To Avert Nuclear War, Convene A Conference To Outlaw Military Use Of Civilian Nuclear Power

OUTLAWING ATTACKS ON NUCLEAR WILL MAKE NUCLEAR ATTACKS LESS LIKELY… From A Mass Psychology Effect…

Nuclear power is crucial as base power for a carbon free future. I explained that keeping fossil fuels as base energy is a trick to keep fossil fuels at 84% of total energy.

Nuclearizing electric power production would have required having four thousand (4,000) nuclear reactors, worldwide… instead of 400. 

Disappointingly, the percentage of electricity that comes from low-carbon sources today is almost unchanged from the mid-1980s. Throughout the early-2000s this low carbon share actually regressed, greatly because of the shutdown of nuclear reactors.. 

Yes, electric consumption is only 20% of total energy consumption… So going nuclear on electric would not have solved all. (We need more such as hydrogen for transportation!)

***

Nuclear can be made very safe, and non-polluting. The only deadly civil nuclear power accident was in Ukraine at Chernobyl, a type of reactor (graphite-gas), power (way too much) and construction without containment, which are all de facto illegal in the West. Yes, Chernobyl should never have been built. (Ukraine has the world’s highest production of electricity from nuclear reactors, a distant second behind France.) 

By comparison, fossil fuels kill around ten million people a year, and probably much more.

The Orcs of Putin have attacked nuclear installations in Ukraine, and transformed them into battlefield. That should be unlawful. It is also a way to inure us to Putin’s military use of nuclear energy… Something he already did by threatening to destroy humanity with nukes if we don’t let him destroy Ukraine.

*** 

Dams were attacked in World War Two, causing great damage and loss of life. Now a worldwide convention outlaws attacks on dams, and it has been, so far, respected in Ukraine, which has several giant dams. Mr. Putin has not suggested that he would destroy dams to get his way.

Trying to outlaw attacks on nuclear installations right away would indirectly heighten a worldwide healthy alarm against Mr. Putin’s nuclear ways. Mr. Putin has weaponized the largest nuclear power plant in Europe, by stationing heavy weapons there. Mr. Putin also implicitly threatened to use nuclear weapons to make his invasion of Ukraine work.

Thus calling for a worldwide conference to outlaw attacks on nuclear installations would make it less likely, from general indignation, and the possible loss of allies that it would entail, that Mr. Putin would dare to use nuclear weapons (as using nukes is generally worse than attacking nuclear installations).

Hence there is an excellent reason to rush an outlawing of nuclear attacks, as Mr. Putin’s effective defeat in Ukraine makes it ever more likely that he will use nukes on the battlefield.

Whereas the three nuclear armed democracies (US, UK, France) have refused to declare they would never ever use nuclear weapons first, they would certainly agree to not attack nuclear installations directly, so they would support such an approach. Nuclear power is an important way to mitigate the CO2 crisis…

Under Putin, the Russian military decided to adopt a doctrine of “escalate to de-escalate”, which includes using battlefield nuclear weapons… First usage of nuclear weapons, or attacks against nuclear installations is not explicitly unlawful. However attacks against dams are. 

The Russian military may detonate a few nukes against concentrations of Ukrainian troops (a good reason to avoid those)… Hoping that the democracies, terrified by nuclear war, would then just submit. Thus NATO should create an appropriate answer, not just hope that Putin will not go crazy (as it is clear Putin is not analyzing the situation clearly, this hope is inappropriate).

Patrice Ayme

Russian Tank camouflaged in front of Zapo nuclear reactors 1, 2, 3 and 4… August 4, 2022. Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant (NPP), which Russian invaders are now threatening to blow up, contains 1,200 tonnes of nuclear fuel. If Russia decides to commit a terrorist attack, the nuclear disaster will affect the territories of both Russia and Ukraine.
…Says Zaporizhzhia Regional Military Administration Head Oleksandr Staruk…

Drole De Guerre: Having A World War, But Ignoring It, As In 1939-40?

After France and Britain declared war to Hitler, on September 3, 1939, they entered a strange phase. France attacked with 40 divisions, took seven German villages… And stopped (had the French army persisted in September 1939, some of its own shortcomings would have been revealed to itself…) 

Britain, of course, had no army: the first British soldier got to France a month later. This phase came to be known as the “Drole De Guerre” (strange sort of funny war) . The world war had started, but the British and French did their best not to notice. The Americans were even worse: the US Congress and US president sanctioned France and Britain as belligerent nations, no doubt instilling in France and Britain the feeling that resisting Hitler was not the right thing to do. 

The end result was that, while Hitler was making frantic plans to attack France with the help of Mussolini and Stalin, both France and Britain let their war production slacken.. With disastrous results: only half of the French air force was ready for action in France when the Nazis finally attacked with their entire army. Not having fought a modern battle at high intensity with the Nazis previously left French and British clueless about some easy to fix remedies, such having radios in tanks… Or knowing the Nazis used amphetamines (so they didn’t need to sleep)… Or just taking the Nazi army seriously, keeping a reserve [1]. 

In 1936, after the Nazis and Italian fascists attacked the Spanish Republic, France decided to intervene, but was overruled by the UK and US. Thus the Nazis got free training, and the democracies didn’t. 

The present situation is not a repetition of what happened in the 1930s. This time the democracies, more than 50 of them, are helping  Ukraine. However, the populations of these democracies are not taking this world war seriously enough, same as in 1939-1940. Putin made very clear he plans to use nukes. It could happen if, say, the Ukrainians free Kherson… Are democracies ready to fight nuclear war? No. But they should be. A number of things can be done, such as mass production of ABM missiles… 

***

Us

@Patrice Ayme

I was with you until the last sentences.  

Putin has indeed threatened to use nuclear weapons.  He is wielding fear of nuclear attack as a weapon.  Besides his invasion of Ukraine, which is an attack on European and world stability, he has threatened to use nuclear weapons.  Yet some people are eager to give in to Putin’s demands, believing that they will get peace in our time, believing that they can somehow manage a dictator who has actually threatened nuclear destruction. 

The world’s nuclear capabilities are very different from previous decades, and more modern anti ballistic missiles may intercept some. Submarines are mobile missile systems worldwide.  Countering hypersonic technology calls for new defense systems. The world democracies need to match new technology, but any nuclear strategy is unthinkable.  It’s not winnable. It’s not survivable.  Putin is evil and dangerous, but he does back down to power.  That’s why Sweden and Finland are choosing to join NATO.

***

@Us Those “last sentences” were an allusion to the “Standard Missiles” (SM3, SM6) which have proven capable of intercepting ICBMs (among other missiles). The SMs are carried on destroyers, cruisers, and there is a ground version being installed on two bases in Europe. Being carried by ships, they provide a mobile defense, including much of Europe, and major US coastal cities.

“Nuclear strategy” may be “unthinkable”… But Putin has it, was loud about it, and clearly incorporated it in his thinking about Ukraine. In particular Putin believes we can’t think about nuclear strategy… so he does the thinking for us… in his own special way. By refusing to incorporate nuclear thinking, we only encourage Putin. Democracies should not talk, but should ramp up production of the most sophisticated missile defenses. 

It’s not a question of nuclear war being “winnable” or not. Putin believes that if he uses nukes, the democracies will submit. This is erroneous. However, by pretending we can’t win a nuclear war, we only encourage Putin to go nuclear. Nuclear war, called “escalate to de-escalate” by the Putin folks, is fully incorporated in the present Russian strategic thinking. We have to do the same, and that will show Russian generals that Putin’s nuclear intimidation strategy can’t work.Meanwhile, we have to militarize the democracies’ economies, ASAP. None of this is fun and progressive, but the alternative is the Gulag run by Putin. 

*** 

Ted Jenkins

Ottawa Canada

@Patrice Ayme It’s true that our response should be more energetic (while avoiding nuclear war). It would have been better for NATO to declare a danger of war and fully-mobilize conventional forces (include plans to introduce conscription and rationing, host an alternative Russian government, fly into Ukrainian air-space, etc). Arrange contacts with the Russian military for a coup. But nuclear war would be a catastrophe.

@Ted Jenkins Putin’s war doctrine is that, because nuclear war is unthinkable, engaging in it will cause democratic thinking to believe it has lost the war. This was Putin’s computation all along. 

Right now, Putin is happy to destroy Ukraine, one explosion at a time: it serves his goal of ethnic cleansing, and enables him to crank up his dictatorship on Russia. But, should he strategically lose control of Crimea, say, Putin will try to use nukes on the battlefield, on Ukrainian troop concentrations. We have to get ready for this. And, by the way, the catastrophe is already upon us: the world’s greatest nuclear weapon power’s government has put itself in a position where it must win, or go nuclear… to win in an unthinkable way…. 

***

A question which should haunt NATO and its allies: why did the French Republic lose the Battle of France of May-June 1940? The French had nearly superior everything… plus the British empire as allies (one New Zealand ace, Edgar “Cobber” Kain, shot 16 Nazi planes down in three weeks). 

The answer is greatly that the Nazis had been at war for nearly three and a half years already, so the Nazi tactics, command and war administration were efficient… Whereas the French and British started to learn how to fight a war… while losing it. 

An example: France and the UK had roughly as large an air force as the Nazis, but they didn’t know how to use it. Ammunition rounds for fighter planes, although produced by the millions a month, barely reached the battlefield. Some aircraft units ran out of ammunition completely. French armies didn’t know how to use French aviation. French fighter planes were only used for ground attack starting June 5, 1940… More than three years after the Nazis had learned to do that in Spain. And so on. When a French reconnaissance aircraft, an Amiot 143 night bomber, saw the traffic jam extending more than 100 kilometers on three small roads, of most of the Nazi army trying to squeeze through the Ardennes mountains, on May 12-13, there were no French bombers to attack them… and the whole thing was so crazy, unthinkable and ludicrous, the French High Command preferred not to think about it.  

Defeat in war is all about the unthinkable happening by surprise.

Wrecked MS.406s and an RAF Bristol Blenheim Mk. I litter a captured French airfield as German soldiers inspect the damage and a Messerschmitt Me-109E comes in for a landing. (©Mary Evans/Sueddeutsche Zeitung)

[1] France and Britain had conducted two landings in northern Norway in 1940, successfully, defeating Nazis, sinking their ships. The French Foreign Legion crushed elite Nazi troops after the second landing, and was poised to cut Sweden in two, as planned (Sweden, in complete contrast with the Norwegian democracy, was an important ally of Hitler, providing him with high grade iron)… But the French army didn’t learn much, as the Norwegian campaign did not involve huge tank formations. France and Britain learned how to make good sea-air-ground disembarkment battles, though, and that turned out to be very useful later… Many times.

Nazis Often Exhibited The Characteristics They Condemned: Not A Coincidence, But Sadomasochism. See Putin.

Intriguingly, many Nazis ressemble more the parodies of “Jews” that they depicted, condemned, rejected and despised… whereas often the “Jews” look like ordinary people. One reason for this is that many Western European Jews had ancestors who converted to Judaism, so their distant ethnic origins were not necessarily exclusively from the Middle East. 

This is true even for superman super Nazi Reinhard Heydrich… and certainly for Nazi photographer Herman Heukels. Dr. Goebbels, Hitler’s fanatical Nazi chief propagandists and successor, who killed  his 6 children, aged 4 to 12 years old… started to hate Jews after he was rejected by a Jewish girl. Goebbels also advocated the assassination of handicapped people… although he himself was so handicapped that the German army refused him for military service… And so on. Nazis seem to have been so full of hatred that they hated even themselves, and thus pretended to not be who they were, or looked like. Hitler asked himself whether the “Jews” were German… And deduced that they were not… Although Hitler was certainly not a German, as he was born and educated as an Austrian… And besides Hitler could not prove that he was not a “Jew” according to the Nazi definition of “Jew”, as one of his paternal grandmother was employed by a wealthy Jew, and got a child of unkown male parentage.

The most famous example of an “Aryan” baby was actually the picture of a… Jewish baby… which throned as the cover of a Nazi propaganda magazine (I have written an essay on this, years ago).

Nazism was then also an adventure in sadomasochism, rejection of reality and self-rejection, not just racial hatred… As seen in today’s war, that invasion of Ukraine officially motivated by claiming Ukrainian nationalists are Nazis…

Obviouly those massively engaging in “Nazi” behavior in Ukraine are those obsessed by Nazism in Ukraine, namely Putin and his orcs.

Sadomasochism is one concept. The sadist extolls pain, giving pain, but then receiving it belongs to the same universe… One doesn’t go without the other…

Patrice Ayme

Reference: Photos That Helped to Document the Holocaust Were Taken by a Nazi

Historians have relied on Herman Heukels’s pictures of Jewish persecution in World War II, but it’s not widely known that the Dutch photographer shot them as Nazi propaganda.

Herman Heukels looked more like the Jewish archetype which he condemned to extinction… than the pictures of Jews he himself took… The latter looked quite often like fully ordinary Europeans… This may be why the Nazis, ultimately did not use the pictures he made…

CLIMATE EMERGENCY: Global Heating Is Accelerating Considerably: Alpine Evidence.

GLOBAL HEATING is accelerating. How can we see this? In the Alps, glaciers are melting at an incredible rate. Just looking out, as I can in the French Alps, it’s clear all glaciers below 3.500 meters will be gone in a matter of years: one can see that their upper slopes, which feed them, are bare. Just look at the accompanying photo.

Now this disappearance of glaciers below 3,500 meters was the pessimistic prophecy of glaciologists for… 2100! It’s happening now! If extended globally, this means a global heating of seven (7) Centigrade…. Way outside of the worst IPCC/GIEC predictions… And it is happening, I repeat… now! 

The obvious plot to underestimate GLOBAL HEATING is increasingly contradicted by the facts:

Glacier du Casset. From where the picture was taken to the top of the mountain in the clouds, 2,200 meters, 1.3 mile. The glacier was going as low as the first pink granite rocks in the valley bottom. It has retreated arounf 1,000 meters in denivellation. More importantly, its feeding slopes are bare, so it will entirely die. The peak of the mountain is higher than the 3,500 meters below which glaciers are supposed to disappear according to glaciologists in… 2100! This would correspond to a retreat of nearly 2,000 meters in denivellation, thus a temperature rise of 14 Centigrades!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The pink snow is caused by deposition of Sahara sand.

“Experts” keep on talking as if a global temperature rise of 1.5C could be held… But France has officially already experienced a two (2) Centigrade rise. So how come France is already at +2C and the rest of the world at +1.3C? France is smack in the temperate zone (45 degree latitude). I would suggest that the French experts on temperature are more honest.

California Sierra Nevada forests are destroyed by heat. Pests and drought rise the heat wave. One has to see the astounding amount of destruction to believe it. Last year I took an hour to cover half a mile on a trail, so many trunks of giant trees being in the way, in confusing entanglements. Sometimes I had to walk on trunks, 20 feet above the ground.  

Meanwhile, in the Western Mediterranean, the sea reached considerably higher levels. In Corsica 30.7 Centigrades (5C above what the temperature used to be). The temperature is so high that several emblematic species of Mediterranean corals are threatened with extinction. As they can’t migrate north, they will forever disappear from life on Earth. In Greenland, temperatures have been 10 Centigrades above “normal”. There is no more “normal”. 

Abnormality is the new normal.

This accelerating pace of global heating is completely outside of the misleading picture that the IPCC gives. It is more than alarming. It looks as if the IPCC, anxious not to displease the established order, is deliberately tweaking the data by underestimating the present global heating..

The IPCC is certainly distorting its models of how temperature will evolve: the models all include Carbon Capture schemes… But those do not exist, except on a small scale, when the CO2 is already in pipes (as is done in Iceland). Carbon Capture at the needed scale will be possible only when we have nearly free energy (say H fusion). Not something happening before 2100…

84% of world primary energy production is from fossil fuels (The rest is mostly hydro and nuclear). That’s not negotiable. It is a fact, and a very hard one. Governments have to ask themselves how they will lower that number. It will not be with electric plugs and batteries. Nor fake carbon accounting a la California, counting as stored carbon, forests which have already burned…. Nor will primary energy become mostly carbon free thanks to a bit of sun, and a bit of wind. 

Patrice Ayme

Keynes Was Wrong

(Lord) Keynes is one of the greatest celebrities in economy. As such, he has been an inspiration of the self-declared “left” (“liberal” in the USA; “New Deal” in the 1930s).

Keynes was involved in three major concepts:

1. That the Versailles Treaty of 1919 was the cause of Nazism (he created it).
2. That government should create useless work (another key idea of Nazism).
3. That the dollar shouldn’t be the world reserve currency (only on this was Keynes right).

***

Keynes advocated wanton government spending. Such stupidity, is the oldest imperial trick of distributing coins to the poor. It demeans the plebs, and helps the established order, and no one else. Unbelievably, the so-called great economist proposed, as a job creation measure, the idea of filling bottles with old bank notes and then burying them, so that people would be employed to dig them up.

“If the Treasury were to fill old bottles with banknotes, bury them at suitable depths in disused coal mines which are then filled up to the surface with town rubbish, and leave it to private enterprise on well-tried principles of laissez-faire to dig the notes up again (the right to do so being obtained, of course, by tendering for leases of the note-bearing territory), there need be no more unemployment and, with the help of the repercussions, the real income of the community, and its capital wealth also, would probably become a good deal greater than it actually is. It would, indeed, be more sensible to build houses and the like; but if there are political and practical difficulties in the way of this, the above would be better than nothing.“

Book 3, Chapter 10, Section 6 pg.129 of Keynes’ “The General Theory..”

This is the exact opposite of the Absolute Worth Energy Economy. Inflation of useless work feeds inflation of the CPI and then RAGFLATION.

***

Keynes was a dedicated racist, who despised, in very explicit writing, Poles and Slaves, extolled Germans, and launched the theory that the Versailles Treaty of 1919 would lead to economic collapse, as Slavs were just good when used as slaves to the Germans (this is all in his “Economic Consequences Of Peace”, a proto “Mein Kampf” rag). The Nazis grabbed Lord Keynes’ outrageously racist theory, and it is repeated to this day by racist idiots to excuse Nazism. Not only this, but the theory of the evil of Versailles is mainstream thinking, and if one doubts it, one is viewed as uneducated or… racist (being racist against Nazis being a great theme Nazis and their followers bemoan…)

***

Krugman, of Jewish descent, was always an admirer of Keynes (not knowing Keynes was one of the master thinkers of Nazism!). So Krugman, a Nobel Laureate was of the persuasion that whatever hare brained stimulus plan Obama or Biden were coming up with, was a good thing. It didn’t come to his mind that money spent on holes, instead of growing the real economy profiting the poor, was a trick to make the wealthiest, wealthier. 

Wrote Krugman on I Was Wrong About Inflation, July 21, 2022:

In early 2021 there was an intense debate among economists about the likely consequences of the American Rescue Plan, the $1.9 trillion package enacted by a new Democratic president and a (barely) Democratic Congress. Some warned that the package would be dangerously inflationary; others were fairly relaxed. I was Team Relaxed. As it turned out, of course, that was a very bad call. 

 

Government spending to do good stuff is always good. Government spending to do stuff that the private sector should do is always bad Example: Biden wanted to spend 3.5 billion on plugs in the desert for wealthy people with ultra expensive electric cars: bad. Instead he should spend the same money on fundamental research on new clean energy which is way too expensive and resource (PhDs) consuming to be funded by private companies or VCs. 

 

Obama, on his day one, cut to zero fundamental government research on hydrogen… Although that’s how the US got to the Moon (by electrical power from fuel cells). However, renewables can’t really work without “green” hydrogen (for storage and to put in planes, etc.). That was a disastrous decision, but Obama owned it. No private company could be accused.

 

A lot of the stimulus packages were the equivalent of making holes to fill the Albert Hall. Keynes thought that was smart. In truth, that was idiotic: work, energy, human genius, are all finite, they can’t be squandered. Squandering government funds is, in the present state of the planet, criminal. 

 

Not to say that governments should not invest in decency. Just watch the giant camps of homeless, the worst in the world, according to the UN, in Oakland, while the governor of California sits on a budget surplus larger than most countries’ GDPs, while so many bus lines have been cut that the poor cannot travel. 

 

Inflating the good is good, inflating gangrene is not. 

***

Keynes was of course complex, as all very intelligent people are. So, although he did not see that filling the Albert Hall with holes would feed inflation (by reducing supply, thus increasing cost of useful activities), he wrote this:

“There is no subtler, no surer means of overturning the existing basis of society than to debauch the currency. The process engages all the hidden forces of economic law on the side of destruction, and does it in a manner which not one man in a million is able to diagnose.“

The Economic Consequences of the Peace by John Maynard Keynes, on Project Gutenberg

This would promptly be implemented in Germany by Dr. H. Schacht… The German central banker who would become one of Hitler’s main sponsor… and was an international creature of JP Morgan…

The present inflation was not created accidentally. It profited mostly to those who wanted free money, and could be expected to reimburse the loans: the wealthiest.

Not a surprise. And even distribution of coins to the poor is the oldest plutocratic trick, used for millennia, making the wealthiest and more powerful look generous, and economically indispensable…

Patrice Ayme

The last explosion of inflation, in the 1970s, was caused bt war (Yom Kippur) followed by Arab oil embargo, which exploded the price of oil. Now, at least in absolute terma, the world is much more dependent on fossil fuels: world consumption is close to 100 million barrels… a day… Good job, Kremlin paid “ecologists”!

Generalize (“Cartesian”) Doubt To Emotions

There is a difference between seeing something and integrating it in a system of thought… the latter being called understanding.

People can see corruption, inequality, fanaticism, fascism and many other noxious features, but still not understand them, and thus can’t project them into the future (and their inacceptable, disastrous consequences). 

Many individuals in Muscovy, China democracies, the “West” have become very powerful, and, or,wealthy while supposedly serving the people or engaging in publicly financed or arranged endeavors… say from a tax code which engages in discrimination favoring the wealthy. 

Mental inertia is a major problem… if one wants to stick to reality, as science, knowledge, perception and sensibilities, let alone problems and catastrophes, progress. 

If one wants to decrease mental inertia, one has to realize that few facts are left free-floating in one’s mind: they would be too hard to remember. The mind remembers logically, to a great extent, so facts have to be logically integrated. Facts tend to get integrated in a system of thought. They acquire meaning, moods and emotions connected to them. And the dominant systems of thought tend to integrate free floating facts.

 

For example the Catholic hierarchy decided that the Moon couldn’t be a physical object, because, if it were, the question of who lived there, and thus the problem of the non-unicity of the Lord’s creation, couldn’t be far behind. Islam followed obsequiously, as the Moon became a direct signal from God. Thus astronomers and the theory that the Earth orbited the Sun and the Moon, the Earth, were considered to be heresy during the Middle Ages. Astronomy got discouraged.

When looking at any fact or idea, and emotion or mood, we have to ask: where did it come from? 

Descartes recommended doubting everything at some point. That Cartesian doubt has to be extended to emotions. This logico-emotional systematic doubt has to be fostered, not just to become smarter, but also to become more ethical, or ethical enough for civilization to survive….

Patrice Ayme

***

P/S: This is an extended version of a comment kindly published in the NYT by David Brooks. I may add a tech addendum on Descartes, his “error”, etc.

I emote, therefore I am, says Hautes Alpes 2022 denizen

Limits to Growth

Limits to erroneous growth have been reached, and broken straight through.
We are above 600ppm of CO2 equivalent manmade GreenHouse Gasses (GHG). Two-thirds of the thermodynamics forcing which heats up the lower atmosphere through infrared confinement (“global warming”) is caused by CO2… one third is caused by other man-made GHG gasses.

We have more than doubled the GHG “forcing” (from 280 ppm of CO2 to 600+ ppm of GHG). At such GHG ppm, the melting of the poles is guaranteed. Ultimately a 70+ meters sea level rise. This is never said enough..

The answer is more growth, but the right growth. Growth of intelligence.

For example, the present “renewable” push is rather dumb: lots of wind, smoke and mirrors. It is an OK form of growth, but it is insufficient: nuclear, thorium, hydrogen, fusion and fundamental research have to be pushed incredibly more. Instead Biden wanted to spend 3.5 billion dollars on electric plugs for the wealthy… Of the money which should go to fundamental energy research (he had promised 10 billions, now it’s down to peanuts… So much for being a “progressive”)

All the more as most countries will refuse to be bound by the limits to growth.

So what will happen when nobody feel limited by limits, and crash through them? War. The invasion of Ukraine is the first blatant case, it’s motivated by Ukraine having sun, water, soil, a natural huge breadbasket. But more wars will come, and quickly. Brazil’s president, an ex-MP and army captain, told the military to expect a war with… France… about the Amazon. As France is helping Brazil build its first nuclear sub, we can see contradictions galore are all over…

To limit the growth of war, the leading democracies will have to keep a technological edge over the rest… As science and tech progress is where the solution lies… War will bring a resolution to the problems which caused it. Tech will vanquish those limits, by making them irrelevant…

Denali: 5 kilometers of ice going up in the sky… Enjoy while it lasts…. This is shot from the only road in the National Park. The area is full of grizzlies which can be observed in plain sight, roaming to the point getting out of a vehicle is forbidden… My astute dad went to fish as close to this place as it could, as nobody else was clever enough to realize that there would be plenty of fish where fishers could be devored. While we got back to the car, an enormous grizzly showed up, nose in the air, irresistibly attracted by trout smell…

Patrice Ayme

ianmillerblog

A little over fifty years ago, the Systems Dynamics group at MIT produced a 200-page book called The Limits to Growth. Their message was, continued economic and population growth would deplete Earth’s resources and lead to global economic collapse by 2070. At the time, this was considered heresy. The journal Nature was scathing (See vol 236, pp 47 – 49, 1972). How could the foundations of industrial civilization, such as coal mining, steel-making, oil production, crop spraying, cause lasting damage? It was accepted that such industries caused pollution, but such effects were considered to be only temporary. At the time computer modelling was looked down upon. This is understandable; at the time computers were quite primitive compared with now, and big computers were only available to the major organizations. I recall four years before that someone doing a chemical bond calculation and coming back from the computer with what…

View original post 633 more words

Ecologically Fake, Plutocratically Correct

The present “ecological” policies of the West were made to fail. It was all a deep and subtle plot. Powers that be, dictators and financiers all tied in to fossil fuels, conspiredt to invest trillions in “renewables”… knowing full well that this couldn’t work as advertized. Intermittent renewables, absent nuclear and hydro, need fossil fuels as base power. This is why pseudo-“super green” California closed nuclear and is dismantling dams (which can be used as batteries for renewables). The present CA governor, who poses as an ecologist, emanates from the Getty Oil…

 

Official, admired “ecologists” were paid by the Kremlin dictatorship, for decades. The greatest revenue and source of military power of the Kremlin is also fossil fuels. Watch German ecologists, presently the government in Germany, close three perfectly safe, functional and fueled nuclear power plants in Germany. The “Greens” will replace those reactors with coal plants. 

 

So vicious are these pseudo-ecologists and Kremlin servants that they prefer to dispose of unused nuclear fuel, at great cost, ecological and financial… rather than letting that nuclear fuel be used in plants, making energy. It is as if they seeked the opportunity to make more CO2…. and help nuclear dictator Putin make more money to purchase electronics on the black market, to equip his rockets, and kill Ukrainian civilians.

 

Those devious plots are increasing considerably the production of CO2, now well above 50 gigatons per year. Thus they make the CO2 catastrophe worse, and thus foster wars, the first of which is the invasion of Ukraine, which is motivated by the fact that well irrigated Ukraine will stay a world sized breadbasket while other countries roast. Recently, Ukraine was providing enough grain to feed 400 million people. It could produce even more.

 

The CO2 catastrophe, wars and an enormous, stealthy yet indispensable fossil fuels infrastructure thanks to the  “renewables” trick will make the powers that be ever more powerful.  

 

As it is, after spending trillions which should have been spent on hydrogen and nuclear instead of sun and wind, “renewables” are less than 4% of the world primary energy production, and all they did was to make advanced countries more fossil fuels dependent: nuclear energy production has gone down 10% in the US, and much more in Europe, as enormous subsidies went to sun, wind and blah blah blah tricks to transfer more money to the wealthiest through “carbon” exchange tricks.

 

Not only do conspiracies drive history, but they are enacted through plots… Helped by disinformation and myths…Nothing new here. What’s new is nukes, CO2 levels not seen since before the dawn of humanity, the sixth extinction, and the various forms of pollution driving it…

Patrice Ayme

Let there be wind, say corrupt ecologists paid by Kremlin dictators and other tyrants.

On The Moral Necessity Of The Aggressive Method. Earth Against Apes.

“All it takes for evil to triumph is for good people to do nothing”

(Paraphrasing a well known expression of reality.)

Why? Bad people -evil- or individuals behaving diabolically are guaranteed: indeed not just are there zillions of ways to be bad, and they are hard to avoid… But there is a most fundamental psychological reason for evil:

Evil generates conflict, and conflict masters the human condition. Si vis bellum, para pacem. War generates neurological peace.

You will ask me: why don’t we humans want harmony instead? Because harmony brings the mental space for the contemplation of one’s human condition, that is of human’s desperately ominous fate. Harmony brings thus, neurologically speaking… nothing. Neurological peace is nihilism. Only the most debasing subjugation justifies it neurologically.

Neurology is made to be active: fight or flight is its friend, so is building, achieving, and, overall, strongly emoting. And not just that: neurology is made to handle complication, and, overall, debate, which means beat thoroughly.

Hence the seduction of mayhem, even when it makes no apparent sense, because that other, deeper, sense, filling up a metaphysical void, is always there. 

All this mayhem makes Putin a friend of nerves, indeed… Too much of a good thing in this case, of course. Russian gas has been cut off in France weeks ago. France is perfectly OK, didn’t even notice. The current account of Russia, from a deluge of oil, is catastrophically positive. The world war against the demented nuclear tyrant has to be won. All this is known. Repeating faithfully the insanities of Putin makes one a criminally insane fascist. All such matters are good neurological stuff, excellent material to forget that life ia scream told by an idiot, signifying nothing… Something that neurology knows is false, or it won’t exist…

A dominant way of achieving evil is through studied nonchalance, politeness galore. Politeness is what made the polis possible, except now old fashion politeness is killing the polis.

***

So here I was, confronting a number of authoritative types, elected to various functions and owners of this, that and the other thing, who had concocted in combination with landscape architects, arborists, board members, and official government organization (French ONF, Office National des Forets) and the like, a plan to cut more than 60% of the trees in a park, some of them 100 feet tall. All the reasons they gave are bogus. My preferred one was that, if one did not cut some of the trees now, they may die in ten or twenty years.

Unfortunately for these learned powers, I have used this park for decades, often writing below the trees. And so did my dying mom. A number of individuals, very much in opposition to the project, tried many things to block it, and then sued (I am part of the lawsuit). At a party, though, I had the occasion to meet with some of the proponent of the project, who head some board(s), acted important, and hid their cut-60%-of-trees determination behind nebulous considerations about the elective process.

My position: those who cut large trees without extremely good reasons are criminals, and nebulous hypocrisy or authoritative mines are no refuge. I duly expressed very loudly my decisive position, adding that the governmental ONF was corrupt (it makes money and power from cutting trees).

***

Many participants were outraged by my outrage… But, this is the sixth extinction. And the invasion of Ukraine is part of it (Putin wants to grab one of the world’s wealthiest agricultural regions).  

Truth and reality is what will save us, as determined through debates. If authorities can’t dominate a debate and all they do is to use the Führerprinzip (we the authorities rule absolutely), they should be, at least, attacked verbally.

***

Long ago, I knew a very high level (C suite) executive of a major oil company (Total). A major real estate development was going to happen next to his birthplace, in the Calanques (seeadjoined picture). He used his considerable technical knowledge, and James Bond like personality, to physically sabotage the project, causing millions of dollars of destruction to enemy machinery. The project was abandoned as a result, and the area is now part of the National Park of Calanques… This was long ago, passed all legal delays, and my friend died (violently, for principle in an unrelated matter as he refused unethical orders). 

***

Eco-terrorism is sometimes terrorization of eco-criminals and that’s terror, as deserved and ethically required.

We, and our planet, are past the time of niceties. Or even the time of blahblahblah, as Greta Thunberg pointed out…

Most of the leaders of the planet exude stupidity, arrogance, mediocrity and astronomic vileness. Those infamous inclinations are not just their motivation, but their propellant. The very way according to which leadership is established, that is the present leadership by greedy, haughty apes, instead of a leadership by strong debates and creative ideas is what is bringing disaster.

Respect for said leaders and how they got selected (by the powers that be, mustering elections) is what ciments the process. 

Aggressively denouncing that violence, or aggressively counterattacking it, is the only way to get out of it. 

Far from calling for stoicism, the insufferable, when there is still hope, doesn’t call for the other cheek, but for stabbing through the heart, as John Snow does to his lover and queen, who “always will be his queen”, the beautiful and heroic warrior queen in Games Of Thrones, Mother of Dragons, after she says, all mesmerized by her own power:”they don’t get to choose”… Speaking of everybody else.

John Snow was doing the aggressive thing, the most aggressive thing, as advised by his closest counselors, and flowing down from his two sisters… And he did it in a fully timely manner. We are all victim of our beautiful queen, this so-called “democratic” system, which doesn’t work: it fed Putin, and this year the emissions of Greenhouse Gasses will probably be the highest, ever (so much for the ridiculous Paris Accord). 

There is still hope for saving the biosphere. But there is no hope for the present world political system. We must act accordingly. 

Saving all big trees from destruction should be one of the tenets of the new religion we need to rest our ethical system upon [1]… That and another few hundred ecological commands.

And we should call them commandments, as the old religions had it.

As it is, our self-congratulating leaders are just apes. We, and the planet, deserve better. We deserve debate… ethymologically the most aggressive thing, neurologically speaking….

Patrice Ayme

What my friend saved through eco-sabotage.

[1] In its biased and soporifically soothing climate projections, the UN climate panel (GIEC in French; IPCC, International Panel of Climate Experts) always stuffs in a mysterious, and misleading carbon capture mechanism. In truth, that man-made carbon capture does not, and will not exist (before we get free energy, say from fusion, freeze the CO2 out of the air, and inject it in basalt). The only carbon capture mechanism we have is forests made of large trees (besides plankton in the sea, and deep ocean currents, for now). Big trees are not enough per se, but they will certainly mitigate… even before using genetic engineering to grow fast really enormous trees… which is one modest solution I would propose….

Great Leader Obama Teaches Ambitious Killers Like Himself To “Lead” Us All The Way To Hell

Obama has founded a school of “leaders”.

“The program will build lasting relationships among emerging leaders who are committed to working together to solve the most pressing challenges of our time, thereby creating a global network that reaches across issues and borders. After completing the program, Obama Foundation Scholars will:

• Return to work on their global issue of focus and implement their personalized action plan to accelerate positive change within their community. 
•  Have an opportunity to play a role in the Obama Foundation’s efforts to inspire, empower, and connect rising leaders from around the globe.

You can get to know our previous classes of Obama Foundation Scholars”

Obama went on a vacation to the Netherlands, all expenses and CO2 paid, to select European “Obama Leaders”.

Yes, modestly, Obama calls those future servants of the established order, “Obama Leaders”.

The idea is apparently that Obama knows how to “lead” (… so as to please the powers that be, and “navigate” better). So Obama can teach that leadership quality that he has. 

Where did Obama, the great leader, lead us to? Did he lead us to Putin v2.0?

Well, he led Putin into Crimea, that was the famous “reset” with Putin which Hilarious Clinton presented to war criminal Lavrov. Obama, the great leader, in a famous hot mike leak had instructed, as the great leader he is, Medvedev, the Putin understudy, to “tell Vladimir he would have more freedom after the elections” That freedom was to send Meal Ready To Eat to Ukraine, when Ukraine was invaded by Putin in 2014…

Here the comparison with Trump and Biden is clear: Trump and Biden sent very effective weapons to Ukraine.. Instead Obama, great leader he is, sent a few meals.

***

Another Obama great leadership, most profitable, was Obamacare, which boosted profits of the private healthcare industry… and the salaries of non-profit healthcare administrators… Ever since US life expectancy has collapsed, by making healthcare even more impossible to more US citizens. As intended, very officially.

Obama also led in the usage of drones to kill innocent civilians and children in countries the US was not at war with… No doubt very instructive, and inspirational to Mr, Putin… Especially because Mr. Obama was widely, not to say wildly, admired for it… Everybody knew about Obama considering carefully, with his fake deep thought frown on his face, whether that wedding in Yemen with 200 people, would be blown to smithereens, or not, and then deciding in the affirmative.

The slide detailing the kill chain indicates that while Great Leader Obama approved each target, the Great Leader did not approve each individual strike, although news accounts have previously reported that the president personally “signed off” on strikes outside of Afghanistan or Pakistan. However, the slide does appear to be consistent with Obama’s comment in 2012 that “ultimately I’m responsible for the process.”

In October 2011, a 16-year-old U.S. citizen named Abdulrahman Awlaki, the son of Anwar al Awlaki, died in an Obama strike while eating dinner with his cousins, two weeks after his father was killed by a CIA drone. Other children were also killed in that strike. Leadership leading to hell, indeed…

Yes, war is hell… But this was not war… It was Obama leading in his own special way. The way he wants to teach.

Obama’s Leader Principle is not fundamentally different from that of Hitler, with the same exact name. Hitler was obsessed with “leaders”, just as Obama.

Democracy, however, has no leader, As a principle.

Modern tech has made leaders more dangerous than ever, and unsustainably dangerous. Obama’s first name basis friend, Vladimir Putin, the one Obama encouraged, is a perfect illustration of that.

Patrice Ayme

 

Obama Led The Kill Chain