Peak Oil and 'Chemtrails'

[Wayne Hall]

“The Sword of Damocles Has Two Edges” says Dale Allen Pfeiffer. Only one of them is called ‘climate change’.

This is something that came to mind in the last few days when I saw that the mainstream press here in Greece is starting to run articles on the pollution caused by aircraft, both commercial and military.

See for example this translation of an article by Ben Webster from the London ‘Times’ .

Perhaps there are some advantages to focusing on the other edge of Damocles’ sword: Peak Oil.

It is an issue that is less plagued by ‘sceptics’, trolls and denialists than is climate change, ‘global dimming’ [not to mention, of course, ‘chemtrails’.]

It is also something that is beginning to hit, and will hit, people more concretely and tangibly.

Approached from the viewpoint of deployment of dwindling resources of non-renewable fossil fuels, the question becomes whether it is sane to use fossil fuels to enable aircraft to bomb cities, ‘mitigate’ climate change caused by use of fossil fuels, unnecessarily transport goods over long distances or passengers on non-essential journeys, rather than provide the preconditions for elementary survival through transition to an economy based on sustainable energy resources.

Perhaps we should be delinking ‘chemtrails’ from ‘global dimming’ and climate change and subsuming them to peak oil. In this context the question of whether ‘mitigation’ is deliberate policy or merely incidental to commercial and military aviation activities (this after all seems to be the key issue from the viewpoint of international law and perhaps the greatest obstacle to transparency) can become secondary

[Wayne Hall]

John Heinen replies:

"I find myself similarly plagued by the dilemma. I have not been able to come to a sensible settling point on which side of the blade we'll all get hacked up by first. The reality of it is that both are so mammoth in their proportions at this point as to have a momentum nearly unstoppable by anything other than a near total collective effort. {... with Exxon having been outed for 'steering' the global climate change debate, the divide-and-conquer operation well established far and wide -- hopes of that happening are rapidly fading.}

As Kunstler is so fond of saying, what is to come will be nothing less than a shitstorm. Fortune will favor the prepared." (Actually, John wrote 's-h-i-t-s-t-o-r-m', Mr. Censor. W.H.)

[javelina]

Wayne, I have no exotic intellectual analysis to offer here in response to the above-posted.

In my personal observation, Kunstler's comment is about as accurate a characterization as I have seen of what we can expect in the near future. In fact I would say we're there already.

As to "what we'll get hacked by first" - what are we looking for here? Exactly what are we expecting to emerge as (drum roll) Irrefutable Evidence that we are in trouble?

[EnviroEngr]

Since I was in quite a hurry when I replied back to Wayne, I put my ideas in mental-shorthand. I should expatiate a bit more sometime soon.

My more metaphysical inclinations have me thinking that to the extent human beings create the circumstances they later come to experience, since We are in the process of writing a Chapter in which the protagonists take a massive punishing, We will all play some part in the "Our Armageddon" production now in rehearsal. The authoring ingenuity We possess will dictate the extent to which there is no way out of the swift kick to the back of the knickers We have planned for Ourselves.

I could stay up all night enumerating the myriad different ways we're trying to run Ourselves through the rip saw. Sooner or later, the Resistance will give up and let Us have it.

[Wayne Hall]

Thanks John.

The only aspect I have difficulty with is this 'we'.

I can't see myself as part of the group or process that has brought us to this pass.

Also I don't see any advantage to the formulation that 'we' have done it. And I always make a point when I hear a person talking about 'we' and 'our' misdeeds - as if he sees himself as one of those responsible - that he should be ashamed of himself for what he has done.

That profound point having been made, here is what David Stewart sent a few days ago:

There is the old myth that Nero played the violin as Rome was consumed by fire.

Peak oil, Chem-trails, Global warming, climate change and the way these are being handled remind
me of that myth - more pointedly the way the nations of earth are handling the whole 21st century
fallout from 20th century gluttony tells us that they are terrified to death and have no clue how
to answer to the problems.

To me there are no coincidences. I do not think it is a coincidence that we reach peak oil and we
will have no oil left in a short period (relatively speaking) while at the same time we reach (if
not already surpassed) a threshold of green house gases that cause global warming.

Nature tends to have preset limits in her systems. We are seeing those limits balance out like a
ledger.

[Wayne Hall]

Scott Stevens also ventures the prediction that 'it won't be long now'.

Michael Ruppert on his site made these remarks yesterday:

We are at the point where one nation's full supply is another nation's starvation and collapse....

In the meantime the Bush administration becomes increasingly weakened and ineffective by the Rove/Plame scandal and other problems. This becomes a perfect excuse (out) to explain why the administration will be unable to cope with the collapse that is coming. "The Bush administration, hobbled by recent scandals, has proved incapable of dealing with these crises on Capitol Hill" CNN will say. The people will scream, "It's time for a change!"

"Meet the new boss..." Isn't it strange that best friends GHWB and Bill Clinton just conveniently went boating in Maine? It is the perfect set up for Hillary in 2008 and also a convenient way to explain the collapse of the American economy.