What’s On Topic for Planet3.0

This site is mostly on hiatus with occasional bouts of introspection, pending a technical reworking. Comments are off. mt aims to restart it in early 2016. (mt remains active on the internet, welcomes any kindhearted input and vows to learn from experience. Follow @mtobis for cryptic tweets and links to longer writings elsewhere.)

This article was posted in Engage.


  1. secondary organic aerosol
    Terrestrial vegetation and atmospheric photochemistry produce large amounts of fine particles in the atmosphere, thereby cooling Earth's climate. According to new research, the physical state of the fine particles produced by coniferous forests is solid, whereas previously scientists have assumed that these particles were liquid. The new findings have major implications for our understanding of particle formation processes, for the transformation of particles in the atmosphere and for their effects on climate.

    Don't you have anything on this ?

Click here to show comments that that do not meet our comment policy

  1. "Sustainability creates and maintains the conditions under which humans and nature can exist in productive harmony, that permit fulfilling the social, economic and other requirements of present and future generations"

    I don´t see ANY possibility of maintaining conditions under which over 6 billion homo sapiens can exist on a single planet.

    [undefended assertion. not helpful. -mt]

  2. "undefended assertion. not helpful. -mt".

    I suppose I could write a one hundred line set of references about the exhaustion of natural resources and increasing pollution. However, I think the key difference between us is how we view human nature. I see an enormous struggle for resources between populations, including wars. Think of it as a very large version of Easter Island and the collapse of that society after they exhausted their resources.

    A dream like condition in which you can either change our nature, or create a central control authority to make us behave isn´t practical. Might as well face it, we will take care of the problem, population will gradually shrink, and eventually will stabilize at a much lower value with people living in much worse conditions. It´s the natural outcome of the way we are. History shows that´s what we have done, and I don´t see a reason why we would change. Whether you consider it "helpful" or not is irrelevant. Your cause is doomed.

    [Off topic to what's on topic. Please resubmit to open thread. -mt]

Click here to close shadow comments

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.