http://millenniumprojecttwo.blogspot.com/2007/01/uk-nuclear-deterrent-applied-planetary.html

if we have a;ready gone past a tipping point as Lovelock and I believe. Then we are in the lag time before the manifestation of planetary ecological life support system collapse.

We either sit around and wait for the politicians to do nothing. Or we do something.

We have to sort of reverse engineering the degredation of the planetary eco-system.

Adaption and survival to your meteor strike to me was another example of having to get ‘a grip’ on the planetary situation.

My survival comment was more localised. In the event of a planet-wide meteor catastrophe, we are screwed, no two ways about it.

In the event of local disruptions - to food, energy, and water supplies - we can adapt by raising awareness of the problem and training engineers, architects and medics.

Take New Orleans. If you were a policy maker in 1990, would you listen to the engineers and reinforce the flood defences, or would you build loads of wind turbines and keep your fingers crossed?

I think all your points about space collisions are all valid.

Another thing they do is give an objective perspective of the Earth as a whole, as an eco-system, defined by it’s discrete isolation in space.

With reference to “adapt to the possibility and prepare for survival?”

Would this involve programmes to re-engineer the planetary ecosystem to create sustainable conditions after disruption caused by a collision?

I was thinking about it today funnily enough. We now know - as of the last ten years - that meteors do indeed pass close enough to us to be a serious cause for concern, every one to two years. (luckily we have jupiter and the moon, but that’s a slight tangent).

There is no way we can actually blow them up - we would not have enough warning to launch a missile in time.

So, do we go all-out to try to prevent being hit, spending huge sums of money on early warning systems and nuclear missiles that have minimal chances of success, or do we adapt to the possibility and prepare for survival?

And do we really need to scare the bejesus out of the public in order to achieve our aims?

Would destroying or deflecting it with a nuclear blast be considered eco-friendly or peaceful?

One did pass quite close a few days ago.

Being so old all it’s manufacturing resource and energy costs are minimal spread out over so many years.

People see it and don’t realise it is a WRC of the early 80’s with 21st century technology underneath. Brakes, steering, suspension, bushes etc etc.

Eco friendly yes. But get it on a twisty road. Fun and adventure. Cost £150 to buy. You would have to spend serious serious money to get anything new to stick with it now. It and others also keeps the engineering skills alive.

When I go to London 550 miles plus. I use the coach.

Back to the car analogy. In 2002 in the run up to the Iraq war world leaders were debating about changing the colours of the furry dice in the the global car.

Having been just invited to contribute to the new generation of UK climte models and recommended to the Cabinet Office to advise on sustainable devlopment, I had two things going for me. One was kudos, if I wrote something in a UN report for the UK government it would be read.

This was 2002 remember. So the second was I knew that within the political system the knowledge of global ecological systems was minimal. What was there was, in the main disjointed, inappropriate, confused and at times completely inaccurate.

if you don’t understand UK Government, let me try and explain with a hypothetical. 1000 scientists may work on reserach for evidenced based policy.

This goes to say the science directorate. Then to the Cabinet Minister for a decision re policy or legislation.

Now the chances are the Minister has gone through school, education and all their life and never read one book on science or engineering or anything similar. They do art history and politics. Get a degree in law and become an MP.

Many civil servants are the same who advise or prepare work for Ministers. Give them something on global ecological systems and their eyes would glaze over. I realised this.

In the run up to Iraq the politicians were discussing changing the colour of the furry dice of the planetary car.

I had been asked as a mechanic to advise these politicians in a UN report on the priorities of running a car.

Now I would have liked to have given them the full benefit of my knowledge and explained about brakes, steering, suspension etc. But I knew it was pointless, it would lose them. These people think a car is about furry dice and beaded seat cushions. Full stop end of knowledge.

So I take something blindingly obvious. I point to the tyres and say “tyres are more important than furry dice”. Those black round rubbery things.

What I hoped would happen would after they got interested in tyres this would stir their interest in brakes, fuel lines etc. All the other equally important things that are essential to the safe and continued running of the global car.

Unfortunately this did not happen. The Chief Car Technician to the Government saw my recommedation. He went to the media and said “tyres are more important than furry dice to the safe running of the global car”.

Everyone went wow. Tyres! All the beaded seat and noddy dog people suddenly got into tyres. Suddenly everyone has a view on the mechanics of the global car.

Some people are obsessive. They measure the tread depth with little gauges. Others prefer just to look at the tyres and decide. Other little groups debate whether they are going to have Pirelli or Bridgestones. With squiggly patterns or blocks

Other groups don’t agree. They believe bald tyres are fine as they put down more rubber, so in the dry create more grip.

Tyre changing suddenly became the No 1 global topic for debate. The politicians talk aboutit, it fills the media. There are even tyre changing websites!

This was not supposed to happen. I said tyres are more important than furry dice as an introduction to global car mechanics. In the hope that people could also then get interested in steering and suspension and brakes.

Everyone in the car is now going to die because they think if they talk about tyre changing they will be safe.

What is going to happen is they are going to shoot off in their global car chatting about tyre changing. Get to the first corner. The steering is loose. They can’t make the bend. Panic, hit the brakes which fail. Lose cotrol as the suspension is shot. Crash in a fireball because the high pressure fuel lines are corroded and burst.

Everyone dies.

OK I admit I made everything up. I never told the UK Government that tyres are more important than furry dice, as an introduction to global car mechanics.

I told them climate change is a greater threat than terrorism as an introduction to sustainable planetary ecological life support
system management.

There is a corner on the evolutionary pathway of the planet approaching.

http://www.mp2.worldfriend.com/sustainable_development_forum.htm