Doesn't this feel like Mother Nature getting even...?

[Txim_Asawl]

After the incident at the Great Barrier Reef with the Shen Neng 1 (and other ships almost hitting the reef) or the disclosure of the "Collateral Murder" videos, the occurance of what the news call natural disasters seems more than just a coincidence or unfortunate calamity.

The giant plume of volcanic ash over Iceland, which now travels to the south-east, incapacitating air traffic over northern and parts of central Europe, seems like a large smoke signal by Mother Nature Herself, telling us that She does indeed watch and care...

Just as Neytiri yelled "Eywa has heard you!!!", when Pandoran nature decided to attack the oppressors, this has a feeling of an answer to someone's prayers to our own Mother Earth.

Oh, and before someone claims the most recent earthquake in China being the punishment for the Shen Neng 1 incident - I wouldn't do that, since the victims of that mishap are innocent of that and most likely didn't even know what was happening down under, due to their government's information control (to put it euphemistically). That'd be just a too grim and macabre connection to make, really.

Wiggling bare toes,

~*Txim Asawl*~

[Grif]

I'd love to think that this is revenge maintaing the balance, but I can't.

[Neytiri]

The Iceland volcano - yes... the increasing number of earthquakes, no...according to the US Geological Survey website there are no more major earthquakes this year than any other year, it's just that the media I think is reporting on more of them to play mind games with us, what with 2012 coming and all...

But, yes the ash from the volcano stopping air traffic... definitely good revenge... :)

[HufweMakto]

Don't know about that, but it seems like there have a lot of strong earthquakes this year. And then this volcano. I now hear that Katla, another volcano close to the one that's now erupting (and I can't spell or pronouce correctly) might also erupt, because those two usually erupt at or around the same time.

[Dan'Tsuay]

I like how the Volcanic ash has grounded a large majority of airspace in Europe, as if nature is showing its dislike of commercial airline transport.

[joeylovesgaia]

Uh, I don't see the connection between air traffic and the Shen Neng, except that they are both transportation, and both destructive. Well, as I said before, volcanic ash reflects sunlight, so maybe the Earth is putting on a sunshade? The Physical Social and Economic Effects of Climate Change by Volcanic Activity (http://www.maths.tcd.ie/~will/effects1.html)

[Aihwa]

Well if it is, Mother nature has a sick set of priorities. Iceland is one of the "greenest" nations energy wise. Almost all their power is generated through renewable means.

[Imperius Dictatio]

Heres what I find funny.

That eruption has pumped more greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere then humans have since the Industrial Revolution.

And to be frank those of you who are taking any sort of perverse revenge pleasure from this ought to ashamed. If this eruption is anything like Lake Laki (Also Iceland.) We could be seeing a major disaster and loss of human life. And if the worst case scenario happens and this thing wakes up Katla then were all in deep ****.

[Devourment]

It's not going to be nature, it's going to be a virus. It's going to kill all of us.

[Imperius Dictatio]

Doubtful.
No virus has the sort of kill rate needed to wipe out all human life.

[Devourment]

Doubtful.
No virus has the sort of kill rate needed to wipe out all human life.

It's only a matter of time before a super strain developes that is completely resistant to all of our drugs.

Then it's game over.

[joeylovesgaia]

That eruption has pumped more greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere then humans have since the Industrial Revolution.

Wrong. Humans emit 150 times as much as volcanoes: Global Warming FAQ - What is Causing the Increased Warmth? (http://www.brighton73.freeserve.co.uk/gw/causes.htm#volcanoes)

If that's too technical for you, try this: Volcanoes and Greenhouse Gases - Do Volcanoes Generate More Greenhouse Gas Than Humans? (http://environment.about.com/od/greenhouseeffect/a/volcano-gas.htm)

[joeylovesgaia]

It's only a matter of time before a super strain developes that is completely resistant to all of our drugs.

Then it's game over.

IMHO, germs are the least of our worries.

[Txim_Asawl]

Well if it is, Mother nature has a sick set of priorities. Iceland is one of the "greenest" nations energy wise. Almost all their power is generated through renewable means.

And since Iceland is situated on one of Earth's "hot spots", almost all of that power is obtained geothermally. Iceland also has a very spiritual culture, with the people believing that they share the land with elves and faeries - they even have a governmental representative for faerie matters... that led in the past e.g. to changing the route of a planed road around large rocks, which are believed to be inhabited by faerie folk.
And some Icelanders look very much like having partly faerie ancestors.

Come to think of it, it could have been the elves of Iceland prompting the eruption... and speaking of possible faerie lineage - does anyone know where Björk was or what she did before the volcano erupted? Maybe she was communing with her kin.

:nlol:

Wiggling bare toes, a little mischievously,

~*Txim Asawl*~

[Imperius Dictatio]

It's only a matter of time before a super strain developes that is completely resistant to all of our drugs.

Then it's game over.

Not even a Superbug would have a 100% Kill rate.

Not even the Ebola virus the most lethal and virulent strain of viruses known to mankind has the kind of kill rate needed to wipe out all human life. (Marburg and Zaire strains generally have a 90% Fatality rate.)

Edit: Iceland is Nordic. Therefore they have a Nordic Culture and background. I highly doubt that they have any legends regarding Celtic Faeries. And further the creatures known as Fae in myth and legend were dark, broody and sometimes evil (At worst. At best they were selfish,mischeavious or didnt really care much for humans.) creatures and beings beyond normal human understanding.

[josie20]

It's not going to be nature, it's going to be a virus. It's going to kill all of us.

I've got my money on the sun going supernova, and a-lot sooner than we all think. But, no one can know the future.

[Imperius Dictatio]

Okay.....Thats just insane. Do you have any concept on how a stars life cycle progresses? Our sun doesnt have near enough mass to go supernova . It'll turn into a Red Giant in 4-5 billion years and eventually turn into a nebula whilst the core of the sun will be reduced to a white dwarf.

[josie20]

Okay.....Thats just insane. Do you have any concept on how a stars life cycle progresses? Our sun doesnt have near enough mass to go supernova . It'll turn into a Red Giant in 4-5 billion years and eventually turn into a nebula whilst the core of the sun will be reduced to a white dwarf.

Ha ha ha! Yes I do. I was just repeating what I read on some conspiracy website. I just thought it was funny, that's all. Sorry, I didn't realize this was a super serious discussion.

[Imperius Dictatio]

The devil is in the details.

Regardless. those that think this volcanoe is 'just' revenge is foolhardy in this assumption. This can possibly lead to Katla waking up and that eruption would lead to even more problems.

And also once again there is no disease/virus/plague that could ever kill off all of mankind. It's frankly impossible.

[Txim_Asawl]

The devil is in the details.

Regardless. those that think this volcanoe is 'just' revenge is foolhardy in this assumption. This can possibly lead to Katla waking up and that eruption would lead to even more problems.


I got the thought of Mother Nature getting even mainly from the impeccable timing of this eruption shortly after the Shen Neng 1 incident was over... and thinking that some sort of "punishment" against the high-tech human race as a whole for committing violence against nature is in order is not my thought alone.

All recent problems for modern transportation infrastructure aside, there's even beauty in the dangerous and disastrous side of Nature:

http://www.avatar-forums.com/images/imported/2010/04/746.jpg

(Picture from More from Eyjafjallajokull - The Big Picture - Boston.com (http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2010/04/more_from_eyjafjallajokull.html) )

Wiggling toes, awestruck at that sight,

~*Txim Asawl*~

[madman]

We will all be killed by alien invaders. Just you wait

[Imperius Dictatio]

1. Coincidence nothing more. And your foolhardy beliefs and the wanting to see your own species suffer is morally repugnant.
2. Your obviously not getting that it's Thor fighting an Ash Demon. No one attacks the domain of the Thunder god. Also ignoring the possible metal album cover jokes that are covering the internet in awesome. Subverting this to express views on NATURE is silly when it can be better suited trying to think of awesome Metal Sounding Album covers to go along with this picture.

[Aihwa]

I've got my money on the sun going supernova, and a-lot sooner than we all think. But, no one can know the future.



No, our sun will never nova. Trust me on this one. Within a few millenia, its going to grow into a red giant and cook the earth, but it will not nova.

[madman]

No, our sun will never nova. Trust me on this one. Within a few millenia, its going to grow into a red giant and cook the earth, but it will not nova.

Eventually it will gobble up our solar system before it dies

[Aihwa]

Eventually it will gobble up our solar system before it dies



Nope, that's a myth as well. Its expansion will move the "habitable zone" that the earth currently inhabits, out a few million kilometers, however it wont literally swallow up the earth. Then it will contract again in a few more millennial, blah blah blah life cycle of a star then repeats.

[Tsyal Makto]

Nope, that's a myth as well. Its expansion will move the "habitable zone" that the earth currently inhabits, out a few million kilometers, however it wont literally swallow up the earth. Then it will contract again in a few more millennial, blah blah blah life cycle of a star then repeats.

That will be interesting, because that means moons like Titan or Europa could develop complex life.:nsmile:

And no, it won't contract. It will form a nebula, and the star-stuff (Carl Sagan FTW:ntongue:) will go into forming new stars.

The outer planets won't be "gobbled" per se, but the thermal pulsations that the sun will let off as it forms a nebula will cook them.

[josie20]

Nope, that's a myth as well. Its expansion will move the "habitable zone" that the earth currently inhabits, out a few million kilometers, however it wont literally swallow up the earth. Then it will contract again in a few more millennial, blah blah blah life cycle of a star then repeats.


That will be interesting, because that means moons like Titan or Europa could develop complex life.:nsmile:

And no, it won't contract. It will form a nebula, and the star-stuff (Carl Sagan FTW:ntongue:) will go into forming new stars.

The outer planets won't be "gobbled" per se, but the thermal pulsations that the sun will let off as it forms a nebula will cook them. Oél ngáti kámeie.:nsmile:

Do you folks have any links where I could read about this stuff? I find this type of information very fascinating! Thanks :)

[Tirea Nantang]

yay go Eywa

[josie20]

And also once again there is no disease/virus/plague that could ever kill off all of mankind. It's frankly impossible.

As a whole, I honestly believe that's the least of our worries.

[Imperius Dictatio]

No, our sun will never nova. Trust me on this one. Within a few millenia, its going to grow into a red giant and cook the earth, but it will not nova.

*Headdesk*
A step in the right direction at least.

Right. There is a differnce between a few thousand years. (Mellenia is 1000 years.) The time it takes the sun to go red giant will be around five to six BILLION years.


Nope, that's a myth as well. Its expansion will move the "habitable zone" that the earth currently inhabits, out a few million kilometers, however it wont literally swallow up the earth. Then it will contract again in a few more millennial, blah blah blah life cycle of a star then repeats.

No. It doesnt repeat. Once it's outer layers turn into ever expanding clouds of plasma that scours everything in the solar system and turns it into a nebula thats it. The Sun turns into a white dwarf and burns for a few billion years before getting snuffed out.


That will be interesting, because that means moons like Titan or Europa could develop complex life.:nsmile:

And no, it won't contract. It will form a nebula, and the star-stuff (Carl Sagan FTW:ntongue:) will go into forming new stars.

The outer planets won't be "gobbled" per se, but the thermal pulsations that the sun will let off as it forms a nebula will cook them.

No there would be no new formation as a nebula from a dying star wouldnt have enough materials to jumpstart a new star formation.

[AuroraGlacialis]

Ok, the stuff posted here about the sun expanding is 90% nonsense, sorry. I.D. is right - billions of years, not millennia and it will be the end of the solar system, as no sun - no light - eternal darkness. Look this up in any astronomy 101 book.
But I.D., you are also very wrong on other accounts, like the amount of greenhouse gasses from that single volcano - humans contribute much much more, as already has been posted.
I personally do also think it is coincidence (as stuff like the ship disaster happens all the time and no "revenge" follows). But I still find it is a good thing, as it shows people how unstable and weak technology can be. Interestingly, in Germany where I live the majority of regular people seem to think of the air traffic fail as something positive. At least to serve as a warning to be prepared to something like this in the future. Economists and Businesspeople as well as tourists on their way into holidays differ of course ;)
To see it as a response of "Gaia" to some other event would be taking it too far though ;)

[HufweMakto]

All recent problems for modern transportation infrastructure aside, there's even beauty in the dangerous and disastrous side of Nature:

http://www.avatar-forums.com/images/imported/2010/04/746.jpg

(Picture from More from Eyjafjallajokull - The Big Picture - Boston.com (http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2010/04/more_from_eyjafjallajokull.html) )

Wiggling toes, awestruck at that sight,

~*Txim Asawl*~

Sweet picture, that is just amazing. Now I feel a need to draw something like that.

[Txim_Asawl]

It seems that the joke I made about this being a possible revenge is now backfiring on me... I received a mail from Amazon, that they shipped out my pre-ordered copy of Avatar last Wednesday, but so far it hasn't arrived. It seems that the volcanic ash plume has wreaked havoc on allmost all transportation and delivery infrastructure, thereby also delaying German mail and DHL deliveries... silly me.

And, please, let me make sure and repeat: I was grinning hugely when writing my original post - it was meant to be humourous due to the impeccable timing of the two events occuring.

Wiggling bare toes, with a week of barefoot freedom slowly ending...
(see My barefoot diary - the 21st century (http://www.barefoot-spring.net/barefoot/diary3.html) for details)

~*Txim Asawl*~

P.S.: I just love it when people don't use encryption on the WiFi access points... nothing beats sitting in a street café, wiggling bare toes in the spring sun and posting on one of my favourite forums.

[joeylovesgaia]

Yeah, sorry. Sometimes I fail to get jokes.

[Imperius Dictatio]

Snip.

I wouldnt go calling technology weak or unstable. If Technology were either we wouldnt use it. Of course when you go and compare it to cataclysmic events like a volcanoe yes such things would look weak in comparison.......For now.

While I might have been wrong about the amount of Co2 getting pumped out that is true. It doesnt change the fact that it's pumping it out in large amounts. (And this isnt even a major eruption.)

[AuroraGlacialis]

No, it is not a major eruption. It is a common one and that is why I said some of our technological systems are not stable because such a minor event (regarding the earth as a whole) already does such a disruption. There was a nice article in my Nature Alters last week: Access : Complex networks: The fragility of interdependency : Nature (http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v464/n7291/full/464984a.html) - it analyzes the stability and possibilities of cascading failures of Networks like power, communication and transportation and how these interconnected networks can also influence each other.

[Imperius Dictatio]

I didnt say it was a major eruption.

[Zapgun]

No, our technology is fine, our infrastructure though is bust.

That and I dont want to get jet engines which are precision instruments into an ash cloud, it would foul up the works, but a prop plane however would do just fine.

Our jet planes are not designed to fly through ash clouds as ash clouds are not a part of our normal weather system. If we really wanted to I am sure we could pull it off though.

[AuroraGlacialis]

Well - bummer. Nature is not "normal". There are ash clounds, earthquakes, tsunamis, storms, large waves, EM interferences, solar flares,... the infrastructure and some of our technology is not built for this but for a supposedly "normal" situation and if nature deviates from it we call it a catastrophe or an emergency. We depend on infrastructure that is quite fragile towards disruptions. See that article on interconnected networks I posted. The power network breaks in a major point - the internet in that area goes down, more power failures, more internet failures, disruption in banking systems follow etc. Logistics fails? People will have a food supply of merely days because nothing is stored anymore, everything is "just in time". We build cities in places that are dangerous (Who the hell thought of building SF right on top of a major fault line!). People often do not think this through, or they do not want to, like with the three major nuclear waste deposits in Germany. Geologists suggested some sites, politicians decided to take one that was not even on the list. Geologists surveyed it and said it will be no good, Politicians put 30 years of money into that pit until now one of the places burst and another is finally found to be unsuitable. WTF!

[Zapgun]

our stuff is designed to deal with the things it deals with the most. If Ash clouds became a regular occurrence for air travel, then necessity would dictate that a new plane design is in order, necessity is after all the mother of invention.

Our technology is perfectly fine.

[Imperius Dictatio]

I've been hearing that all those closed down airports were for nothing and that folks were over-stating the effects of the Ash cloud. Air Traffic should have been flowing if not for some blunder with some higher ups.

[ateyo 'uniltiranyu]

I would like to hope planet Earth is a lot like Pandora, that there's a planetary consciousness that will protect the balance of life from the destructive forces of humanity... Because were nearing the point of no return :nsad:

[Zapgun]

I seriously doubt it, there is no evidence that earth is anything like Pandora, and besides would you hand control of your life to me? no? Then why would you entrust it to someone who just happens to live in trees?

[ateyo 'uniltiranyu]

I seriously doubt it, there is no evidence that earth is anything like Pandora, and besides would you hand control of your life to me? no? Then why would you entrust it to someone who just happens to live in trees?

As much as I want Earth to be like Pandora, there is no evidence like you said that such a being exists :ncry:. Although I disagree, I think it would be better if there was a governing force that just protected the balance of life and nothing more. No one can deny the fact that mankind is approaching self destruction while taking Earth and its species with it in the process. This is where I believe only a more powerful force than humanity can interviene to protect the balance of life.

[Zapgun]

Like I say in other threads, what self destruction? Are you such a far seeing psychic that you can envision the end of humanity?

People say the earth is dying, we are destroying ourselves and everything around us without offering any evidence....

[ateyo 'uniltiranyu]

Like I say in other threads, what self destruction? Are you such a far seeing psychic that you can envision the end of humanity?

People say the earth is dying, we are destroying ourselves and everything around us without offering any evidence....

Deforestation, the chemicals we dump into our water supply, the over consumption of natural resources by industrialized nations, overfishing and overhunting depleting the diversity of species, pointless wars over our petty differences. You don't have to be a psychic to see that we're destroying ourselves. The government wants us to believe that everything is just fine out there when it isn't. If you go research any of these topics on google you'll find plenty of evidence. The greedy corporations and governments of this world only want you to believe there's no destruction because of how they pillage the earth. If this information got out what would you think that would do to their reputation. Look around, astronomers haven't found any earth like planets out side our solar system yet. Earth as far as we know is the only planet that supports human life and we need to ensure that it can sustain our species in the future. Earth is all we have.

[Zapgun]

I looked up deforestation in America, not much up here. It has always been an issue in south and central America, but not as much as people would have you believe.

Wars are occuring all the time, but they are small wars, not big ones like WW2 was, that devastated and hurt everyone and no one wants to go through something like that again. Again, over fishing and Over hunting is done in developing nations, people do not really care about the environment over there.

Do not bring the government into this, if they really are 'hiding' our problems as you claim they are, then thats the only thing they are doing right. The government hiding and not addressing global issues would be like a logger cutting down all his forests, pretty soon both would be out of a job.

[ateyo 'uniltiranyu]

South and central America, the rain forests, are the lifelines of this planet. They basically supply the planet with most of its oxygen. If deforestation continues, and I believe more effort needs to be put into stopping it, then there would be many obvious environmental problems that would arise.

Yes, there was much pain after WWII but do people really learn? I'm not going to get into all the politics about the middle east but in my opinion the wars there aren't going to stay small. As much as I wish I could prevent war over there I don't think it's possible to stop it. All that needs to happen is a certain country launching a nuclear weapon and it's all over. If wars must be fought, we must refrain from using nuclear weapons as a start.

Now over hunting and overfishing may not directly effect the existence of humanity but it may very well effect the quality of life we live. I'm sure a lot of us here wouldn't appreciate going on a hike and seeing half of the biological diversity that we used to.

Some governments are more proactive in protecting the environment then others. Governments may address problems in our world and environment because as you said that's what they do. But what good does it do if you address the problem but don't take action to make it better? Governments aren't taking nearly enough action to prevent the problems we face. Governments are clearly not as much of a problem as corporations are. There are a few good corporations that are interested in renewable energy but there are still many that are just in it for the money. They are willing to make these profits no matter what cost it may impose. Some corporations don't care about the beauty of the forests or the good of humanity, they just care about putting more money in their pockets. Does walmart sound familiar?

[Zapgun]

Actually a good portion of the worlds oxygen comes from forests up in Siberia. And aside from that, even if the forests in south America are raised, which isn't as big a problem as you make it out to be, just go look at satellite photos of the rain forest.

As for wars, since when has an atomic weapon been used in an act of aggression after world war 2? I don't think nuclear weapons are going to be an issue, they certainly were a deterrent during the cold war.

I would think hiking would be a luxury us western folk enjoy.

Walmart is not the average corporation, I always felt it was on the extreme end.

[ateyo 'uniltiranyu]

I don't think anyone would like to see the rain forests destroyed, many of us enjoy the natural beauty. There has been some good progress by environmental organizations to stop deforestation. There are people that have lived in these forests for thousands of years as well, if they were to cease to exists they wouldn't have a home.

Lets just hope they don't. There are the extreme countries though. In my opinion all nukes need to be dismantled.

Everyone can enjoy hiking at some point even if your not a western guy.

Walmart and some food companies like Burger King and Nestle who actively take part in deforestation. But there are a lot of corporations that aren't too extreme. I give props to the ones that are developing renewable energy.

[AuroraGlacialis]

I seriously doubt it, there is no evidence that earth is anything like Pandora, and besides would you hand control of your life to me? no? Then why would you entrust it to someone who just happens to live in trees?
So you are afraid if there would be a god? I think most people would disagree with such a fear.


Like I say in other threads, what self destruction? [...] People say the earth is dying, we are destroying ourselves and everything around us without offering any evidence....
Sigh - that is only because you do not accept the evidence. There is plenty of scientific and a lot of obvious evidence for destruction. Much of it is temporary and will be reversed if left alone within some decades or milennia, but others is lasting longer. I will not bother to list the evidence as I know your resistance, @zapgun, towards evidence and theories on the influence of humans on the planets ecology. I do not know where you got that resistance from or how you keep it up, but as I stated, my educational background is in scientific ecology and earth sciences and I have seen plenty of publications and evidence for destructive processes. We are not even close to understanding earths ecology, but we can see clearly, that we have a big influence and many of the results are negative or at least unpredictable. Most problems arise from the speed we influence the planet, so ecologies and earth systems have not time to alleviate the effects.

On politics and economics, I have to admit that this is not a major part of my education (except resource gology which I took as a special course), so what I know about it is in a big part from media and talking to people, but I think I can see evidence for destructive processes there, too. Wal Mart, Monsanto, Fast Food Chains - you do not have to be an economist to understand the downsides of such cooperations and you just have to listen to the political and economical news to notice, that the economical system is not a very stable construct.

@ateyu: I think you are right on many accounts here. And yes - Nukes are more dangerous now than ever. Not a global nuclear war - this one people are probably too afraid of, but the likelyhood that a single bomb or a single country is incinerated are now higher than ever with an increasing number of unstable states having a small number of nukes.

[Zapgun]

No I would not be afraid Pandora would bring a god with it, I do not believe Eywa is a God, Eywa is simply something beyond Na'Vi comprehension so they automatically slap Divine being on it and bow down. Even Jake Sulley bought it.

The only difference between me and Eywa is Eywa is a much larger creature then me, and its neurons are the size of trees as opposed to mine which are the size of....well, neurons. Eywa, only ever helped when it was forced to do so at gunpoint. Literally. Some god.

[Imperius Dictatio]

Snip.


1. Wrong on the South and Central America forests providing us much of our Oxy. That would be the Taiga as it makes up about 1/3 of the earths tree's. (And therefore 1/3 of earths oxygen.)
Anyway there are problems down in Brazil and the place is literally a wild west. So good luck with that.

2.The threat of using Nuclear Weapons acts as a deterrent. Take away the threat off widespread and near instant destruction and the only thing we'll see as a result is the return of the old specter of large scale convetional wars creeping back in.

3. The State Goverments and various agencies are already strict on hunting and fishing. Hells Bells humans have provided themselves as an excellent means of population control.

4. This just screams "ITZ ALL THE CORPORATIONS FAULT!!1111"

[josie20]

You guys...*sigh*...half of the earth's oxygen comes from phytoplankton. The ocean's plankton produces more oxygen than all the forest trees combined. Also...

"Where in areas of the sea too warm for plankton to survive, colder water rich in nutrients from the depths are churned up, plankton and life become abundant. The growth of plankton absorbs CO2 from the sea, trapping the carbon as it dies and falls to the ocean floor. The potential in southern oceans would be to remove 1 billion tonnes of carbon a year (out of 8 billion tonnes a year man made. This would reduce the balance from 5 billion to 4 billion put into the atmosphere - see global page.)

Plankton growth emits dimethyl sulphide gas which creates cloud formation which in turn reflect the suns rays, cooling the earth."

climate (http://www.climateandfuel.com/pages/exotic.htm)

[AuroraGlacialis]

Actually, it does not really matter where the oxygen comes from, the matter is where the net fluix goes. A rainforest provides a lot of oxygen but also consumes a lot, Same for tundras and phytoplancton. Ecologists try hard to dinf out about the net flux and little is known yet. I just read a paper that stated that in northern boglands the net flux is that CO2 will go to the air because of global warming increasing microbial activity that frees plant carbon. In the ocean, only a fraction of a percent of the CO2 that is captured reches the bottom, the rest is consumed on the way down. Still it is a large amount. But the key point is, that little is known. too little to predict which reservoir is the most important yet. What is more important is, that we are influencing ALL of these systems. We are deforesting the rainforests, which also liberates SOC (soil organic carbon, basically CO2 bound in the soil). We are changing the oceans chemistry with unknown implications for phytoplancton life. And we also do not really leave the tunda forests alone, do we? But anyway - the reservoir of O2 will not run low. air has about 20% of it and only a minute amount of it is bound in CO2, so at least in the short term (decades and hundreds of years) we will not run out of it, but the problem is the buildup of CO2, Methane and N2O in the air which directly contributes to global climate change.

Oh and I.S. - if by conventional warfare you think about everything non nuclear - maybe true, though I still think, nuclear bombs are tempting for smaller states now more than ever especially as now a full blown nuclear counterstrike is unlikely. But consider that "conventional warfare" under that definition also includes chemical and biological warfare (which are probably even more harmful to people and the environment than a single nuclear strike). Also consider that the US uses depleted (but still radioactive and poisenous) nuclear material (Uranium with traces of other elements) to build anti-bunker and -tank bombs.

[Imperius Dictatio]

I'd rather have MAD to keep everyone in line rather then have the world descend into WWIII. Sure Rogue States are developing nuclear weapons but they know if they're stupid enough to launch them they'll have several very large super powers open up their aresenals for a reprisal strike.

And theres nothing wrong with D.U. weapons. It's not as if these things have the possibilty of undergoing fission.

[Pardalleo]

Sorry that this is in all caps, but i am disabled and bedridden. Decades ago i read a sci-fi book that had the premise that the planet was sentient and when the humans had overstayed their welcome (by abusing her as we do earth) she unleashed many of the things we see going on today. If you are knowledgeable about the dire straights we have put this planet in (most of you may have some limited info from the remarks posted here) then you would realize that it is a matter of when (soon) not if humanity will be either exterminated or greatly reduced. We are in the 6th mass extinction, our rivers and oceans are polluted beyond repair (pacific garbage patch map, mercury poisoning,pcbs, toxic algae blooms jellyfish invasions, dead zones map, seattle washington mega fund site, orca decline, sea lion poisoning, etc. We also are loosing 1,000 species a day, tazmanian devils now have a contagious form of cancer, african lions may be down to as few as 12,000, the orangutans are being killled off by palm oil plantation owners. The gorillas, bonobos and chimpanzees (as well as all african wildlife) are being eaten to extinction. Was anyone aware that hiv came from eating chimpanzees and other primates? The people who posted on viruses below might want to do more research. Viruses are comprised of recombinate dna (rna). Hiv was siv in african wildlife (which causes them no harm). When humans ate chimpanzee meat our dna was close enough that siv picked up human dna and hiv was born. The swine flu is part bird dna, part human dna and part pig dna. It also kills tigers, civet cats and others. So, every species it passes thru, the dna is recombined. Hiv, bird flu, swine flu are all examples of zoonotic diseases. If you are under the impression that science will save the day i suggest that you google all of the above and get back to me in a year or so. I don't mean to rain on anyone's parade, but mother nature has a balance that must be maintained and plenty of weapons built into the system to ensure it. Is earth sentient? Who can say. Can she defend herself from the one specie that is destroying everything? Why not look into it and decide for yourself. You have somewhere between 5 to 50 years to figure it out.

[Mother of the Forest]

I've wondered at this myself. It almost seems that the Earth is getting back at us, yes...

[Imperius Dictatio]

Snip.


Viruses however are not tied to the earth wanting to kill us (Not to mention the earth is a just a speck of mud, rock and iron hurtling through the void and is in no way self aware or sentient.) So you've rendered your entire point null.

And plus I dont worry about such diseases. This kind of stuff has been going on for thousands of years and will continue to do so for several reasons.
1. Mankind also does have cures for the flu bugs and there yearly changes and even the more deadly strains can be brought to heel.
2. Most humans have a natural resistance to these bacteria and diseases. (The only disease that can achieve a kill rate of 80-90% is Ebola and it's never been found outside of it's traditional areas if the Marburg outbreak is ignored.)
3. Anti-Virals.
4. In the future I forsee Medical nanotechnology. Once we hit that theres very little that couldnt be cured.

[josie20]

Not to mention the earth is a just a speck of mud, rock and iron hurtling through the void and is in no way self aware or sentient.
And you know this beyond any doubt? Give me scientific evidence that the earth has no spirit. How can you be certain that the earth is not self aware. Yes, it is made up of mud, rock and iron, things which are not inherently "alive". However, everything that is "alive" is made up of things that are not "alive".

[Imperius Dictatio]

And you know this beyond any doubt? Give me scientific evidence that the earth has no spirit. How can you be certain that the earth is not self aware. Yes, it is made up of mud, rock and iron, things which are not inherently "alive". However, everything that is "alive" is made up of things that are not "alive".

No DNA.
No Cells.
No Central Nervous System.
The Earth cannot reproduce.
No metabolism.
No Growth.
No response to Stimuli.

All of these things are key to consider something to be alive. And all of these things are something that the earth cannot do.

The earth is simply a ball of inanimate matter it's nothing more and nothing less.

[josie20]

No DNA.
No Cells.
No Central Nervous System.
The Earth cannot reproduce.
No metabolism.
No Growth.
No response to Stimuli.

All of these things are key to consider something to be alive. And all of these things are something that the earth cannot do.

The earth is simply a ball of inanimate matter it's nothing more and nothing less.
No DNA-alright
No cells, nervous system-That's what we are. And as of now, we are the equivalent of cancer and are attacking our own "body".
The Earth cannot reproduce-not in way of sexual intercourse. But it allows reproduction of all life on earth. Which allows me to skip to growth.
No Growth-The earth does grow. Every time something dies, it decays and is turned into soil. The more things die, the more soil is produced. The more soil is produced, the bigger earth becomes/grows.
No metabolism-Again, linked to growth. If the earth did not "metabolize" dead matter, life would cease to exist.
No response to stimuli-The Earth operates as a biosphere. This biosphere operates as a single organism. If you were to think of a cell and the the interactions of the various parts and organelles, it is similar to that except the earth is much more complex. The Earth is also like an organism in the fact it responds to stimulus, like the greenhouse effect and the earths atmospheric temperature. It is also like an organism and its "systems", there are corrective measures that keep life in check, such as the food chain to govern the population of animals.

Earth is much more complex(at the very least, different) than any smaller organism. Any scientific model for life is based on what little we've been able to study on the surface of the planet. Thus, it is subjective.

The idea that Humans are killing their planet is not a metaphor: it is literal. Like a cancer, Humans are killing their host. And how can one kill something that isn’t alive?

[Imperius Dictatio]

No DNA-alright
No cells, nervous system-That's what we are. And as of now, we are the equivalent of cancer and are attacking our own "body".
The Earth cannot reproduce-not in way of sexual intercourse. But it allows reproduction of all life on earth. Which allows me to skip to growth.
No Growth-The earth does grow. Every time something dies, it decays and is turned into soil. The more things die, the more soil is produced. The more soil is produced, the bigger earth becomes/grows.
No metabolism-Again, linked to growth. If the earth did not "metabolize" dead matter, life would cease to exist.
No response to stimuli-The Earth operates as a biosphere. This biosphere operates as a single organism. If you were to think of a cell and the the interactions of the various parts and organelles, it is similar to that except the earth is much more complex. The Earth is also like an organism in the fact it responds to stimulus, like the greenhouse effect and the earths atmospheric temperature. It is also like an organism and its "systems", there are corrective measures that keep life in check, such as the food chain to govern the population of animals.

Earth is much more complex(at the very least, different) than any smaller organism. Any scientific model for life is based on what little we've been able to study on the surface of the planet. Thus, it is subjective.

The idea that Humans are killing their planet is not a metaphor: it is literal. Like a cancer, Humans are killing their host. And how can one kill something that isn’t alive?

Bull**** readings are off the charts on this Post.

1. Bull****. Cells as in Prokaryotic and Eukaryotic. Something which every other lifeform on earth (Other then Viruses.) are made up of. Earth has neither and your 'arguement' that all living things are Earths cells is simply silly.
2. *Rolls Eyes* So earth now has Nerves,Spinal Cord,Brain,Nuerons and etc? Please point them out as I'd love get some pictures.
3. Bull****. If the earth cannot reproduce and create mini-planets then your full of crap. Seriously your argueing that life reproduces for earth via proxy to support your inane claims.
4. Bull**** once more as this isnt growth. Earth is a closed system and everything follows a cycle. Decaying matter is also normally consumed by scavengers and decomposers and further this minerals and materials find there way back into plant and animal populations. So Earth does NOT grow at all and cannot increase it's mass or size unless of course an asteriod or other stellar debris impacts the earth, but in short there IS No growth.
5. So it's not proper biological stimuli and instead various abiotic cycles that take place.

6. It's a complicated biosphere to be sure. But it sure as hell isnt alive.
7. It is a metaphor.

[josie20]

You see, I think the problem here is that I'm not posting because I believe a certain thing. I'm posting because everything should be approached with an open mind. What you need to realize is that anything scientific is subjective to what we are able to study on earth. Which, in comparison to the universe, is nothing. Like I said, I'm not posting because I believe something. I'm posting because I have an open mind, and because all knowledge we possess is subjective. I suggest you lose your pride and realize that.

And this is where I get off, when less than desirable language is used. I always try to keep conversations respectful and mature. This conversation just became the opposite of that.

Good day

[Imperius Dictatio]

That still doesnt change the fact that you argueing that the Earth is a living thing with a spirit.
Then supplying a horrible counter-arguement in order to prove an equally ineffectual point, is both greatly annoying and a waste of my time.

[josie20]

Very well, Imperius Dictatio. None the less, I enjoyed our short discussion, even though my arguments were horrible. :)

[Kreb]

Back to the topic... it occured to me that the eruption of ash lasted only a few days, yet disrupted European air traffic with a knock on effect around the world. It could have been worse! Imagine the ash billowing out for six months!

[Imperius Dictatio]

Reports say that the ash should not have cuased Air Traffic to shut down. Seems like it was a major overreaction.

[Grifff]

No DNA-alright
No cells, nervous system-That's what we are. And as of now, we are the equivalent of cancer and are attacking our own "body".
The Earth cannot reproduce-not in way of sexual intercourse. But it allows reproduction of all life on earth. Which allows me to skip to growth.
No Growth-The earth does grow. Every time something dies, it decays and is turned into soil. The more things die, the more soil is produced. The more soil is produced, the bigger earth becomes/grows.
No metabolism-Again, linked to growth. If the earth did not "metabolize" dead matter, life would cease to exist.
No response to stimuli-The Earth operates as a biosphere. This biosphere operates as a single organism. If you were to think of a cell and the the interactions of the various parts and organelles, it is similar to that except the earth is much more complex. The Earth is also like an organism in the fact it responds to stimulus, like the greenhouse effect and the earths atmospheric temperature. It is also like an organism and its "systems", there are corrective measures that keep life in check, such as the food chain to govern the population of animals.

Earth is much more complex(at the very least, different) than any smaller organism. Any scientific model for life is based on what little we've been able to study on the surface of the planet. Thus, it is subjective.

The idea that Humans are killing their planet is not a metaphor: it is literal. Like a cancer, Humans are killing their host. And how can one kill something that isn’t alive?

no, the earth has a constant mass, and if you want to get nitpicky about it the eart loses about 200 million tonnes as gases from its atmosphere every year

[Grifff]

Reports say that the ash should not have cuased Air Traffic to shut down. Seems like it was a major overreaction.

tbh they were being on the safe side tho

[Imperius Dictatio]

That they did. Hindsight is always 20/20 however.

[applejuice]

Reports say that the ash should not have cuased Air Traffic to shut down. Seems like it was a major overreaction.
Actually, I found this on the Boeing website: Aero 09 - Volcanic Ash Avoidance (http://www.boeing.com/commercial/aeromagazine/aero_09/volcanic_textonly.html)
Interesting indeed, suggests that ash must be avoided even if the potential damage is little.

[Imperius Dictatio]

I just told you what I've been hearing.

[Txim_Asawl]

Perhaps aviation officials were recalling the dramatic events during the flight of British Airways flight 009 (Callsign Speedbird 9) over Indonesia, that encountered volcanic ash, leading to the failure of all four engines (Boeing 747)...

Full story here:

The story of BA flight 009 and the words every passenger dreads ... | Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-431802/The-story-BA-flight-009-words-passenger-dreads-.html)

Of course, that was the most dramatic incident of an airliner dealing with volcanic ash (and one German news network of course did show the TV documentary on that particular flight during the week of air traffic silence... but then, they always like to show documentaries of air traffic disasters).

~*Txim Asawl*~

[AuroraGlacialis]

Just to tell you - today, air traffic was paused again over parts of Northern Europe due to the ash cloud. Seems that the officials are still not convinced that it is just fine to fly through that little bit of dust


1. Mankind also does have cures for the flu bugs and there yearly changes and even the more deadly strains can be brought to heel.
2. Most humans have a natural resistance to these bacteria and diseases. (The only disease that can achieve a kill rate of 80-90% is Ebola and it's never been found outside of it's traditional areas if the Marburg outbreak is ignored.)
I just told you what I've been hearing.
Nice - just replicating random statements from hearsay.
"cure for flu", I'd like to see that! Maybe in your SciFi riddled mind! (to elaborate: you can vaccinate against infections by some kinds of flu and you can try to alleviate the symptoms and help the body recover, you can even prevent spreading of virus by antivirals - if you can get them - within hours or the infection, but you still cannot really cure flu once you got it - and there are already antiviral-resistant strains around just like it happened with the bacteria and antibiotics)
Oh and yes - just ignore outbreaks, they probably will not happen. We're safe - not!

Josie - I would not necessarily speak of the Earth as a sentient beeing, but in some respects it can be seen as an organism. Not by the rather narrow definition, I.D. has with DNA and stuff (he who speaks of the stars and the universe should know better that there may be other ways life can work BTW). Mostly however, it is an immensely complex systems of positive and negative feedback loops. And it is alive in a sense that the interconnected ecosystems are compromised of living beeings. If you really want to call Earth a living beeing, you'd inevitably have to go into philosophic discussion on what life is and this gets tough. So that is why I would call Earth an organism only as a metaphor, but it is a very good one. In reality, it may be more a symbiosis of many organisms with the elemental flows of the Earth. If looking at an ecosystem with all its symbiosis, parasites, hunter/game relationships and food chains, you should always add the Earths systems to that as they provide a major influence on these ecosystems and Earths systems connect the ecosystems (maybe like veins connecting organs if you like to use the organism analogy again).

[Imperius Dictatio]

1. Well sorry I meant vaccine. Though frankly I have a steller immune system and have never needed a flu vaccine.
2. I actually have plans in place in case of various disasters,outbreaks and emergencies. Outbreaks in todays world are all to real due to how easy it is to get from one corner of the world to another. This makes proper Quarintines a nightmare to implement.
3. I never said there was no ET life. However I hightly doubt the earth is a LIVING organism. Hells Bells look at the virus. That thing just barely fits the bill as being a living thing. Iif it had a tough time meeting the criteria then the Earth has no real chance.
In short I term the earth has a habitable biosphere for which life flourishs. Nothing more.

[Zapgun]

Saying that the earth itself is a living thing would be like claiming that a linoleum tile from your bathroom, upon which grows several species of mold is alive.

[Tsyal Makto]

3. I never said there was no ET life. However I hightly doubt the earth is a LIVING organism. Hells Bells look at the virus. That thing just barely fits the bill as being a living thing. Iif it had a tough time meeting the criteria then the Earth has no real chance.
In short I term the earth has a habitable biosphere for which life flourishs. Nothing more.

Pandora isn't alive either. Like Earth, Pandora is just a big ball of silicon, iron, and the like. What grows on it is what is alive. Eywa is what grows on the ball of silicon and iron, not the silicon and iron itself. There are indeed biological systems on Earth that act like massive singular organisms, such as Mycelium or the Pando tree. If given time to evolve they could turn into a system similar to on Pandora.

Hells Bells look at algea. Scientists recently found that they can communicate using electrical signals.:nwink:

[Imperius Dictatio]

Incorrect in the assumption that the planet itself is alive.
When in fact the 'mind and body' of the entity happens to be made up of an unknown quantity of plant life working as a gestalt being.

[AuroraGlacialis]

Incorrect in the assumption that the planet itself is alive.
When in fact the 'mind and body' of the entity happens to be made up of an unknown quantity of plant life working as a gestalt being.

Yes - the planet itself (and I never claimed that) is a mass of rock and chemicals. What you describe as a gestalt beeing would go more into the way of "Earth as a living beeing".

Living organisms are made up of cells and organs and essential base chemicals (oxygen, water,...) and rigid structures (. In case of the Earth the cells would be the lifeforms on and within the planet, the organs would be ecosystems (a certain kind of lifeforms living together comparable to cells of a specific kind forming organs), the base chemicals are air and water and the rigid structures that are partly shaped by the organism are the silica rocks and continents. All these systems in a living beeing as well as the Earth are connected. The system can have flaws, it can have effects that are in some cases counterproductive to the overall system stability and require internal mechanisms to regulate (e.g. sugar and insulin, overshooting immune system, runaway global warming), but the overall system is rather stable because of the many regulatory systems.

So I think the analogy is quite nice developed. I would not want to claim, that Earth has a consciousness as I would not claim that a tree has one. But I also would argue that if the biosphere is destroyed or harmed this would be analogous to "injuring/killing Earth" (within the analogy of Earth as a beeing)

I'd like to get a link to the article on the algae, if you have one, please. Sounds interesting. I have read an article on bacteria that build up networks to connect via electric currents in Nature Magazine. Apparently there are several different species building networks to connect electrically. They do not communicate however, but use it to transmit electrons for energy gain at geochemical interfaces like ocean floors. Still - nice find ;)

[Zapgun]

Well consider, at the cellular level organizarion as it is seen in modern organisms is very easy, the DNA is simple and quickly changed with no detriment to the cell most often, and the cell can easily gain new organelles, just look at mitochondra, and an article I read once about a petridish full of ameoba, and a bacterium that attacked the amoeba. One of the amoeba was observed to have a new organelle none of the others had after all the others had died out, when the organelle was removed, the amoeba died. Symbiosis is easier on the cellular level then it is on larger scales. Far easier. It also takes billions of years to develop in an organized direction, that is why the earth, or the life on it, does not form some super consciousness. The body analogy breaks down the larger in scale you go.

[cargo]

Eywa is what grows on the ball of silicon and iron, not the silicon and iron itself. There are indeed biological systems on Earth that act like massive singular organisms, such as Mycelium or the Pando tree. If given time to evolve they could turn into a system similar to on Pandora.

Hells Bells look at algea. Scientists recently found that they can communicate using electrical signals.

This is not all true even if a large amount of plant matter became sentient it would not be like eywa. eywa had an incredible amount of input and output so it could see every thing on the planet and could defend it's self. Were a giant thing of plant matter on earth would probably become evil.
In the case of the algae and other bacteria they communicate by activating genes, producing enzymes, or communicating chemically. This is all very interesting seeing how these small bacteria do thing small and simple then get rather complex. Unfortunately they do this all to infect.
-Cargo-

[AuroraGlacialis]

Symbiosis is easier on the cellular level then it is on larger scales. Far easier. It also takes billions of years to develop in an organized direction, that is why the earth, or the life on it, does not form some super consciousness. The body analogy breaks down the larger in scale you go.
No, the analogy just also scales up the time. yes, it takes (not billions!) tens or hundreds of thousands years to develop symbiotic ecosystems, but they do exist. Thinking of Earth as a whole system requires to think in large timescales. We geobiologists think in millions of years. So if I say the time period since industrialization is to earth like the impact of an asteroid, I mean it - for a system that changes in millions of years, a day is like a hundred years: a blink of an eye!

Oh and @cargo: Bacteria do not infect. That are just some of them. The vast majority are useful members of the ecosystems. Did you know that 70% of the oxygen generated comes from the oceans, most of it from single celled photosynthetic organisms called cyanobacteria? If we'd be poisoning the surface of the oceans by some means, we'd literally suffocate ourselves - even more so than burning some more rainforest.

[Zapgun]

It takes millions of years for a particular species to develop symbiosis with another. This requires 'CONSTANT' interaction between the two, so that traits favoring the symbiosis emerge. For the whole world to develop symbiosis for it to be considered a single organism? Impossible.

Ecosystems can change naturally in hundreds of years, many of them undergo rapid changes, ecosystems do not change in millions of years but in thousands. Not from rainforest to desert, but the change is faster then you think.

[AuroraGlacialis]

It takes millions of years for a particular species to develop symbiosis with another. This requires 'CONSTANT' interaction between the two, so that traits favoring the symbiosis emerge. For the whole world to develop symbiosis for it to be considered a single organism? Impossible.

Ecosystems can change naturally in hundreds of years, many of them undergo rapid changes, ecosystems do not change in millions of years but in thousands. Not from rainforest to desert, but the change is faster then you think.

Believe me, I know this. But this change is not as destructive as you think to existing relationships. Ususally ecosystems "move" rather than be destroyed. Don't be bound to a specific location - This is a very human perspective. Animals and early humans did not need to stick to a specific place, they move together with their ecosystem. If it gets warmer, the ecosystem will move towards the poles or up a hill maybe. If that would not be so, species depending on such an ecosystem would not have evolved at all.

The whole biosphere of the earth is also not a meeting of different systems, it originated from the same source. Basically the ecosystems of the earth developed by branching off existing ones. What makes you think, this connection has to be severed or that a newly developing ecosystem is not from the start developing in a way that is in tune with the connected ecosystems. It's usually not that an ecosystem will develop in a barren landscape - since life covered the land some 400 million years ago, every new ecosystem developed took the place of another and by doing this, an evolution had to happen - if the ecosystem would have been harmful to the surrounding systems for example by draining too much resources, it would have been eliminated. New ecosystems would develop favourably in a way that is beneficial for itself and the systems around it. It is exactly as you wrote - there is a CONSTANT INTERACTION between ecosystems.

[Zapgun]

No, my rainforest example as an example, the rainforest doesn't have to move, it can dry up all together.

There have been cave paintings of lakes and rivers in the sahara, THE SAHARA! Wetlands and pine forests! with savanah to the south, then it dried up and blew away like so much sand. Ecosystems dont move, they disappear.