Creating the Future

Well the Trident debate was past by a majority of people in the House of Commons. Nearly said won by the Government, but that would be inaccurate reporting. An underlying message that many MPs who were in favour of a new missile system gave, was they felt it necessary as they couldn't predict the future and we live in an uncertain world. So what do are political leaders actually do?

There are 3 simple stages. We live in the here and now and react to the future as it rushes on to us. We try and predict the future. We try and make a better future, we create the future we want.

So what are our Members of Parliament doing. Surely it is part of their job to lead us us to a better future. If they are admitting they can't do the job, why are they there?

Nigel Griffiths MP Plays Environmental Card in Trident Debate

No sooner than posted the The Trident and Environmental Paradox has to be amended. Nigel Griffiths Edinburgh MP and Shadow Leader of the House of Commons has just made a personal statement in the Trident debate.

In summing up his opposition he strongly played the environmental assessment. Resources being used in the creation of the Trident replacement could be better used in being deployed in the challenge of climate change.

He did not go into such a deep analysis as has been outlined here over the last few months, but the environmental assessment has now been brought out in an important personal statement.

The Trident and Environmental Paradox

Over the last few days the political parties have been trying to get their environmental policies to the top of the political agenda. Today they vote on the replacement for Trident.

This site has spent so much time on the Trident debate presenting a political and ecological analysis that the political parties or the media are not presenting.

Yesterday we were told that the environment is the biggest challenge we face. So we have to turn TVs off standby and recycle our cans. How many people for how many years will have to do everything we are told to do in order to offset the emissions produced and resources used in building such a s system. It just puts dissonance into to minds of the population.

All our efforts are futile when we see the resources that want to be allocated. The cold war was a world run on the balance of fear. Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD). The environmental challenge is a world of Mutually Assured Survival.

There needs to be a coherent and cooperative global approach to planetary management. The superpowers of the present and future are the ones that the world can depend on and look to for survival. The survival of everyone, everything and this Earth.

Scotland: The World's First Ecological Superpower. Sent to all MSPs April 2006
The UK Nuclear Deterrent.
Scotland, Trident and the Legacy of JFK

Scottish Ship Building Job Losses: You can Take a Horse to......

Good Intentions

There is a ship on a beach, climate change now causes George W Bush to announce he wants 20% of US fuel from sustainable sources, the Olympics are costing more and more, raising complaints from Scotland over that and Trident, terrorism and war still are in the news, and cash for peerages . All separate?

Six horses gallop through our daily news their reins trace back in time to the clutched hand of February 2001: An odyssey in time.

Well that was how the story started for the next post. Come 11.30 last night and still writing it was getting obvious that story was proving to large for a single sharp approach in a short one article format. Making the connections and putting in the references for the forensic reader to follow to make an definitive account of the last 6 years was being defeated by the length to do it justice. Perhaps better to break it down and if any connections are questioned or queried, be assured they do exist and are valid.

Scotland, Trident and the Legacy of JFK

In the early 60s President Kennedy initiated a programme to put man on the moon and bring him back alive before the end of the decade. This was done, but it is the space programme in the 70’s which will give us the example of how to save a planet.

Apollo 13 lost it’s life support system due to a small explosion in the service module. Earth has now but all lost it’s ecological life support system due to economic growth, greed and exploitation. When it finally shuts down about 5 billion or more will die.

The only way the astronauts arrived back on Earth alive was to shut down all non essential systems to preserve sufficient power to enable them to re-enter the Earth’s atmosphere and land safely.

The only way we can survive is to assist the Earth to rebuild the ecological life support systems of the planet. To do this we must shut down all non essential systems. One of the biggest emitters of pollution and consumers of resources is the global weapons industry.

The results of it’s products bring about destruction further adding to the collapse of the planets life support systems. Repairing the damage and rebuilding towns, cities, infrastructure and countries after war consumes resources and causes pollution, causing more ecosystem collapse.

The weapons industry is a ‘multiplier’, each and every step from production, through implementation and restoring the consequences of it’s actions destroys a little bit more of the planetary systems that keep us alive and the beauty of life, part of the reason for living.

Opposition to the new nuclear deterrent can be justified in that the resources used and emissions released in it’s production are an unacceptable contribution in destabilising the increasingly fragile ecology of the planet.

The arms industry and the nuclear deterrent are one of the non essential systems that need immediately shutting down on the space ship that is this Earth. The peace of the planet and the security of Scotland then comes down to the mutually assured destruction of the 21st century.

As Marshall McLuhan said, on spaceship Earth there are no passengers only crew. The resources allocated by the Government previously for nuclear weapons, now go into the creation of making Scotland a world leader in planetary management.

All life on the planet is now threatened. Scotland takes a global lead in maintaining that life on the planet. So who will threaten Scotland? Any threat to Scotland reduces the viability of Scotland to ensure the continuation of life on Earth. Any potential aggressor risks their own demise by their course of action.

The only weakness that if the carrying capacity of the planet is reduced so much one group may decide to reduce the population of the planet by the mass killing of others to try and give themselves a better chance of survival.

Though by the stage that this scenario is reached chaos and anarchy on a global scale will be so rampant it will be difficult to identify one particular enemy, each part of humanity will be at conflict with the rest over the scraps of existence that remain.

Soon the soils of Scotland will dry out in searing summer heat, fires will burn through the mountains uncontrolled. Winter winds will blow the dust of Scotland across the surface of the Earth. That remaining will be washed down by storms into the rivers choking and blocking them. Flood waters spilling through villages, towns and cities.

What has taken millennia to create will disappear. No longer will we have to travel to the moon to see barren desolation, the lunar landscape will be brought here. Glen Lyon, Cairngorms, Rannoch Moor, everywhere denuded and gone. Deposited in the streets and houses of towns.

There is no point in having a nuclear deterrent to protect nothing. Use those resources to create the future. Through the flip flops of fate Kennedy left us the legacy of how life is sustained on a stricken space craft. Get rid of or shut down all none essential systems. Trident first, free the resources.

Scotland: The World's First Ecological Superpower

The UK Nuclear Deterrent: An Applied Planetary Engineering Analysis

Synopsis

The UK cannot have a new nuclear deterrent due to the resources used and CO2 emitted in it's production and implementation. Costs to the environment which are not covered or payed back later. The budget approx £25 billion should be used to produce ships, equipment, training and research making Scotland a world leader in oceanographic research and marine management. These jobs and investments will be sustainable both for the benefit of Scotland and the planet as a whole. This is in line with the Scottish: Ecological Superpower summary sent to all MSPs at the start of April 2006.

------------------------------
On the 12th January 2007 Prime Minister Tony Blair said he wants the UK to be a warrior nation for decades, (and in so doing demonstrates that he doesn’t know the true meaning of warrior). On 20th April 2006 Chancellor Gordon Brown at the World Bank said he wanted the environment to be at the centre of policy.

Both want a new nuclear deterrent for the UK, indicating that neither understand the environmental challenge and agenda. The Scottish National Party oppose the nuclear option on moral grounds, but many are concerned this with also cause job losses in Scotland.

One aspect of planetary engineering is foresight. This situation, as a win win scenario, was covered in the consultancy document and executive summary, Scotland: The World’s First Ecological Superpower? Produced at the suggestion of Perth Business Gateway in February 2006, as an update from the original 2001 proposal to use the Millennium Dome as a global environmental management centre. The document was sent to every Member of the Scottish Parliament at the start of April 2006.

So Tony Blair and Gordon Brown want a nuclear deterrent. Well they can’t have one. The reason? They have given that themselves. Climate change is the greatest threat to the international community. (It isn’t, planetary ecological life support system collapse is, which climate change is a symptom of, but that’s another story).

The process of a £25 billion defence project consumes resources and emits CO2. A consequence of which is the moving of the Extinction Horizon (EH) closer to the present. This is a point of no return sometime close in the future. After this date, the degrading of the planet’s ecological life support system will occur reducing it’s capacity to support life. This includes human society, civilisation and individuals. The ‘Mad Max’ scenario.

Some such as James Lovelock believe we have already passed this point of no return, and the deaths of billions is now inevitable. The reason billions aren’t dying at this exact moment is there is a lag time between reaching that point and it’s physical manifestation. This is the ‘time zone’ we are not occupying as a human society. The end of days. This extinction of human society may be true if taking a passive approach, allowing the Earth’s ecological systems alone to recover after the extinction of human civilisation has reduced the loading and destruction imposed on them.

Taking an interventionist approach, which is where human society and civilisation works with and assists the earths ecological systems to recover, could move this Extinction Horizon to some time into the near future as opposed to being at some point in the recent past. The interventionist approach involves massive and immediate applied planetary engineering implementation. The time frame which we are working to is the period between the non assisted extinction horizon, which is in the past, and the point in time of it’s physical manifestation.

Climate change and the overemphasis on reducing CO2 emissions is a convenient political over simplification sound bite, which does not address the true situation. An analogy would be having a vehicle and in preparing it for an MoT or other vehicle inspection test, talking of and only concentrating on the tyres. These may well be essential and important to the vehicle passing the test, but they are not the only important thing. The vehicle as a whole must pass the test and that includes brakes, steering, suspension and every other component and system involved in the safe an continued progress of the vehicle on the highway.

The test and objective of applied planetary engineering is to grab this Extinction Horizon, which is behind us, in the time frame of planetary evolution. Having grabbed it, move it into the present, then push it away into the future. Applied planetary engineering is about moving the Extinction Horizon further away into the future. Each and every action, by one degree or another is moving this Extinction Horizon relative in time to where we are now.

If we move further into the time zone of the lag time between potential extinction and physical manifestation, we can no longer grab behind us in time and move the Extinction Horizon into the future. Game Over.

Applied Planetary Engineering is the development and implementation of the strategies to move the Extinction Horizon further into the future.

Now assessing Tony and Gordon’s desire to have a new nuclear deterrent in terms of applied planetary engineering, this is a none starter.

1) The resources used and CO2 emitted do not push the Extinction Horizon into the future. The results of the project bring and make more inevitable the ecological backlash or Armageddon due to it’s contribution to the destruction and destabilisation of the Earth’s ecological life support system.

2) This is a long term project. By the time the new nuclear deterrent is ready, this point in time will be after the physical manifestation of the Extinction Horizon, if not resolved, which the resource use and emissions released in building a nuclear deterrent will have contributed to. We cannot afford the luxury of any large projects which do not contribute to moving the EH further into the future. There will be nobody left to make war against.

3) Every single person and most species of animal and plant are now under threat from global ecological life support system collapse. This is the great unifier. We must all work as one, as one planet to rescue our collective future. If we do not do this, there will be no future in which to fight each other in. When we are as one with one common cause, why do we need weapons of mass destruction?

4) Production of military products do not pay back the initial resource use and pollution footprint in their creation. Use resources in waste water treatment for example and this improves the stability of the ecosystem, giving a stability return on the projects initial environmental cost. Military projects do not do this, and jaw jaw is less detrimental than war war.

5) Strategy to manage the planet and push the Extinction Horizon into the future will require climate and oceanographic monitoring, research, assessment and implementation. The £25 billion can finance the new generation of ships and research vessels to do this. Building these in Scotland still provides jobs which push the Extinction Horizon into the future, not moving it into the past.

6) Vast maritime clean ups are required of chemical dumps and dangerous ship wrecks containing cargo and materials which should not be in the oceans. The oceanic ecosystems are not just under stress and hence losing stability and productivity due to climate change, they are being affected by pollution. This needs cleaning up. The £25 billion can go towards the ships and technology required to do this. Jobs will be created in Scotland which will contribute to the continuation of the sustainable evolution of the entire planet.

The executive summary Scotland: The World’s First Ecological Superpower gave the main areas for investment. Applied Planetary Engineering needs the tools to do the job of ensuring a future for all of us and this planet. Make that investment.

If Tony and Gordon go for their nuclear toys instead, it will be over all our dead bodies