Problems, Predicaments, and Technology

  Recently I wrote this in one of the groups I manage after reading several comments from members who clearly did not understand the facts behind several of my posts, quote: " I think it is important to point out why promoting technology is NOT a good thing. First of all, technological devices DO NOT reduce emissions, period. They RAISE emissions. For those who do not understand this, please look up Jevons Paradox [Tim Garrett explains Jevons Paradox and Civilizational Inertia here] . Secondly, one cannot help reduce the effects of climate change without reducing the effects of ecological overshoot. Ecological overshoot is CAUSED by technology use. More technology use = more ecological overshoot, and since ecological overshoot is what causes climate change, using more technology only makes climate change WORSE, not better. So, please take this into mind before promoting the very thing that has brought us to this point in time. One might as well promote arsenic as a health aid... &

  T he ongoing debates in many different groups (and on social media in general) are really beginning to show that some people have a good comprehension and grasp of the predicaments we face. On the other hand, I still see so many folks who want to try to hold onto things which simply cannot continue (with anything positive happening as a result). So many things which are sold as "solutions" don't take reality into account and those who buy into these ideas are going to find out the hard way what constitutes sustainability and what doesn't. Sadly, even things which are sustainable today may not be tomorrow. As the ecological systems we depend upon break down, options keep on narrowing. As I wrote in It's a Trap, Don't Do It , focusing so intently on certain goals can sometimes be seen as foolish once one zooms out and looks at the bigger picture. Many of these goals often come as a result of fears, so looking into those fears more deeply should be undertaken B

Recently, I have come across literally hundreds of people defending EVs, their batteries, and electricity generation of all flavors. Of course, this is all fine and dandy, as I am used to the typical arguments in favor of technology of all stripes and often simply post my article about Problems, Predicaments, and Technology , highlighting the connection between the three. But what concerns me most is that despite all the information available here on my blog and in so many other credible sources of science claiming the exact same things, even intelligent people are ignoring this science in favor of their own beliefs. Folks, BELIEFS DO NOT ECLIPSE FACTS , it is actually the other way around. When the facts do not agree with your beliefs, your beliefs are rendered entirely irrelevant. You can still choose to believe them, but those are called "false beliefs" and they ONLY exist in your mind; not in reality. Examine this commonly mentioned statement; "You made me laugh!&quo

  Scenes from earlier times in Glen Haven, Michigan. From top, D.H. Day Farm, Glen Haven Canning Company, Outside of Glen Haven General Store, and the last two showing the inside of the Glen Haven General Store. When I began this blog last December, my main goal at that particular point in time was to replace the files in the groups I run with an outside source so I could get away from the unreasonable rules that Facebook had instituted regarding the editing of those files; of course once they did away with personal files (the files still exist but the only way one can get to them now is if they saved the address for them), the writing was on the wall that group files would also be going away. The group files are still around for the time being, but FB has discontinued the possibility of creating new documents in groups unless the file is a PDF or other recognized file. I had no idea that I would be writing all these articles, as that certainly wasn't what I originally had in mind.

  Today I want to tackle once again the subject of the much-hyped "energy transition" which has been thoroughly debunked from articles, books, documentaries, and presentation videos such as Planet of the Humans , Bright Green Lies  (also located here ) , Life After Fossil Fuels , Earth and Humanity: Myth and Reality , The Hydrogen Economy Myth , Energy and Human Ambitions on a Finite Planet ,   The Fantasy of Electrification ,   What Would it Take for Humanity to Experience Radical Transformation? and Pulling Back The Curtain On The Energy Transition Tale . I have pointed out how these hilarious ideas attempt to use technology to solve the problems and predicaments that technology use has CAUSED, which most people can deduce is an impossibility. Some people have accused me of being a "technology hater" which is completely false. I'm not really much different than most people, I enjoy all the modern conveniences that technology provides and am very gratefu

  It is truly saddening to see so many articles which proclaim complete nonsense. The worst part is that so many people are culturally indoctrinated to the point where they cannot see through these false claims. In this particular one , the claim is made that we need to protect nature (true), quote:  " Our five breakthroughs for nature echo and expand upon those same themes, emphasizing the urgent need to transform our relationship to the natural world on which we ultimately all depend. In a nutshell, here is the handful of headline actions that we are advocating: We need to put nature at the heart of decision-making, with governments and the private sector held accountable for making nature a global priority. An annual investment of US$500 billion to protect and restore nature is a minimum requirement, with funding diverted from environmentally harmful activities into nature-positive initiatives. The communities and local organizations working on the front line of conservation a

  OK, I am going to try to keep this quite short and to the point. Everyone familiar with me knows that I have been rather outspoken against what are commonly called "technofixes" for a considerably long time. Of course, this has always been for very good reasons, being that technology is what has caused the predicament of ecological overshoot in the first place. However, given the hype, marketing, advertising, and PR work done by the industries involved, many people are unaware that these technologies do not reduce fossil fuel use, they actually INCREASE their use by requiring (among other things) a considerably larger electrical grid, storage of energy for when intermittent devices are not generating, and large losses due to the realities of electrical transmission. Because the overwhelming message presented to society over the years that technology is "great" and does so much for us, the inculcated message is that technology can do no harm. Unfortunately, this c