Here is the weather forecast: there will be a World government, soon

We at LSS might not want a world government: we might be quite happy with the State we’re in. But you can’t avoid the inevitable. And the hard data, the ineluctable facts from the weather forecasters, suggest that this inevitable may come sooner rather than later, But before we draw our conclusions: what are these facts?

If we break 1.5⁰C global warming (and all the evidence suggests we shall) the effects will be dramatic. There will be alternating cycles of fires and floods in many countries, and for the first time the trend of ever rising food production will go into reverse. The loss of land, and the beginning of floods in coastal cities will lead to rapidly increasing migration pressures. Many would say that is already happening. But it’s as nothing compared to smashing the 2⁰C limit. At that point, sea levels will rise by 40cm by the end of this century, displacing hundreds of millions and wrecking the pattern of the world economy. The surviving lands, wracked by floods and droughts, will start to lose their capacity to produce food at all . The resulting migration pressures will make todays numbers look negligible. As for 3⁰C? It’s too scary to give the full details. But its got something to do with complete collapse of the seasons, fires in the tundras, and social unrest brought about by massive flows of refugees.

In such circumstances a World Government would form very quickly. Because it would be the only body capable of addressing the multiple threats at a global level; Which is the only level at which they can be tackled. History shows that sudden changes in ecology (usually plagues or climate changes) produce truly massive, paradigmatic changes in politics and society . The ending of the Roman Climatic Optimum meant the end of the Ancient world. All its customs, norms and beliefs were washed away in a new Medieval Europe. Similarly it was the Black Death that nailed the coffin of Feudalism, and an utterly new capitalist world was born. The nation state has served us well for hundreds of years. But then-so did cathode ray TVs, plastic musical records and steam trains. So-do we cling to what we’ve got? Or replace it it in anticipation, saving everybody time in the long run?

Could global warming have been avoided?

Photo by Sebastian Voortman on Pexels.com

Historians of the future (assuming there will be any such) will probably point to the 2020s as the decade when the world began its short unhappy slide into climate catastrophe. The Greek forest fires of 2021; the Californian ones of 2023, combined with floods in Pakistan in the same year that drowned fully one third of that country, were proof, attributable proof ,[1] that human induced climate change had started to wreak incontrollable and irreversible destruction to the fabric of planet’s surface. A fabric that human beings needed to be intact if they were to survive. They will also ask how it was possible that a society with the most advanced techniques of science and communication had allowed itself to arrive at such a point.

Starting in the 1960s, the warnings had been coming, like the steady rise if a beating drum. The Keeling curve and the concerns of the LBJ administration were early examples. In the 1970s even the CIA (hardly a bastion of Green Woke Communism) had got in on the Act. Through the 1980s and 1990s there were conferences, resolutions and rising alarm. All action was undermined, subverted and rendered null by the fossil fuel industry and the petrostates. Whose actions bore such a resemblance to the tobacco industry and its efforts to deny the links of their product to lung cancer.[3] Perhaps the last reasonable chance to act in time was the Kyoto summit of 1997. Which, if its recommendations had been implemented in full, might have avoided the enormous costs, both economic and in lives, of what was unstoppable by 2020.

And that future was to be? As the temperature gradients warmed through 2⁰, 2.5⁰ and 3⁰C , rising sea levels and wildly fluctuating weather conditions caused whole societies to collapse. The resulting waves of refugees were halted, temporarily, on the borders of safer lands, Until those fleeing returned with armies and weapons which could never be stopped; and the last bastions of order fell. Like a smoker dying of cancer, or a boozer from liver failure: humanity as a whole could just not kick its habit.

[1]https://www.worldweatherattribution.org/

[2]https://earth.org/data_visualization/the-keeling-curve-explained/

[3]https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/stories-53640382

#global warming #forest fire #climate change #flood #oil industry #fossil fuel #cancer #tobacco industry #greece #california #pakistan

Climate Change denial: latest round in a long war of deception

First deny there’s a problem. Then do all you can to delay a solution. Buy up politicians, scientists, bloggers, and bots. The tactics of the fossil fuel industry and outriding nations as they seek above all to protect their comfy lifestyles and exorbitant profits. It’s not just made abundantly clear in this report by Damien Carrington in the Guardian: it nails down every last nail to be had into the coffin lid. [1]

But we’ve seen it all before gentle readers. We recall walking down an alley in London in 1971 with a close relative who assured us there was no definite, provable link between smoking and cancer, OK!? (he died of the latter) Why was he able to state this? Because for decades the tobacco industry had managed a huge campaign of deception, obfuscation and general misinformation designed to give him and his peers every excuse they needed to continue their tragic addiction. Using exactly the same techniques now employed by climate change deniers, funnily enough.. The only difference was that they didn’t have the Interweb to turbocharge their propaganda and illusioning. This rather depressing link to the WHO explains the ghastly details to anyone who may want to know more about the fundamentals of human nature [2]

And what are these fundamentals, by the way? We don’t know them all But we can hazard a guess at some, provisional though we may well be

1 Some people will do anything to make some quick cash, Anything at all.

2 Many people will do anything to avoid facing the consequences of the vile little habits which they have acquired in the course of a lifetime of self indulgence and self deception.

3 Just because you are educated and slightly more far seeing than others around you does not give you tactical superiority in the current wars between the intelligent and our enemies They are incredibly cunning and well funded

4 This ain’t over yet. Keep a close eye on rising sea levels, if you want to live

We will be ready with further insights. inspirations and bons motifs in future blogs. Keep reading. And thanks for all the recent sigh ups and likes. Keep ’em coming.

[1]https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/jun/19/climate-misinformation-turning-crisis-into-catastrophe-ipie-report

[2]https://www.who.int/news/item/16-11-2023-new-who-campaign-highlights-tobacco-industry-tactics-to-influence-public-health-policies

#climate change #global warming #ecology #fossil fuels #tobacco #cancer

Do glaciers have political opinions? and some other mystery questions do get you thinking

Instead of all those discourses on things like microbiology or economic history, we thought we’d offer you something a little different today, gentle readers. We’ve decided to come up with one of those puzzle exercises, you know, brain teasers they call them. So here are 11 questions designed to get you thinking, to stretch the old grey matter as t’were. And the good news is: Most of the answers will be available somewhere on the Interweb, or via the websites we have so helpfully posted below.

1 How do you explain the change in the ratio of C₁₃ to C₁₂ in the atmosphere since 1850? Why did this ratio seem have fallen especially quickly after 1950?

2 Since 1750 about 2400 gigatonnes of carbon dioxide have been added to the atmosphere. If this call came from volcanoes, why is the isotopic signature of atmospheric CO₂so different from that from volcanic sources?

3 Do glaciers retreat because they share the political opinions of the Green Party, or is all this melting caused by something else?

4 Why have global surface temperatures increased by 1.2% since the late nineteenth century, but stratospheric temperatures actually fallen?

5 Why is the ocean warming faster than the land? Why would the land warm fastest first if all this were caused by the Sun?

6 Why does spring arrive earlier and earlier in the Northern hemisphere?

7 Do fish conspire with extremists,or have their migrating patterns changed for other reasons?

8 What is causing all these temperature rises anyway?

9 Why is the atmosphere of Venus so hot? And why is the atmosphere of Mars so cold?

10 Do you think rises in sea levels will drive increases in human migration?

11 If scientists are right about cures for cancer, physics, astronomy computers and many other things, why are they suddenly wrong about climate science?

[1]https://royalsociety.org/news-resources/projects/climate-change-evidence-causes/

[2]https://science.nasa.gov/climate-change/evidence/

[3]https://www.climate.gov/news-features/climate-qa/what-evidence-exists-earth-warming-and-humans-are-main-cause

#climate change #global warming #climate science #carbon dioxide #ecology #pollution

Is Carbon Dioxide already killing us? An old blog revisited

About five years ago we published this blog called is Carbon Dioxide the new Passive Smoking?

We already know that rising levels of carbon dioxide from global warming are bad for the planet. They are ruining the climate, causing floods raising sea levels, and making fertile areas uninhabitable. But are they already starting to kill us individually?

Before global warming, the average level of CO₂ in the atmosphere fluctuated around 280 ppm (parts per million). Now it hovers around 410 ppm; by the end of the century it could be around 670 ppm or even higher.

The human body can sustain low levels of CO₂ in the atmosphere-we’ve adapted to it. High levels are normally only a problem for people like building workers, astronauts and captains of nuclear submarines. Research shows that there is no question that the sorts of levels these people can meet will do you serious harm, but most of the work is concentrated around very high CO₂ concentrations at thousands of ppm, with very short exposure times , both for obvious reasons.

But as CO₂ levels rise, what happens to all of us as we breathe in steadily rising levels day in day out, without a break? Especially in places like offices, where it tends to become more concentrated.

Now a paper from Nature Sustainability by Tyler Jacobsen, Jasdeep Kler* and their co-workers looks at this question. Some of their findings are disquieting, to say the least. Firstly chronic CO₂ exposure does seem to have health risks. There’s a long list, but the main stand outs are on cognitive ability, kidney calcification and endothelial dysfunction. Secondly, this is a preliminary paper, as the authors admit. A very great deal of work remains to be done. And that will mean setting up research programmes, signing up scientists and re-budgeting whole departments.

There is a worrying historical parallel. When the first early papers on the effects of cigarette smoking were published, they were largely ignored. Which only gave the danger time to grow. And at least individual smokers were able to mitigate the risk by giving up. But for passive smokers the risk was everywhere. If you lived or worked or socialised with a smoker, you couldn’t help breathing the stuff in. It’s the same with carbon dioxide-there’s no getting away from it

We are aware of the dangers of crying wolf, and of course it’s perfectly possible that this may not be as serious as some of the other problems currently besetting the world. But isn’t it time we researched a little, just to make sure? (LSS 11 2 2020)

Since when very little has changed, Except perhaps that atmospheric levels of CO₂ have almost certainly risen a little. Again, we stress that we don’t know the answer, and are calling for research, not immediate action. But this this blog has a lot more readers now. We include the reference below. Do you know anyone who thinks this ought to be investigated further, by practising scientists or doctors?

Direct Health Risks of Increased Atmospheric CO2

Tyler A Jacobson, Jasdeep Kler, Michael T Herneke Rudolf K Brown, Keith C Meyer and William E Funk

Nature Sustainability Review Article Vol 2 August 2019 pp 691-701

#globalwarming #climatechange #co2levels #health risks #environmental health #passive smoking #health #medicine

Hollywood Fires: Global warming on a screen near you

We confront the endless coverage [1] of the fires raging through Hollywood in California with nothing but profound melancholy. For we had two of our most enjoyable holidays ever in that distant State of America, and many times experienced the kindness and intelligence of enlightened people. The trouble is that they were motoring holidays. We toured around vast areas, heedlessly filling the atmosphere with carbon dioxide and other pollutants, and thereby contributed to the disaster that has befallen these unfortunate people.

And more disaster is to come. Any hopes that this trouble is exceptional and can be put down to an El Niño event, now look forlorn. Read this from Nature Briefings; and click on their link if you dare:

Is Global Warming Speeding Up? Earth shattered heat records in 2023 and 2024, with temperatures rising further than expected on the basis of previous trends and modelling. A mysterious reduction in cloud cover, combined with an El Niño weather pattern, could be responsible for temperature increases in 2023. However, scientists expected temperatures would decrease again in June 2024 when the El Niño subsided, which didn’t happen. Now they are racing to work out whether this sudden spike is just a blip in the climate data, or an early indicator that the planet is heating up at a faster pace than they thought.Nature | 6 min read
Reference: Science paper

Why, and how, are we bringing this catastrophe upon ourselves? One man who seeks to understand is John Vaillant. Fire Weather is his his study of the catastrophic fires that raged for a year in certain regions of northern Canada, regions that had devoted themselves to the extraction of fossil fuels. You can read a review of his work here from Wired [3] But it’s a weary chronicle of greed, short termism, butch manliness and wilful destruction; the substrates in which climate denialism thrives.

However we cannot close without a slightly hopeful thought. Every so often one still comes across, at least in this country, members of the proletariat who ask questions like”this climate chinge fing-der yew fink iss rilly ‘appenin?” Such people, hypnotised as they are by all things American, Celebrity and Hollywood, may now have to confront a reality. Yes, it really is.

[1]https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/c5y81zyp1ext

[2]https://www.wired.com/story/fire-weather-book-canadian-wildfires/

[3]https://www.wired.com/story/fire-weather-book-canadian-wildfires/

#california #hollywood #global warming #fire weather #fossil fuels