(Recorded October 7, 2024)
Description
In a polarized and fractured society, those who draw attention to the ecological devastation wrought by human activities, and those who champion the importance of protecting non-human life, increasingly face the label of being ‘anti-human.’ In this Frankly, Nate reads a poem he wrote 20 years ago this month “The Lament of the Bigfoot” which highlights the disproportionate role humans have on the ecosystems they inhabit and reflects on how his attitudes have both changed and stayed the same 20 years on.
Yes, the scale of the human enterprise has resulted in unprecedented harm to Earth’s biosphere. But separate from – and indeed as a result of – our past decisions, it is our actions today that will steer the future. Imagine how different that future might look if humanity harnessed its ingenuity and innovation to become active contributors, embedded within the web of life.
Is it possible to overcome ‘the agenda of the gene‘? And if so: how? And when? In what ways could humans actively enhance ecosystems by creating, rather than appropriating, biological productivity? And how might we reframe cultural and economic incentives to accelerate the shift towards an ecological civilization? Big open questions.
Support The Institute for the Study of Energy and Our Future
Join our Discord channel and connect with other listeners
Show Notes
01:12 – Herman Daly + TGS Episode
02:07 – Bigfoot
02:09 – ‘The Lament of the Bigfoot’ poem
04:43 – Patterson/Gimlin film
05:03 – Atossa Soltani
06:24 – Jared Diamond + cutting down the last tree
06:56 – Daniel Quinn + Takers and Leavers
07:13 – What if Climate Change was a Hoax?
08:03 – Leaving the stability of the Holocene
08:32 – Pella Thiel + TGS Episode
09:40 – Joanna Macy + Council of All Beings
10:32 – TGS Episode on Energy Blindness in economics
10:43 – Net Primary Productivity (NPP) + Human appropriation of NPP
10:58 – Regenerative agriculture + impact on soil health
11:27 – Restoring wetlands
11:35 – Reconnecting water flows
11:50 – Carbon stored in wetlands
11:58 – Forests grow at *2.5% per year
12:14 – 19 terawatt metabolism
13:13 – *6 of 9 planetary boundaries have been exceeded
13:24 – Maximum Power Principle, Economic Superorganism
13:53 – Frankly on emerging shift in consciousness
15:58 – Four Horsemen
17:40 – Mary Oliver + poem
Comments
Welcome to the new Resillience commenting system!
We have moved from the former Disqus commenting system to a new system as of September 10, 2026.
We made this change because of privacy concerns regarding Disqus. It's also part of a set of changes to bring more services to the Resilience community under a single login: commenting, (coming September 2026), and online courses (coming 2027). Unfortunately, your old Disqus comments may not reliably link to your account in this new system. Please contact us if you have any questions or concerns.
an abrupt collapse of the human system, for many reasons I've discussed, could be the worst case for the natural world with wars and the 2020, you know, the modern version of Jared Diamond's chopping down the last tree and so I think there needs to be more of a holistic bend versus break, which is a large part of my work.
I'll believe in "bend versus break" when I see the Keeling Curve roll over, the global human population start to decline and wildlife and insect populations start increasing.
All the good intentions and self-sacrifice in the world can't do much to change the dynamics of the modern city, which suck in energy and resources and spit out waste. Half the world's population lives in a city now and those people aren't going to vote to commit suicide to reduce the human impact on nature. Unless a complexity failure kills it first, the superorganism is going to keep going until resource depletion or other natural feedbacks kill it.
Modern civilization is still on a course to break, not bend, and the sooner it happens, the less long term damage there will be to the natural world. We should welcome doom, not try to avoid it.