving is dangerous right) in the US in one year and it doesn’t even come close to how many people die every year of lung cancer alone. Almost all lung cancer is caused by smoking. That’s not even taking into account COPD, and the smoking related cardiovascular disease deaths which even dwarf lung cancer in number.

So it is a very very destructive habit. I’ve taken care of more patients than I could count who were dying of lung cancer. Any physician can attest to this.

So when you meet a patient in clinic and you are their doctor, their health care champion, what do you think your every instinct is? Well it to inform them of how incredibly bad it is for them. That’s human nature. But does it work?

Well doctors have been using that approach for years (many still do) and now that it has been researched it is found that it doesn’t work. It seems absurd because YOU know it’s bad for them and you don’t smoke because you know how bad it is so why wouldn’t letting them in on that “truth” get them to see the light? Well for similar reasons to what I stated above. They already know it’s bad. And they are already scared and in denial so you scaring the crap out of them only puts them farther in denial.

So what works then? Well actually strategies around the way you interview them work. You try to get to their point of view, understand their process around their behavior. This has a magical effect although it’s totally counterintuitive . Just by showing that you actually care and understand their barriers they often start making behavior change automatically.

An old saying that I find is very accurate, “They don’t care how much you know until they know how much you care.”

Sorry for the long post but I’ve seen this work not just with my patients but in many areas of life actually and I’m very interested in human behavior and how it affects the ways in which we relate and world views etc.

To summarize I’ll paraphrase Adyashanti (I don’t have the exact quote but he won’t mind):

It took me a very long time to see this but when I finally did it fundamentally changed the way interacted with people. I realized that taking either side you ALWAYS reenforce the other side.

I was overjoyed to hear him say this because this has been my instinct for some time but I had never looked at it this overtly.

Anyways I’m just blabbing now 🤣

Have a great day in Singapore 🇸🇬

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extinction_event

https://cosmosmagazine.com/palaeonto.../big-five-extinctions
Manage
Soh Wei Yu

Soh Wei Yu "What accounts for CO2 levels having been over 10 times higher in the past but with the same global temperatures?"

"You're writing about a time in the range of 500 million years ago. The sun's output has been increasing by about 1% every 100 million years for billions of years. In the Mid-Ordovician period the sun's output was about 95% what it is today. The fact that the temperature was similar to what it is today for large parts of the Earth is strong support that CO2 is effective as a greenhouse gas. Of course we also know this from direct and indirect measurements and from the theory of radiation physics.

Without the higher concentrations of CO2 hundreds of millions of years ago, the Earth would have been a very cold place.

CO2 atmospheric concentrations started decreasing somewhere around 50 million years ago due to a combination of decreasing volcanic activity and higher rates of rock weathering of CO2 from rocks exposed during the buildup of the Himalayas: Understanding the long-term carbon-cycle: weathering of rocks - a vitally important carbon-sink

It's odd that you chose something that supports the current understanding of one of the factors underlying climate change in an attempt to refute it."

- https://www.quora.com/What-accounts-for-CO2-levels-having...
Manage
Soh Wei Yu

Soh Wei Yu Considering that sun's output was so different back then.. and the fact that temperatures have risen sharply with only 400ppm and we are heading towards 1000ppm (and triggering other feedback loops like the arctic methane release) only shows how bad things are going to get.

Manage

· Reply · 1h
Soh Wei Yu

Soh Wei Yu "I think a lot of articles on global warming are unnecessarily inflammatory."

On the other hand, I actually think most articles still grossly understate the predicament we are in.

Take for example https://www.vox.com/2015/5/15/8612113/truth-climate-change

Does that mean nothing really can be done? No, but at the rate we are moving (CO2 emissions are not even halting but actually increasing in speed), we are certainly on course for 4/5/6 degrees celcius or more..
Manage
Angelo Gerangelo

Angelo Gerangelo Yes exactly. Just making the point that we are talking about very complex systems and things aren’t 100% predictable. I don’t doubt the greenhouse effect caused by CO2.

Manage

· Reply · 1h
Angelo Gerangelo

Angelo Gerangelo Soh Wei Yu we may well be. I just mean when facts are skewed then it opens the author to criticism and can be used as fodder from those who want to deny what there is overwhelming evidence to support, that climate change is very real and very concerning.
Manage

· Reply · 1h
Soh Wei Yu

Soh Wei Yu " And they are already scared and in denial so you scaring the crap out of them only puts them farther in denial."

Actually, scaring the crap out of them by presenting them with facts (we're not trying to deceive anyone but simply showing the true picture) - such as pictures on cigarette boxes of blackened lungs, diseased organs and so on, actually do (scientifically proven) reduce smoking. Which is why smoking rates have decreased by so much (from maybe half the population to less than 1/5) over the years..
Manage

· Reply · 1h · Edited
Soh Wei Yu

Soh Wei Yu It takes time but scientific facts will start to sink in the public's psyche... I think. Especially combined with the real life global warming effects people are starting to see taking effect in their environment in real time



· Reply · 1h · Edited
Angelo Gerangelo

Angelo Gerangelo You make a good point. Yes education has worked (in the past many people genuinely didn’t know smoking was bad fir you it was hidden by industry) I’m talking about on a personal level with trying to convince people who already know and are in fear. This is what I think drives denyers if global climate change as well as of course greed motivation etc .
Manage

· Reply · 1h
Angelo Gerangelo

Angelo Gerangelo Yes it has started to sink in and more and more people and organizations including some oil companies are getting on board.
Manage

· Reply · 1h
Soh Wei Yu

Soh Wei Yu Actually I do agree that understanding others' perspective is very important. This is where the Spiral Dynamics makes a lot of sense. Trump is coming from a Red (egocentric), Blue (ethnocentric/mythic-literal) and Orange (rational-scientific) perspective. The whole Republican Party's level of consciousness lies in the spectrum between Blue and Orange. The Democractic party's spectrum lies between Orange and Green (worldcentric/egalitarian-minded/post-modern). None of them has a higher integral level like Yellow, which is why they are unable to accommodate a wider range of views and see how they can fit together in a coherent whole.

In order to process and accept scientific facts, you have to be at Orange. If you are strongly at Blue or lower, you will have a hard time accepting scientific facts. You might be more interested in conspiracies. You will prefer fairytales like the world was created 6000 years ago (a literal interpretation of stories in scriptural texts as truth rather than metaphors). A deep fear or resistance towards facts, science, usually comes from a level lower than Orange. "Ethnocentric" also imply you might have attachment to racism, nationalism, or other group-identities, including religious fanaticism.

But even if you are strongly Orange, it does not translate into environmental concern.. why? Orange is primarily achievement oriented. This is why Trump, a billionaire businessman, places importance on the immediate and individualistic profits and benefits of businesses over long term welfare of humanity or the world. Which is why his administration is starting to accept global warming science (Trump used to be a denialist) which is an improvement but at the same time, they are still fixated on short term achievements and profits. It's only when you rise to the level of green that you start to take a longer term perspective and your area of concern expands to include things like the environment, welfare of masses, human rights (or even animal rights), etc. Trump is deeply anti-green, reversing or demolishing many of the green laws and policies. Pro-business is good but I think having an unhealthy anti-green obsession is no good, IMO. (That said, Green also has its own problems and pathologies)

Manage

· Reply · 31m · Edited
Angelo Gerangelo

Angelo Gerangelo Anyways, regardless of all that we’re discussion, to make any reasonable headway what really has to happen is at a National/international policy level. Specifically the US in China. The political climate here in the US right now is more divided than I’ve ever seen it. The mass spread of misinformation on every issue is very concerning. There are still many people I know personally who staunchly disbelieve in global warming. I’m genuinely not sure what could make such a shift that the US would meaningfully move in that direction.

Manage

· Reply · 1h
Angelo Gerangelo

Angelo Gerangelo Soh Wei Yu that’s really interesting I want to read up on it. Yes a few people I know who are staunchly conservative I used to argue with and it would get heated quickly so I’d back off. Once I started just fully accepting them and their points of view I noticed some very surprising shifts actually.

Manage

· Reply · 1h
Angelo Gerangelo

Angelo Gerangelo I’m putting everything on mass awakening. I’m not kidding actually.

Manage

· Reply · 1h
Soh Wei Yu

Soh Wei Yu Angelo Gerangelo Maybe read Ken Wilber's books. Also Actualized.org has very good videos on Spiral Dynamics -- I watched all of them
Manage
Soh Wei Yu

Soh Wei Yu Ken Wilber's book like A Brief History of Everything is a good read

Manage

· Reply · 48m
Angelo Gerangelo

Angelo Gerangelo wow super cool, I’ll check it out
Manage

· Reply · 44m
Soh Wei Yu

Soh Wei Yu https://m.france24.com/.../20180930-un-report-confronts... "I don't think 2C is safe, and I would never want to argue it," said Frumhoff. "By many measures, 1.5C is not enough."

"But while we might call 2C an upper bound, let's not pretend that we're on a 2C path -- we are way above that," he told AFP.

Even taking into account voluntary national pledges to cut greenhouse gas emissions, submitted in annex to the Paris treaty, the Earth is on track to heat up by an unliveable 3.5C or more by century's end.

"If we want to save ourselves from the disasters that are looming, we only have unrealistic options left," said Kaisa Kosonen, Greenpeace IPPC campaign lead.

"We have to try to make the impossible possible."
Manage
Angelo Gerangelo

Angelo Gerangelo Yes it’s quite disturbing.
Manage

· Reply · 2h



Soh Wei Yu: What do you think about the?

LikeShow more reactions
Comment
Comments
Kathy Gilligan

Kathy Gilligan Thanks, Soh Wei Yu. A lot to dig into. Like a diagnosis in which you’re told you have 10 months to live, except that it is not just you, but everyone you know and everyone you don’t know. Every sentient being. What a time to be alive.

Manage

· Reply · 22h
Kathy Gilligan

Kathy Gilligan Everything is a distraction.
Manage

· Reply · 22h
Soh Wei Yu

Soh Wei Yu Except nobody really knows how it will all play out or the exact timeframe. But day by day, the likelihood that the entire planet is going into a catastrophic mode within 10-15 years becomes clearer (due to the blue ocean event). Life will be much more difficult, lots of people will die, especially for the poorer countries (but all will be affected). But that in itself is insufficient to cause the extinction of our species unless it triggers the tipping points which could raise our temperatures from 2c warming up to 6c. So, will we go extinct in 10 years? Not likely, but I expect that within 20 years, scientists will try desperate and risky methods like releasing aerosols to artificially induce global dimming -- a geoengineering attempt to alter the climate of the world. If this works out, we can possibly delay our extinction for a while, but it doesn't really solve the issue. They all know that our planet will trigger many tipping points beyond 2c warming (or possibly even before that) resulting in a 'hothouse earth', which translates to the extinction of most or almost all species, including ourselves. That's why geoengineering will become inevitable as the planet warms towards 2c.

Manage

· Reply · 1h · Edited
Kathy Gilligan

Kathy Gilligan It’s not solvable, so yes, desperate attempt
Manage

· Reply · 6m
Soh Wei Yu

Soh Wei Yu Solving it will require 100% transition to clean energies (we are so far from that) and the development of large scale sequestration technologies (currently a sci-fi fantasy). Is it possible? Maybe. It is likely to happen? I don't think so. Should we still try our best? Of course.
Manage

· Reply · 3m


===================


https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=411&v=uzCxFPzdO0Y

Shed A Light: Rupert Read – This civilisation is finished: so what is to be done?


 level 1
Citizen Scientist / Philosopher10 points · 6 hours ago
Summary of points?
level 2
21 points · 5 hours ago · edited 4 hours ago
Talk at Cambridge University, November 2018
Civilization has 3 possible paths to take in the near future:
  1. Courageous radical transformation in extremely brief span of time, a transformation the like of which humanity has never before undergone. If this succeeds, this civilization will be finished, because the changes will be so radical. This would involve local food production, etc. Extremely unlikely, but we should try. Speaker urges people to rebel to prevent extinction.
  2. Collapse followed by possible human survival, e.g. 1000 people in Antarctica. This life raft scenario is fraught with difficult ethical problems (how do we choose who survives), but we need to start talking about enabling this outcome since this is likely our best option if scenario 1 eludes us, which it in all likelihood will.
  3. Collapse followed by human extinction and possible the extinction of much of complex life. This scenario is likely if we don't take a hard look at reality and try to aim for scenarios 1 or 2. This is the "Guy McPherson" outcome. Speaker mentions threat of raging nuclear fires devastating the biosphere, the potential for the atmosphere and oceans being so severely damaged that there is no biosphere remaining.
Some topics addressed: the fact that many in the audience feel that collapse is likely and not too far off, yet no one talks about it publicly. Many of us are harboring this awareness privately but it is not a topic of public conversation. This needs to change. Speaker mentions how we can begin to broach the topic in our own social sphere. There is talk that everyone should be voting green because we are in such an emergency that there is no time to dither around with other political parties, approaches. Potential for fast political revolution, especially if climate catastrophes mount. Discussion that logically we should be rebelling and acknowledgement of how difficult it is to do. Mention of a movement in the U.K. to foment climate rebellion.

Another topic broached is that we need to control the population of the developed world. Immigration should be discouraged since it is incompatible with reducing the ecologic impact of developed economies. England should aim for food self-sufficiency. How will England be able to justify the import of food if large portions of the world population are starving?

Mention that collapse is already happening in poorer communities in England and the United States. Outlook for Africa and the Middle East is bleak and collapse can already be seen in there as well.

Basically the speaker is encouraging us to take an unflinching look at the catastrophic problems we are facing and to be begin speaking amongst ourselves about that reality and to consider our options realistically.


=========


    “​They say since 2005, the number of floods across the world has increased by 15 times, extreme temperature events by 20 times, and wildfires seven-fold.”
    And we are only at the beginning. It’s hard to imagine the apocalyptic state of the world in a few decades.
    “The IPPR warns that the window of opportunity to avoid catastrophic outcomes is rapidly closing.”
    Plummeting insect numbers 'threaten collapse of nature'
    theguardian.com
    Plummeting insect numbers 'threaten collapse of nature'
    Plummeting insect numbers 'threaten collapse of nature'
  • Soh Wei Yu Lucky I am not emotionally affected by these articles as I have little emotions lol
    1
  • Tan Jui Horng I'm sure cockroaches will still be left though :P
    1
  • Soh Wei Yu Humans don’t understand dependent arising. They just blindly follow habitual impulses like craving. In this sense we (homosapien sapiens) are no different from other animal species but with our added prowess of intelligence contributing to our self destruction and destruction of biosphere. Rather that treating the environment as the conditions inseparable from us, that nourish and sustains us and are to be protected for the well being of all, they are merely seen as a resource separate from ourselves, to be exploited, developed and consumed. If more people awaken to no self and dependent arising then there will be more hope but I think it’s too late

    Just saw stian post this recently. It is quite apt and relevant.

    ...

    I just had a weird one. It has faded a bit, but I’ll tell as best I can.

    At home we use an organic bin for food scraps and such. As you may know this bin sometimes starts to give growth to various organisms.

    In the past I’ve reflected on my responsibility for these small living things. Sometimes I’ve felt slight endearment by adding things to the bin that I realize will feed and sustain these small creatures—things I don’t need but which they will cherish. Sometimes I’ve felt slight guilt at cutting off their livelihood, either by adding things to the bin that I know will have a detrimental effect for them, or by emptying out the bin.

    Sometimes when I’m about to put something into the bin, I realize that right now there likely isn’t much life in there, but that what I’m about to put in the bin will be a catalyst for life.

    To be frank, I’ve almost felt fatherly. Never of course attached to these creatures, but yet responsible for important factors in their brief existence.

    And something hit me just now, as I approached the bin.

    I don’t actually make these creatures at all. Conventionally speaking, they arise spontaneously. They arise from the conditions I create in the bin, but I really do not birth these creatures or own them.

    Or rather... that is to say... that I birth these creatures just like my parents birthed me. That is to say... not at all.

    My parents had no involvement in my birth, just like I don’t make or create these small creatures, instead they arise out of the right conditions. Neither do I own or father or preside over these creatures, any more than my parents are the lords or creators of my existence.

    When my parents got pregnant, they could not and did not choose for those conditions to lead to my birth, nor could they choose for those conditions to not lead to my birth.

    Just like the arising of the creatures in my bin is out of my hands, so too is my birth out of my parents or anyone else’s hands.

    Who birthed me? Where do I come from?

    No one birthed me—not in this way, anyway. Spontaneously arisen from conditions. Like maggots in the dirt.
    2
  • Soh Wei Yu We do not "come into" this world; we come out of it, as leaves from a tree. As the ocean "waves," the universe "peoples." Every individual is an expression of the whole realm of nature, a unique action of the total universe. This fact is rarely, if ever, experienced by most individuals. Even those who know it to be true in theory do not sense or feel it, but continue to be aware of themselves as isolated "egos" inside bags of skin.
    Alan W. Watts, The Book on the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

    We don’t respect our environment, we destroy it… but, you know, exploiting and destroying your environment, polluting the water and the air and everything is just like destroying your own body. The environment is your body.

    - Alan Watts

    Just as no thing or organism exists on its own, it does not act on its own. Furthermore, every organism is a process: thus the organism is not other than its actions. To put it clumsily: it is what it does. More precisely, the organism, including its behavior, is a process which is to be understood only in relation to the larger and longer process of its environment. For what we mean by "understanding" or "comprehension" is seeing how parts fit into a whole, and then realizing that they don't compose the whole, as one assembles a jigsaw puzzle, but that the whole is a pattern, a complex wiggliness, which has no separate parts. Parts are fictions of language, of the calculus of looking at the world through a net which seems to chop it up into bits. Parts exist only for purposes of figuring and describing, and as we figure the world out we become confused if we do not remember this all the time.
    p. 73

    - Alan Watts
    1
  • Reply
  • 2d
  • Edited

....

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-climatechange-temperatures/evidence-for-man-made-global-warming-hits-gold-standard-scientists-idUSKCN1QE1ZU?fbclid=IwAR2ouLXy3mPTmFUZZg6YzbsSowlEzr2DcCO8_ApKcTSiAUbSYwsd6wSXhwA


Evidence for man-made global warming hits 'gold standard': scientists


"Five-sigma level statistical confidence means the human cause of climate change is a virtual certainty."
....
  • Soh Wei Yu Wouldn't shake the dogmatic half of the republicans though.
  • Soh Wei Yu “Popper, Schumpeter, and Piaget show that we stunt our growth when we ignore disconfirming evidence or distort evidence in order to make it assimilate with our existing knowledge. Focusing on learning what we already we believe is like building a really skinny wall that will topple over as it gets larger.

    On the other hand, we go through a growth spurt when we actively search for disconfirming evidence and allow accomodation to happen.“

    -
    https://medium.com/.../most-people-think-this-is-a-smart...
  • Most People Think This Is A Smart Habit, But It’s Actually Brain-Damaging
    medium.com
    Most People Think This Is A Smart Habit, But It’s Actually Brain-Damaging
    Most People Think This Is A Smart Habit, But It’s Actually Brain-Damaging
  • Soh Wei Yu Humans tend to overlook evidence that challenge their own beliefs and creates discomfort.

    But I’m not like that. We should not be. We should learn to love challenging assumptions and look at the evidence.
  • Soh Wei Yu The hard truth - "This civilization is over...":

    https://www.facebook.com/SoilLifeQuadra/posts/10156656875720199


    Marc Doll
    January 25 ·

    I realize there is something I have known for some time but have never said, and, since I have just spent another 4 hours of my life in climate change academia I have to get this out of my system.

    Please understand that many you reading this won't live to an old age... and likely will start scrolling after one or 2 more paragraphs... (edit...Ok I was wrong on this point. This is now my 2nd most shared post of all time..(edit)...make that my most shared)

    The IPCC report and Paris accord are incredibly overly optimistic and that commits the world to a target that means the death of hundreds of millions if not more.

    But it is worse than that.

    Even the commitments made by countries in the Paris accord don't get us to a 2 degree world.

    But it is worse than that.

    The 2 degree target is now unattainable (unless of course the entirety of civilization does a 180 today...) and is based on geo-engineering the climate of the earth as well as the sequestering of every molecule of carbon we have produced since 1987, as well as every molecule we are producing today,as well as every molecule we produce tomorrow.... with magical technologies that don't exist, wont exist and, even if they did would likely cause as many if not more problems than they fix.

    But it is worse than that.

    The 2 degree target of the IPCC does not factor in the feedback loops such as the increase absorption of heat due to a drastic reduction in the albedo (reflectivity) effect caused by the 70% loss of arctic ice,..- the release of methane from a thawing arctic. (there is more energy stored in the arctic methane than there is in coal in the world). This is called the methane dragon. If the process of the release of the methane, currently frozen in the soil and ocean beds of the arctic, which may have already begun, but if it spins out of control we are looking a an 8 degree rise in temperature.

    But it is worse than that.

    The report which gives us 12 years to get our head's out of our arses underestimated the amount of heat stored in the world's oceans, as we descovered in mid-January by 40%... so no , we don't have 12 more years.

    But it is worse than that.

    The IPCC report ignores the effects of humans messing up the Nitrogen cycle through agricultural fertilizers and more... Don't go down this rabbit hole if you want to sleep at night.

    But it is worse than that.

    Sea level rise will not be gradual. Even assuming that the billions of tons of water that is currently being dumped down to the ground level of Greenland isn't creating a lubricant which eventually will allow the ice to free-flow into the northern oceans; it is only the friction to the islands surface that is currently holding the ice back. Then consider the same process is happening in Antarctica but is also coupled with the disappearance of the ice shelves which act as buttresses holding the glaciers from free flowing into the southern ocean. then factor in thermal expansions; the simple fact that warmer water takes up more space and It becomes clear that we are not looking at maintaining the current 3.4mm/yr increase in sea level rise (which incidentally is terrifying when you multiply it out over decades and centuries.) We will be looking at major calving events that will result in much bigger yearly increases coupled with an exponential increase in glacial melting. We know that every increase of 100ppm of C02 increases sea level by about 100 feet. We have already baked in 130 feet of sea level rise. It is just a question of how long it is going to take to get there... and then keep on rising..

    But it is worse than that.

    Insects are disappearing at 6 times the speed of larger animals and at a rate of about 2.5% of their biomass every year. These are our pollinators. These are links in our food chain. These represent the basic functioning of every terrestrial ecosystem.

    But it is worse than that.

    58% of the biomass of life on earth has been lost since 1970. That includes the insects above but also every other living thing on the planet.

    But it is worse than that.

    Drought in nearly every food producing place in the world is expected to intensify by mid-century and make them basically unusable by the end of the century... Then factor in the end of Phosphorus (China and Russia have already stopped exporting it knowing this) and the depletion of aquifers and you come to the conclusion that feeding the planet becomes impossible.

    But it is worse than that.

    We can no longer save the society that we live in and many of us are going to be dead long before our life expectancy would suggest.

    If your idea of hope is having some slightly modified Standard of living going forward and live to ripe old age... there is no hope. This civilization is over...
  • Marc Doll
    I realize there is something I have known for some time but have never said, and, since I have just spent another 4 hours of my life in climate change academia ...
    See More
  • Soh Wei Yu ..but there is hope..

    There is a way for some to come through this and have an enjoyable life on the other side. Every day we delay can be measured in human lives. There will come a day of inaction when that number includes someone you love, yourself
    or myself.

    So we have 2 options.

    Wake the fuck up. If we do we will only have to experience the end of our society as we know it aka...the inevitable economic collapse which is now unavoidable, but be able to save and rebuild something new on the other side. This would require a deep adaptation. Words like sustainability would need to be seen as toxic and our focus needs be on regeneration. Regeneration of soil, forests, grasslands, oceans etc.... This is all possible.

    Option 2 is the path we are on thinking that we can slowly adapt to change. This not only ensures we experience collapse but also condemns humanity to not just economic and social collapse but in a 4-6 or even an 8 degree world... extinction.

    I am sick of pipeline discussions. I am sick of any argument that is predicated on the defeatist assumption that we will continue to burn oil at an ever increasing rate simply because it is what we have always done. Fact is if we do we are not just fucked, we are dead. I am sick of people who don't understand how their food is produced, and its effect on the climate.(both carnivores who eat feed-lot meat and vegans who eat industrially-produced-mono-cropped-veggies as they are equally guilty here. The consumption of either is devastating). I am sick of the tons of shinny new clothes people are wearing without realizing 1 Kg of cotton takes over 10 thousand Liters of water and incredible amounts of energy to produce. I am sickened by the amount of that same clothing hits the landfill in near new condition. I am sick of the argument that our oil is less poisonous than someone else's. Firstly, no it isn't and secondly, It doesn't fucking matter. I am sick of people that can't even handle the ridiculously-small, only-the-tip-of- the-iceberg-of-changes we need to accept; a carbon tax. I am sick of the fact that the political will seems only capable of focusing on the individual consumer through small measures like a carbon tax but no elected Party seems to have the fortitude to enact policies that take it to the small handful of companies that are responsible for 70% of our current C02 production. I am sick of my own hypocrisy that allows me to still use fossil fuels for transportation. I am sick of those who use hypocrisy as an argument against action. I am sick of the Leadership of my country that argues we can have economic growth and survivable environment... we can't. I am sickened by the normalizing of the leadership of our Southern neighbour who as the most polluting nation in the world officially ignores even the tragedy that is the Paris accord. I am sick of the politicians I worked to get elected being impotent on this subject. Naheed and Greg I'm looking at you. (BTW...Druh, you are an exception) I am sick that the next image I put up of my kids, cheese, pets or bread is going to gain immeasurably more attention than a post such as this which actually has meaning... I am sick about the fact that all the information I referenced here is easily discoverable in scientific journals through a simple google search but will be characterized by many as hyperbolic.

    I am especially sick that my future and the future of my children is dependent on the dozens of people that saw this post, said there goes Marc off the deep end again and chose to remain ignorant of the basic facts about our near future.

    There is a path forward.

    But every day we delay the path forward includes fewer of us. Build community, build resilience, work for food security, think regeneration, plant food producing trees, think perennial food production, turn your waste products into resources, eat food that does not mine the soil and is locally produced, eat meat that is grass fed in a holistic or intensively rotated (ideally holistically grazed in a silvopasture ) that is used to provide nutrients to vegetation, get to know a farmer or become one yourself, park your car, do not vote for anyone who either ignores climate change or says we can have our cake and eat it too, quit your job if it is fossil fuel related (it is better than losing it... which you will), stop buying shit, stop buying expensive cars and overly large houses and then complain that local planet saving food costs more than Costco. Stop buying things that are designed to break and be disposed-of, let go of this society slowly and by your own volition (its better than being forced to do it quickly), Rip up your lawn and plant a garden with perennial veggies, fruit bushes, fruit trees and nut trees. Learn to compost your own poop (it is easy and doesn't stink). Buy an apple with a blemish, Get a smaller house on a bigger lot and regenerate that land, Plant a guerrilla garden on a city road allowance. Return to the multi-generational house, Realize that growth has only been a thing in human civilization for 250 years and it is about to end and make preparations for this change. Teach this to your children. Buy only the necessities, don't buy new clothes-go to the thrift store. Don't use single use plastic or if you do re-purpose it, Unplug your garberator and compost everything, Relearn old forgotten skills. Don't let yourself get away with the argument that the plane is going there anyway when you book a holiday. Understand that there is no such thing as the new normal because next year will be worse, Understand before you make the argument that we need to reduce human population ... meaning the population elsewhere... that it is not overpopulation in China or India that is causing the current problem... It is us and our "western" lifestyle, Understand that those that are currently arguing against refugees and climate change are both increasing the effects of climate change and causing millions on climate refugees... which will be arriving on Canada's doorstep because Canada, due to our size and Northern Latitude, will on the whole have some of the best climate refuges. Understand that the densification of cities is condemning those in that density to a food-less future. Stop tolerating the middle ground on climate change. there is no middle ground on gravity, the earth is round, and we are on the verge of collapse.

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At last check over 15000 shares. Thank you for reading.

    Thanks to Dr. Eric Rignot, Rupert Read , Dr. Jim Anderson, everyone at Berkely Earth those that put keep C02.earth upto date and so many other climate scientists who's work have inspired this piece. Thanks as well to the 16 yr old Gretta Thunburg who gave me the courage to take what was in my head and put it to paper,. I encourage you to dig deep. Listen to talks where scientist are talking to scientists. They are less likely then to use the conservative filters they impose on themselves and you will get to the cutting edge.

    *on a personal note, since I post about my children, I don't accept friend requests from people I haven't met. That said as of today, I have figured out how to enable the "follow" button on my account. I have been blown away by all the fantastic and heartfelt messages and commitments to change I have received due to this post and look forward to reading them.
  • No photo description available.
  • No photo description available.