Email This Post
Cassandra Inverted
May 6th, 2008Q: What do Cassandra and Al Gore have in common?
A: Nothing.
That poor tart of antiquity (Cassandra, not Al, though he may well be old enough to qualify) knew with certainty what the future held, and nobody believed her. Gore on the other hand has prophesied on his and excited a throbbing mixed mass of the guilt-ridden yuppies, aging hippies, and anyone easily frightened by news anchors with serious facial expressions.
Brian Williams’ scowl has been known to scare small children into wetting themselves. Some adults too.
The cycle has become more predictable than any of the prophesies from the alarmist industry. We can go back to Rachel Carson’s 1962 book Silent Spring where she predicted mass species annihilation due to some pesticides, and as an indirect effect condemned millions of children to die from malaria that could have effectively been controlled with judicial use of the pesticides she caused to be banned. Rachel could be rightly accused of inciting an anti-intellectual riot resulting in manslaughter.
Her process — one of taking some small scientific theory or reality and extrapolating worst-case scenarios — has oft been repeated. A mere six years later Paul Ehrlich’s The Population Bomb claimed that in the 1970s “hundreds of millions of people are going to starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now.” Yet the only wide-spread starvation that occurred where caused by governments creating artificial food shortages as weapons … or in Hollywood where actresses upchucked their excesses.
This parade of false prophets has continued unabated. Some predicted the end of natural resources in the 1970’s and even the end of the human species by the year 2000. Oddly, the only thing that died at the millennial turn were a small piece of my liver, that collided with a dose of Jack Daniels … all night long.
One would think … well maybe not. Perhaps one should think about these serial sages and their apocalyptic predictions, and then think about Al Gore.
Try not to think of him too much as the side effects are unpleasant.
Gore is the modern Malthus, taking premature trends and projecting pandemics and pestilence. Al’s predictions are about as accurate. Often echoing other eco-prophets, Al’s earlier Earth in the Balance book and various speeches claimed we would have no arable soil, no forests, oceans devoid of fish, and no oil.
Funny. I had fish for dinner last night, with a nice salad (grown in soil I assume), and went for a walk afterwards in a redwood grove before filling my tank of my pickup.
I won’t pick on Al anymore (today). But the history of doomsayers is long, going back to ancient Greece and perhaps further. Of their dire predictions, very few have come true. Take what political apocalyptics say with two grains of salt.
Of all the people in the world to pick on, Al Gore seems an unlikely choice.
It seems to me you are quick to criticise, yet short of solutions. (Although promoting guns and advocating war, while pinning your hopes on a dysfunctional, impotent, joke of a political party seems like a nobel effort.)
I think with any arguement, or discussion, there are going to be people who over-state their case (maybe in an effort to stimulate discussion?). It just means that someone else will have to play devil’s advocate in order to balance the view. (I think cynical input is good because I think it compensates for over-zealous idealism and niavity.)
As for climate change, I think it may be a result of both man made and ‘natural’ causes, and it is not worth taking risks by continuing to cut down rainforest and burn oil.
I don’t think Al Gore ever pronounces himself as a prophet, I don’t think he’s ever said that God has told him about climate change, or that he has used supernatural powers. It’s more about looking at science and trying to understand and discuss it.
Personally I don’t believe in prophesy, but i do think the Universe might be similar to a fractal, in that patterns repeat themselves.
Apparently an increase in toxins in a bird’s enviroment, can alter the male bird’s song, for the better.
‘..male birds exposed to this pollution develop more complex songs, which are actually preferred by the females, even though these same males usually show reduced immune function compared to controls.’
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/02/080226213436.htm
It confirms what I always knew - toxins are good for you, in a way.
To be honest, I don’t know of many ‘political apocalyptics’ apart from Gore.
I don’t know how you see the future, whether you think that things will just go on as ‘normal’, ignoring the pace of change we are already experiencing.
If you look at how long it took for life to evolve into bacterias, and then millions of years more to create mammals, and then somehow there was this leap from animal to man, with the ability for some kind of self-reflection in the mind, and then how the pace of change quickened and we developed a complex language to communicate and progress, then very recently we’ve managed to reach the moon, created nuclear weapons, and made all kinds of advances in scientific understanding. And now we have the internet, where we can really connect together as a species.
Don’t you think the rate of change is increasing, and why shouldn’t it continue to do so?
And maybe, just maybe there is another novel leap ahead of us, some unexpected change, maybe we’re reaching a kind of critical level after which who knows what will happen… maybe we’ll all get tired of talking.
I’m mostly interested in this because of synchronisity I experience around these issues - but then as we all know, seeing synchronisity is a sign of madness.
I think you are experiencing some kind of cognitive dissonance with regard to Gore. I mean, you criticise him and at the same time compare him to an angel and genie.
You’ve got to admit his ‘Global Marshall Plan’ seems to make sense?
‘ “In my view, five strategic goals must direct and inform our efforts to save the global environment”:
*stabilizing of world population
*the rapid development of environmentally appropriate technologies
*a comprehensive change in the economic “rules of the road” by which we measure the impact of our decisions on the environment
*negotiation & approval of a new generation of international agreements
*a cooperative plan for educating the world’s citizens about our global environment’
Although I must say I think it is rather presumptuous to talk about ’saving’ the global enviroment.
Also, you seem to be blaming him personally for what you see as the shortfalls of the IPCC. The ‘dire’ predictions about climate change seem to originally come from them and Gore is simply ’spreading the word’.
It would be nice to see a global emphasis on the simple things in life, like food - ie everyone should have some, and it shouldn’t be sprayed with poisens and treated like sh*t.
I’d like to see local organic farm co-operatives, where you could work in return for food and sevices.
‘The evolution of a worldwide body of humanity is very much a step — in fact, the newest step — in Gaian evolution. Like the rest of evolution, it was not planned, but is free to occur and consistent with the overall pattern of the dance.’ - Elisabet sahtouris
http://www.ratical.org/LifeWeb/Erthdnce/chapter16.html
‘…specialists estimate 60 acres of tropical forest are felled worldwide every minute.’
‘More than 20 percent of the world oxygen is produced in the Amazon Rainforest.’
‘More than half of the world’s estimated 10 million species of plants, animals and insects live in the tropical rainforests.’
‘Rainforests once covered 14% of the earth’s land surface; now they cover a mere 6% and experts estimate that the last remaining rainforests could be consumed in less than 40 years.’
‘Experts estimates that we are losing 137 plant, animal and insect species every single day due to rainforest deforestation.’
http://www.rain-tree.com/facts.htm
At least Al Gore seems to have ideas about how to tackle these enviromental problems.
In 40 years time there may be no more rainforest. Animals we all take for granted - tigers, elephants, jaguars, lions, may be found only in captivity.
How am I supposed to explain this to my children?
It seems you are knocking one of the few people who not only cares but is also making an impact.
Once tropical rainforest is gone there is no bringing it back, the trees can be replanted but the ecosystem will never be the same.
It is a kind of ecological apocalypse.
We need radical change now. But considering your conservative leanings, you think it’s ok if we just carry on with ‘business as usual’?
I’m sorry for taking out my angst on you (although your comments about Gore seem to provoke it).
But here’s something to think about while filling our vehicles with fuel.
http://deoxy.org/video?v=bvkQ9tu0jck