A.N.U.S.

American Nihilist Underground Society

ANUS.COM: American Nihilist Underground Society (A.N.U.S.) at www.anus.com
RSS feed of ANUS.com opinions and news Mailing list:
Search anus.com:

Nihilism, Futurist Traditionalism and Conservationism

Global warming: saving us from ice ages

17 06 11 - 06:46

Nature loves irony. Not the kind of irony the hipster likes, which is the illogical dressed up as the novel, but irony as in a reversal of fate that becomes a gift:


Three independent studies of the sun's insides, surface, and upper atmosphere all predict that the next solar cycle will be significantly delayed—if it happens at all. Normally, the next cycle would be expected to start roughly around 2020.

The combined data indicate that we may soon be headed into what's known as a grand minimum, a period of unusually low solar activity.

The predicted solar "sleep" is being compared to the last grand minimum on record, which occurred between 1645 and 1715.

Known as the Maunder Minimum, the roughly 70-year period coincided with the coldest spell of the Little Ice Age, when European canals regularly froze solid and Alpine glaciers encroached on mountain villages.

[...]

"With what's happening in current times—we've added considerable amounts of carbon dioxide and methane and other greenhouse gases to the atmosphere," said Pesnell, who wasn't involved in the suite of new sun studies.

"I don't think you'd see the same cooling effects today if the sun went into another Maunder Minimum-type behavior." - National Geographic


So, uh, ...why aren't we hearing more about this in the mainsteam media?

It doesn't fit the narrative, for starters. (The narrative is always: the rich fucked us, even while we overbred past carrying capacity. We're all equal; if anything went wrong, it was the people in charge, not us.)

But also it's too brain staggering for us to think. A great irony -- perhaps.

Even more, we're still afraid to admit that global warming is a symbol, a surrogate. We want one thing that symbolizes all of our mistreatment of the environment.

Of course, we forget to include slash and burn agriculture and overpopulation -- doesn't fit the narrative.

It's not global warming we should fear. That's a paper tiger. What we should fear is OVERPOPULATION which results in LAND OVERUSE which results in species depletion, destruction of natural ecosystems, and interruption of air/water/nutrient supplies.

But that's too much for TV, newspapers, magazines and political candidates.

Better to go talk about carbon caps -- it's just money, after all -- instead.

twenty comments

Anonymous
The climate just during the Holocene was sometimes quite a bit warmer than today.

What did the environment suffer from that? It "suffered" a shift of vegetationzones to the north, and nothing else. I would welcome bananas, but perhaps not baboons here. So approximately 7 degrees celcius should be the goal of the global warming. Anonymous - 17-06-’11 07:30
this asshole
Climate change has replaced religion for those who require blind faith in something to carry on with their lives. The planet is in no danger; it's been through far worse than mere humans. We, on the other hand, could just kill ourselves off in the next several generations. Weak, ineffectual liberals use global warming as projection of their own fear of death onto our planet. Not to say that conservation and clean energy aren't good ideas (because they are), but the scare-mongering and money-grubbing aspects of climate change are rather pitiful, and so many have just bought right into it and think that simply buying the right shit will solve everything. this asshole - 17-06-’11 09:03
Steve
I'm not denying the gist of this article - that overpopulation and land overuse are driving forces behind environmental degradation. However, your statement about swidden (AKA slash-and-burn) agriculture is misinformed. When employed responsibly, i.e. with sufficient fallow time, swidden systems are certainly 'sustainable'. In fact, in tropical areas, swidden is perhaps the only truly sustainable agricultural option available to support human populations (other agroforestry systems are good for producing fruit crops and luxury items but not for staples). The forest regrowth is also often highly diverse with an abundance of edible and medicinally important plants.

The key to swidden's sustainability is management of human populations. Dense human populations lead to excessive forest clearance and a reduction of the fallow period and thus soil degradation. However, all agricultural systems meet a similar fate in the face of human population growth. There is simply no agricultural system that is truly 'sustainable' with the global population levels we are currently trying to support. The intensive agricultural systems which you most likely obtain your food from are probably responsible for far more environmental degradation than the practices of a traditional agriculturist in a tropical area practicing swidden.

"The arguments against the viability of slash-and-burn agriculture as an ecologically sustainable form of crop production have pointed to the degradative effects on soil productivity. These arguments, however, do not take into account the great diversity in slash-and-burn systems. With proper management, swidden soil degradation is minimal. Even if there is a small amount of soil erosion, sediment and nutrients will not necessarily be lost from the agroecosystem because swiddens are relatively small compared with the total area in the fallow rotation system. As a result, soil nutrients, water and other factors limiting crop yields may be captured within the managed agroecosystem. Therefore, sound slash-and-burn agriculture is one of the few truly ecologically sustainable agroecosystems in the world because crop yields can be maintained without inputs of non-renewable fossil energy resources for fertilizers, pesticides and irrigation"

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/16363557/Kleinman%20et%20al.%201995.pdf

Since ANUS is all about finding beauty in darkness, swidden should be fully embraced by the site. Fire in natural and anthropogenic ecosystems is outwardly a destructive force, but underneath this appearance it is the driving force behind many fundamental ecosystem processes. Steve - 17-06-’11 09:38
Dave
this is a stupid idea.

"It's not global warming we should fear. That's a paper tiger. What we should fear is OVERPOPULATION which results in LAND OVERUSE which results in species depletion, destruction of natural ecosystems, and interruption of air/water/nutrient supplies."

You talk about using too much land. When the seas rise five metres thanks to the rich carbon polluters and warming deniers there we will end up with a lot less land.

Oh but thats fine and all because it is only the poor and brown people who will lose their homes and islands. The rich white racist countries have more land space so they can easily pick up with the wealth they made and move if needed. Whos fault is it that the poor will end up drowning in rising seas?

I blame your borders and affluence. Remember that when a billion innocent people drown in the next super tsunami.

Maybe only after the worse has happened you guys will send relief aid and help shelter our poor fellow humans in need whos lives you ruined through no fault of their own. Dave - 17-06-’11 17:05
I care
Thanks for making me feel safer and allowing me to continue being ignorant about my own participation in this destructive culture, Dave! God bless those working-class heroes who will soon die in the demiurge! We will dedicate a MacDonalds to them to keep the TV news ratings high long after people have forgotten about their sacrifice! I care - 17-06-’11 17:36
i love dave
run for congress Dave. make your voice a reality! i love dave - 17-06-’11 18:57
Herp Derpington
Too many humans will result in third world nation conditions all over the world Davey boy. Since it means the mass depletion of nature and no room to put people. The sordid conditions of Africa will be just outside your window when it all breaks down. You won't be worrying much about sea levels then.

Of course this decay is bound to happen, civilization is cyclic and we are in the Age of Kali. You can't rebel against a Cosmic current as much as you want Dave.

Marxists, leftists, liberals, etc. all want bovine conditions for humanity. They think if everyone is middle-class or upper-class then the problems of the world disappear. Yet suicide rates are so much higher in richer countries aren't they Dave? Making everybody middle-class won't result in a new age of evolution for humanity. It'll just bring the mass problems of the middle-class(mainly disillusionment) to everyone. It won't result in everyone being CEOs, and professors, and end things like anal rape.

Though egalitarianism results in some hilarity, now there is no difference between inferior and superior, it's lost it's meaning. All I can do is sit back and laugh as these so-called advanced and wonderful civilization collapses under it's own weight.

I'm gonna ride the tiger Dave, and at the end of all it, I'll still be standing...will you? Herp Derpington - 17-06-’11 20:00
Diversity Fails
When employed responsibly, i.e. with sufficient fallow time, swidden systems are certainly ‘sustainable’.

What kind of brainwashed white nigger wrote this one?

Slash and burn is about moving on to open forest, cutting it down and burning it, then moving on to new land.

When you're talking about fallow land, you're already talking about modern agriculture. Calling slash 'n' burn "swidden" and talking about fallow is just political correctness and has no basis in reality. Diversity Fails (Email ) - 17-06-’11 20:19
Steve
Diversity Fails - please obtain a basic understanding of the topic before you attempt to debate it.

Slash-and-burn is not about "moving on to open forest, cutting it down and burning it, then moving on to new land." Rather, a traditional swidden agriculturist is more or less sedentary, managing several plots (which vary in quantity based on the nutritional demands of the people which he is supporting). At any given time, most of these plots are fallow, typically for a period of 6-20 years. Once the productivity of a cultivated plot begins to decline significantly, intensive management ceases and the plot is left fallow until the soil fertility returns to the baseline levels of the surrounding unmanaged rainforest (of course, whether or not baseline fertility is achieved is based on many factors, i.e. edaphic characteristics and fallow time). The swidden agriculturist has no need to clear more land besides the plots which are already under cultivation or fallow unless there is increased pressure from population growth.

When I'm talking about fallow land, I'm NOT talking about field agriculture. In a swidden system, I'm referring to the period in which these plots are unmanaged (or at least, less intensively managed), and are allowed to regenerate with undomesticated rainforest flora. Fallow and swidden are the terms used to discuss this subject in the scientific literature (which is certainly based in reality). If you had bothered to read beyond three sentences into my reply you would have found a link to a literature review that could have alleviated some of your nescience of the subject.

Now, if you're using slash-and-burn to refer to the modern practice of clearing tropical forest to plant crops such as oil palm, you are discussing an entirely different subject. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe there is any burning involved in this practice, though there is certainly slashing. Regardless, this practice is not described as slash-and-burn, which is a term typically reserved for the traditional subsistence agriculture of rainforest peoples. Historically, Neolithic peoples in Europe also practiced swidden, but to my knowledge this has died out. Steve - 17-06-’11 21:13
Dissonance
Hommies! Check out the Tranceworld Volume 2 mix by Egyptian DJ duo Aly and Fila. Some epic uplifting trance to take your mind to a whole new level! Dissonance - 18-06-’11 01:12
uhhh??
I thought you gave up on anus "dave"? uhhh?? - 18-06-’11 03:05
Slacken OpenAir
You frickin dingdongz...didn't u say "Jesus was cumming"? Slacken OpenAir - 18-06-’11 03:46
Dave
"Too many humans will result in third world nation conditions all over the world Davey boy."

So how many is too many or would you prefer people you are uncomfortable around no longer share our world?

"Since it means the mass depletion of nature and no room to put people."

No room to put people? You can't be serious. Obviously people displace wild nature. A person only takes a few meters out of trillions of available square meters. Last I checked we don't have trillions of people.

This running out of room nonsense sounds like the ignorant pseudomath of typical authoritarian right wingers. Dave - 18-06-’11 21:26
Dave
Dave, why are YOU putting a question mark after a comment? Why do you shoot off accusations of racism but yet offer nothing in the way of a counter argument? Seriously, FUCK OFF. Dave - 18-06-’11 22:13
Diversity Fails
Steve:

http://cnre.vt.edu/lsg/intro/S&B.pdf

Sorry, the whole "swidden" thing is a scam. As most of the world practices slash and burn, and as I've seen it in action, it's the simplest form of farming: destroy an acre of forest, plant it, abandon it, move on.

Everything you've posted is typical leftist revisionist history. Diversity Fails (Email ) - 19-06-’11 05:03
Herp Derpington
"So how many is too many or would you prefer people you are uncomfortable around no longer share our world?"

500 million people is plenty according to thinkers like Pentti Linkola. I am not racist, I don't care if a person is a nigger, kike, wetback, chink, gook, honky, etc. The only people I'm uncomfortable with are those with below average IQs who take and do not give. As well as those who are diseased in character, ignoble, and who only care for personal power and such, or who may be cowardly, overindulgent and with a lack of manners and such. I'm not really interested in killing off Marxists, ultra-capitalists and such but I do not care for them either.

"No room to put people? You can’t be serious. Obviously people displace wild nature. A person only takes a few meters out of trillions of available square meters. Last I checked we don’t have trillions of people."

Look at China which is massively overpopulated, there is little room to put people and other such countries. When we do have to make room for people and progress we end up cutting down massive amounts of forest, tearing up a lot of land, etc. In Nordic countries they have to dig up the ocean floor to put up more land for people. This has a disastrous effect on wildlife and nature. I know you types may worship Stalin, but my reverence is with Nature. Call it Nazi or fascist, but I love nature so much to see it suffer so sickens and saddens me. Humans should be living in harmony with nature, not trying to create some egalitarian technocratic nightmare. After all, this harms us as well as other species since we run out of fresh water, food, etc. There's no denying we already feel some of this now. Overpopulation is bad for nature and even humans. When we cannot grow enough food to feed even rich first-world countries, and cannot provide enough fresh water to drink then we are in trouble. All cause we grew too many humans. And again the effects on nature are awful. You only have to compare before and after pictures to see this. If you can't then you're blind I guess.

"This running out of room nonsense sounds like the ignorant pseudomath of typical authoritarian right wingers."

I'm not a right winger nor am I an authoritarian. And,
This is not pseudomath since I have offered no invalid mathematical proof, you may as well call it pseudophysics or pseudochemistry or pseudoanalrape.

Cheers. Herp Derpington - 19-06-’11 11:45
and the penetration
It definitely lacks the rigor of real analrape. and the penetration (Email ) - 19-06-’11 13:07
Dave
Have you quit being racist yet or not?

"The only people I’m uncomfortable with are those with below average IQs who take and do not give. As well as those who are diseased in character, ignoble, and who only care for personal power and such, or who may be cowardly, overindulgent and with a lack of manners and such."

The problem with right wingers is their disgusting intolerance just because someone is different or holds different values. Dave - 19-06-’11 16:31
Herp Derpington
"Have you quit being racist yet or not?"
Like I said I'm not prejudice against niggers, kikes, gooks, chinks, etc.

"The problem with right wingers is their disgusting intolerance just because someone is different or holds different values."

This seems like an obvious troll, in what way are these "values" not de-evolutionary? Maybe you have your head too far up your ass to understand these things, who knows. Removing humans who espouse these 'values' should be removed from the human stock. And also I'm not really a right-winger. But you probably lack the understanding.

Best regards! Herp Derpington - 19-06-’11 17:17
Herp Derpington
Removing humans who espouse these ‘values’ should be removed from the human stock

Blah I raped the english language there, "Removing humans who espouse these 'values' helps improve the human stock overall and advance our evolution" That's something along the lines of what I wanted to say. Herp Derpington - 19-06-’11 17:19


(optional field)
(optional field)

Remember personal info?
Small print: All html tags except <b> and <i> will be removed from your comment. You can make links by just typing the url or mail-address.