There is an organization called the Lifeboat Foundation that tries to develop methods for helping humanity survive a variety of dangers that are global and fatal. There is some of the “About” text from there web site,
The Lifeboat Foundation is a nonprofit nongovernmental organization dedicated to encouraging scientific advancements while helping humanity survive existential risks and possible misuse of increasingly powerful technologies, including genetic engineering, nanotechnology, and robotics/AI, as we move towards a technological singularity.
There have a number of programs running that look at different areas of concern. Below are some of the more interesting ones.
AI Shield
To protect against unfriendly AI (Artificial Intelligence)
Asteroid Shield
To protect against devastating asteroid strikes
Nano Shield
To protect against ecophages and nonreplicating nanoweapons
Particle Accelerator Shield
To prevent, and also make plans on surviving when possible, particle accelerator mishaps including quantum vacuum collapse, mining the quantum vacuum, formation of a stable strangelet, and the creation of artificial mini-black holes
Some of their long term programs are ambitious. I can’t see anyone being able to do anything about these possible problems?
Alien Shield
To prevent annihilation by an alien race (biological or otherwise)
Antimatter Shield
To prevent antimatter-based annihilation
Black Hole Shield
To protect against black holes that are not manmade. This would include an "eye to the sky" program that would scan for signs of them
Gamma Ray Shield
To protect against gamma ray bursts
Sun Shield
To protect against and/or cope with our sun becoming a red giant and other harmful fluctuations in its output
There are some more down to earth problems that the organization are looking into which seems noble and worth doing. But there are some that are clearly daft.
The web site is lifeboat.com.
Monday, 28 July 2008
Wednesday, 23 July 2008
100 months to save the planet
The BBC website, on the 21st July 2008, has an article about how we only have 100 months to stop runaway climate change using a “Green New Deal”. It says,
A "Green New Deal" is needed to solve current problems of climate change, energy and finance, a report argues.
According to the Green New Deal Group, humanity only has 100 months to prevent dangerous global warming.
Its proposals include major investment in renewable energy and the creation of thousands of new "green collar" jobs.
The name is taken from President Franklin D Roosevelt's "New Deal", launched 75 years ago to bring the US out of the Great Depression.
The new grouping says rising greenhouse gas emissions, combined with escalating food and energy costs, mean the globe is facing one of its biggest crises since the 1930s.
The authors say that that within "the very real timeframe of 100 months" the world will reach the point where the risk of "runaway" climate change became unacceptably high.
In an article for the BBC News website's Green Room series, Mr Simms warns that the combination of the current credit crunch, rising energy prices and accelerating emissions are "conspiring to create the perfect storm".
It seems people are using the climate change brush and using it to paint whatever image they want. Change banks and large corporations, use global warming. Change how people live and move around, use rising sea levels. Change countries and rulers, use climate change.
A "Green New Deal" is needed to solve current problems of climate change, energy and finance, a report argues.
According to the Green New Deal Group, humanity only has 100 months to prevent dangerous global warming.
Its proposals include major investment in renewable energy and the creation of thousands of new "green collar" jobs.
The name is taken from President Franklin D Roosevelt's "New Deal", launched 75 years ago to bring the US out of the Great Depression.
The new grouping says rising greenhouse gas emissions, combined with escalating food and energy costs, mean the globe is facing one of its biggest crises since the 1930s.
The authors say that that within "the very real timeframe of 100 months" the world will reach the point where the risk of "runaway" climate change became unacceptably high.
In an article for the BBC News website's Green Room series, Mr Simms warns that the combination of the current credit crunch, rising energy prices and accelerating emissions are "conspiring to create the perfect storm".
It seems people are using the climate change brush and using it to paint whatever image they want. Change banks and large corporations, use global warming. Change how people live and move around, use rising sea levels. Change countries and rulers, use climate change.
Tuesday, 22 July 2008
'Inevitable' flu pandemic will kill 50 million
The Mail Online, on 21st July 2008, reports on the UK’s House of Lords saying that Britain was facing an inevitable flu pandemic that will kill millions. It says,
Britain is facing an 'inevitable' and 'devastating' flu pandemic which will kill up to 75,000 people, a government committee revealed today.
The outbreak – most likely a strain of bird flu which could claim the lives of up to 50 million worldwide – will be on a scale not seen for decades.
The pandemic will require an ‘urgent’ response to prevent the rapid spread of infection, the powerful House of Lords Intergovernmental Organisations Committee warned.
And the Lords also attacked the World Health Organisation (WHO) as ‘dysfunctional’ and lacking the ‘organisation and resources’ to curb a major outbreak.
The next pandemic will kill between two and 50 million people worldwide and a fair fraction of that in the UK, it said.
Echoing the report, the Government said: ‘While there has not been a pandemic since 1968, another one is inevitable.
Does ‘inevitable’ mean soon or just one day in the far future? It is ‘inevitable’ the Sun will go out, one day. Doesn’t mean we should panic.
Britain is facing an 'inevitable' and 'devastating' flu pandemic which will kill up to 75,000 people, a government committee revealed today.
The outbreak – most likely a strain of bird flu which could claim the lives of up to 50 million worldwide – will be on a scale not seen for decades.
The pandemic will require an ‘urgent’ response to prevent the rapid spread of infection, the powerful House of Lords Intergovernmental Organisations Committee warned.
And the Lords also attacked the World Health Organisation (WHO) as ‘dysfunctional’ and lacking the ‘organisation and resources’ to curb a major outbreak.
The next pandemic will kill between two and 50 million people worldwide and a fair fraction of that in the UK, it said.
Echoing the report, the Government said: ‘While there has not been a pandemic since 1968, another one is inevitable.
Does ‘inevitable’ mean soon or just one day in the far future? It is ‘inevitable’ the Sun will go out, one day. Doesn’t mean we should panic.
Friday, 18 July 2008
Charming us to Believe Climate Change
The Independent newspaper, on 17th July 2008, has an article about the new drama from the BBC, called Burn Up, where the oil-industry conspires to cover up the full extent of global warming. It says,
Christopher Hall, the producer of Burn Up, which is going to hit the screens next week, admits that "the question we kept asking ourselves was, 'How do we make a sexy programme about CO2? It's a gas, for goodness' sake!' So we see this piece as a Trojan horse: we rivet viewers with good drama and smuggle the message in that way."
Whitford, who won an Emmy in 2001 for his role as the loyal presidential aide Josh, starts by underlining the importance of sugaring the pill of the eco-message in Burn Up. "If you're dealing with urgent matters, you have to be very careful that the piece works dramatically. Nobody enjoys being served worthy vegetables – 'Eat up your civic greens or you'll feel guilty!'
Penry-Jones chips in: "Viewers don't like being lectured to. That gets very annoying very quickly, and the film-makers come across as do-gooders. Burn Up is a complex drama that respects its audience's intelligence. So much television these days is dumbed down to appeal to the lowest common denominator.
What makes Burn Up intriguing is that it is not mere banner-waving, eco-friendly agitprop. Mack, an almost irredeemably slippery lobbyist for Big Oil, is by far the most seductive figure, a devil who, once again, has all the best tunes. Whitford says: "Mack thinks that if there are any international constraints put on oil production or carbon emissions, then it will interrupt the glorious beauty of the free-market system. So he uses all the charm at his disposal to promote unfettered capitalism."
This is more propaganda. They are using television as a means to shape your mind and get us to believe in their theory of man made global warming.
For some reason it’s the oil companies that are getting the blame. It is as if they are trying to link this to how cigarette companies denied lung cancer was down to smoking.
Christopher Hall, the producer of Burn Up, which is going to hit the screens next week, admits that "the question we kept asking ourselves was, 'How do we make a sexy programme about CO2? It's a gas, for goodness' sake!' So we see this piece as a Trojan horse: we rivet viewers with good drama and smuggle the message in that way."
Whitford, who won an Emmy in 2001 for his role as the loyal presidential aide Josh, starts by underlining the importance of sugaring the pill of the eco-message in Burn Up. "If you're dealing with urgent matters, you have to be very careful that the piece works dramatically. Nobody enjoys being served worthy vegetables – 'Eat up your civic greens or you'll feel guilty!'
Penry-Jones chips in: "Viewers don't like being lectured to. That gets very annoying very quickly, and the film-makers come across as do-gooders. Burn Up is a complex drama that respects its audience's intelligence. So much television these days is dumbed down to appeal to the lowest common denominator.
What makes Burn Up intriguing is that it is not mere banner-waving, eco-friendly agitprop. Mack, an almost irredeemably slippery lobbyist for Big Oil, is by far the most seductive figure, a devil who, once again, has all the best tunes. Whitford says: "Mack thinks that if there are any international constraints put on oil production or carbon emissions, then it will interrupt the glorious beauty of the free-market system. So he uses all the charm at his disposal to promote unfettered capitalism."
This is more propaganda. They are using television as a means to shape your mind and get us to believe in their theory of man made global warming.
For some reason it’s the oil companies that are getting the blame. It is as if they are trying to link this to how cigarette companies denied lung cancer was down to smoking.
Monday, 7 July 2008
The Bright Side of the End of the World
The Time magazine, on 5th July 2008, has a funny little article about Rob Kutner’s new book that takes a humours look at the end of the world. It says,
Environmental reporting will give you an apocalyptic mindset. There's the melting Arctic ice and rising sea levels; torched rainforests and polluted Chinese megalopolises. Animals going extinct — gone forever, a mini-apocalypse — up to 10,000 times faster than the rate believed over the past 60 million years. When we talk about climate change, we're not just talking about rising temperatures or altered landscapes. We're talking about the end of human civilization as we know it.
While most creative works about Armageddon (The Day After Tomorrow, Omega Man, The Road) tend to be bummers, heavier on cannibalism than comedy, Kutner's book is a lighthearted romp that looks on the bright side of the end of the world.
If nuclear annihilation was the apocalyptic mainstay through the decades of the Cold War, the eco-apocalypse has clearly taken its place. In some ways, the "Al Gore Scare Machine," as Kutner puts it, is more of the same. Like nuclear war — or like the more fantastical possibilities that Kutner imagines, such as a robot uprising or an unleashed super-plague — global warming will be an apocalypse of our own making.
Global warming is very scary because once it truly gets started, we may in the end be helpless to stop it. But fear has never been a very good motivator, especially not for the decades-long societal changes we'll need to make to slow climate change.
Rob Kutner is the host of the TV program “The Daily Show” and is the author of the book “Apocalypse How: Turn the End-Times into the Best of Times”.
Environmental reporting will give you an apocalyptic mindset. There's the melting Arctic ice and rising sea levels; torched rainforests and polluted Chinese megalopolises. Animals going extinct — gone forever, a mini-apocalypse — up to 10,000 times faster than the rate believed over the past 60 million years. When we talk about climate change, we're not just talking about rising temperatures or altered landscapes. We're talking about the end of human civilization as we know it.
While most creative works about Armageddon (The Day After Tomorrow, Omega Man, The Road) tend to be bummers, heavier on cannibalism than comedy, Kutner's book is a lighthearted romp that looks on the bright side of the end of the world.
If nuclear annihilation was the apocalyptic mainstay through the decades of the Cold War, the eco-apocalypse has clearly taken its place. In some ways, the "Al Gore Scare Machine," as Kutner puts it, is more of the same. Like nuclear war — or like the more fantastical possibilities that Kutner imagines, such as a robot uprising or an unleashed super-plague — global warming will be an apocalypse of our own making.
Global warming is very scary because once it truly gets started, we may in the end be helpless to stop it. But fear has never been a very good motivator, especially not for the decades-long societal changes we'll need to make to slow climate change.
Rob Kutner is the host of the TV program “The Daily Show” and is the author of the book “Apocalypse How: Turn the End-Times into the Best of Times”.
Tuesday, 1 July 2008
Climate Change June 2008 Round Up
Here is this month’s roundup of climate change events and stories in the media.
Problems created by climate change.
Rising ocean acidity threatens low-lying islands
Hummer (the car) sales decrease
Warmer seas blamed for rapid decline of Scottish puffin colony
Turning sea into acid bath
Climate change blamed as mango harvest goes sour in India
Melting Arctic ice could spur inland warming
Senegal city is 'most threatened'
Ocean changes may trigger US megadrought
Arctic thaw threatens Siberian permafrost
Conflicts fuelled by climate change causing new refugee crisis
Arctic sea ice melt 'even faster'
Retreating Antarctic sea ice threatens southern whales
Global warming to spark increase in US wildfires
Extreme floods, storms seen increasing in North America
Climate change to create "plant refugees"
Global warming moves Costa Rica coffee land higher
Climate change may strain U.S. forces
Plants and trees head for the hills to escape global warming
No ice at the North Pole
What we are told to do to help stop climate change.
Eating insects is good for us and for the environment, scientists claim
Generation energy at home
Japanese families to take speedier baths
Drive less and ditch your electric toothbrush
Personal carbon trading
Carbon capture from power stations
Forces homes to fix solar tiles in German
Scientist urges carbon taxKill your air conditioner
Problems created by climate change.
Rising ocean acidity threatens low-lying islands
Hummer (the car) sales decrease
Warmer seas blamed for rapid decline of Scottish puffin colony
Turning sea into acid bath
Climate change blamed as mango harvest goes sour in India
Melting Arctic ice could spur inland warming
Senegal city is 'most threatened'
Ocean changes may trigger US megadrought
Arctic thaw threatens Siberian permafrost
Conflicts fuelled by climate change causing new refugee crisis
Arctic sea ice melt 'even faster'
Retreating Antarctic sea ice threatens southern whales
Global warming to spark increase in US wildfires
Extreme floods, storms seen increasing in North America
Climate change to create "plant refugees"
Global warming moves Costa Rica coffee land higher
Climate change may strain U.S. forces
Plants and trees head for the hills to escape global warming
No ice at the North Pole
What we are told to do to help stop climate change.
Eating insects is good for us and for the environment, scientists claim
Generation energy at home
Japanese families to take speedier baths
Drive less and ditch your electric toothbrush
Personal carbon trading
Carbon capture from power stations
Forces homes to fix solar tiles in German
Scientist urges carbon taxKill your air conditioner
Bird flu 'still a major threat'
The BBC website, on 30th June 2008, had an article about the possible bird flu pandemic. It says,
The world is still at risk from a new pandemic strain of flu according to leading scientists.
The H5N1 strain of the bird flu virus has been out of the headlines for some time but experts say it still poses a potential threat.
In January that year there had been the first human deaths in Turkey and the threat to Western Europe seemed palpable.
The level of media interest in bird flu has subsided - but has the threat disappeared? Not really.
The threat may be theoretical at present - but all of the infectious disease experts I have spoken to over recent years agree that it is not a matter of if but of when the next flu pandemic will occur.
Nick White, a leading expert on infectious disease and professor of tropical medicine at Mahidol University in Bangkok and Oxford University then goes on to say.
"We did not overreact to the threat from bird flu and we should still be worried,
"It is fortunate that nothing has happened so far but a flu pandemic could be cataclysmic for the human race.
"If it became as infectious as Spanish flu in 1918-9 it could kill hundreds of millions of people."
At the moment you are more likely to die from lightning than blue flu, unless you’re a bird of course.
The world is still at risk from a new pandemic strain of flu according to leading scientists.
The H5N1 strain of the bird flu virus has been out of the headlines for some time but experts say it still poses a potential threat.
In January that year there had been the first human deaths in Turkey and the threat to Western Europe seemed palpable.
The level of media interest in bird flu has subsided - but has the threat disappeared? Not really.
The threat may be theoretical at present - but all of the infectious disease experts I have spoken to over recent years agree that it is not a matter of if but of when the next flu pandemic will occur.
Nick White, a leading expert on infectious disease and professor of tropical medicine at Mahidol University in Bangkok and Oxford University then goes on to say.
"We did not overreact to the threat from bird flu and we should still be worried,
"It is fortunate that nothing has happened so far but a flu pandemic could be cataclysmic for the human race.
"If it became as infectious as Spanish flu in 1918-9 it could kill hundreds of millions of people."
At the moment you are more likely to die from lightning than blue flu, unless you’re a bird of course.
Fire in the sky
The BBC website, on 30th June 2008, had an article about the 100 year anniversary of the comet explosion that flattened some 80 million trees in over 2000 square kilometres near Tunguska. It says
The blast was 1,000 times more powerful than the atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki and generated a shock wave that knocked people to the ground 60km from the epicentre.
The cause was an asteroid or comet just a few tens of metres across which detonated 5-10km above the ground.
To many, this event - the biggest space impact of modern times - serves as a reminder of the continuing threat posed to our planet by objects from space.
The international Spaceguard survey programme has been working to identify the Near-Earth Objects larger than 1km - the class of object could cause a "nuclear winter" if one were to strike the planet, possibly threatening civilisation.
Objects the size of the one that caused the Tunguska impact are too small to be seen by present-day surveys.
But there is no guarantee the next object will explode over the sea or a sparsely populated wilderness. This begs an obvious question: how prepared are we for the next one?
Dr Richard Crowther is head of the United Nations Near Earth Object (Neo) programme. He told the BBC News website: "Tunguska reminds us that these impact events have occurred in the relatively recent past.
"The surveys suggest that objects of this size are numerous enough to anticipate similar events in the relatively near future."
The blast was 1,000 times more powerful than the atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki and generated a shock wave that knocked people to the ground 60km from the epicentre.
The cause was an asteroid or comet just a few tens of metres across which detonated 5-10km above the ground.
To many, this event - the biggest space impact of modern times - serves as a reminder of the continuing threat posed to our planet by objects from space.
The international Spaceguard survey programme has been working to identify the Near-Earth Objects larger than 1km - the class of object could cause a "nuclear winter" if one were to strike the planet, possibly threatening civilisation.
Objects the size of the one that caused the Tunguska impact are too small to be seen by present-day surveys.
But there is no guarantee the next object will explode over the sea or a sparsely populated wilderness. This begs an obvious question: how prepared are we for the next one?
Dr Richard Crowther is head of the United Nations Near Earth Object (Neo) programme. He told the BBC News website: "Tunguska reminds us that these impact events have occurred in the relatively recent past.
"The surveys suggest that objects of this size are numerous enough to anticipate similar events in the relatively near future."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)