Earth 2100 is a television show that was presented by the U.S. based ABC News on June 2, 2009. Later, in 2010, it also aired on the History Channel. This was a documentary style program that considered the findings of scientists from around the world. The real world research was combined with the fictional account of a woman named Lucy, who is born in 2009, and lives to the year 2100.
According to executive producer Michael Bicks: "this program was designed to show the worst case scenario for human civilization. Again, we are not saying that events will happen — rather, that if we fail to seriously address the complex problems of climate change, resource depletion and overpopulation, they are much more likely to happen."
I took special note of this program when it aired. I had long been fascinated by cautionary tales like this one. But this particular warning felt different. It wasn't presenting an unbelievable future. It actually felt all too possible. This was largely in part, due to the fact that many of the scenarios were already taking place.
Earth 2100 should have been a wake-up call (at least to Americans), but in recent years, it has felt more like a roadmap to disaster. If you were to watch this show now on your personal media device, you might actually get nervous. It is now 2024, and we are on the other side of what could be phase one of a global pandemic, that paralyzed our entire planet, just a few years ago.
Your particular world view may color how you view such doomsday predictions. Your political position may also govern your perspective on this topic. Some even suspect the governments of the world may be orchestrating these scenarios in order to achieve a goal of forced population reduction.
Real or imagined, the effects on our lives are felt both physically for some, and financially for all of us. There isn't a country in the world that isn't seeing their currency devaluing through inflation and downsizing.
Regardless, of why you believe these things are happening, they are not only happening, but accelerating at an alarming rate. The question is: When we actually care, why do we care? We care when it harms us or our family personally.
A recent hurricane that passed over an area of Mexico was listed as a category five storm, but the U.S. media outlets only reported on their concerns regarding what category the storm would be upon reaching U.S. soil. What about other countries in and around the Caribbean? Shouldn't we be concerned about people experiencing category five winds, regardless of what country they live in? Apparently, not.
I am not describing an isolated incident. I noticed this is the norm in the United States. Since media access became global, it is now possible to compare news outlets around the world. If you for instance listen to the BBC you may have noticed that they often report on the weather conditions of countries around the world. This is especially true when storms become deadly.
Why is there a difference between how storms are reported? The United States may not be alone in this pattern of isolationism, but it claims to be a leader on the world stage. So, you would think it would report more diversely. Even if the media outlets did report about these conditions affecting other countries, would you even care? For that matter, would I? After all, what can I personally do? Even if I could send relief supplies, as I might do to assist people in an American city, that relief assistance would only be a band-aid on a much larger issue.
No matter what you believe about climate change, localized climate disaster is real. It always has been. It is recorded throughout history. Your doubting global catastrophe should have nothing to do with your human decency.
Why would we not want to help others who may be suffering? Why is empathy too painful for some people? Storms can be dangerous, even deadly. But a greater question is: "Am I my brother's (or sister's) keeper? We often refer to the eye of the storm as a quiet point in the center of the storm, but have you considered the devastating effects of the "I" of the storm?
When I am only concerned with a storm that affects me or someone I know personally, the "I" can become more destructive than the storm itself. There is a human propensity to be nepotistic when in it comes to crisis. The amygdala in our brain goes into fight or flight mode. The concern for survival may override concern for others. This is not a universal truth. Many will rise to the occasion, especially when facing the storm personally. Human decency may be present when we feel connected to others who suffer.
So, why is there a disconnect when the disaster is distant? One reason could be that we are not wired for this modern media linkup with all the events going on at any given moment. It's called information overload, and it can produce anxiety, paralyzing fear, and cold indifference. We may become so overwhelmed by what we are hearing that it releases cortisol into our system, leading to health problems that can distract me from anything, or anyone else.
Not everyone responds in this way. Some will get angry, looking for someone to blame. If you identify with this scenario, then others may classify you as a conspiracy theorist (or worse).
Some may dive deep down the rabbit hole. In an attempt to make sense of our chaotic world, ideas that many would consider ludicrous may be adopted. For instance, some believe we live on a flat earth. Now, as I stated at the beginning of this book, I do not wish to alienate anyone. If you hold this world view, this is not a personal attack. But I want to ask you a very important question. Let's say you are correct. If there really is a dome surrounding our circle of the earth, and we are pumping greenhouse gases, and other toxic gases into our atmosphere, wouldn't that mean we are living in a literal greenhouse?
I don't know about you, but that paradigm would terrify me. Imagine starting a bonfire in an enclosed space. What would happen? Without any outlet for the smoke, disaster would ensue. I'm not using this scenario to make fun of or disprove a flat earth model. My point is, a flat-earther should be more concerned about our environment than the rest of us. If they are right then we are in even greater danger than our current climate models suggest.
What is holding you back from taking this storm seriously? I don't know you personally, so I'm not going to suggest that I know. I can however, tell you what I believe, and it is this: As humans we tend to get in our own way when it comes to change. We may rise to the occasion in a moment of crisis, but when it comes to long term stuff, we tend to have a short attention span.
I find one particular world view especially troubling. Let's talk, (not about them, but) to them on the next page.
YOU ARE READING
God Please Save Your Planet...from us.
Non-FictionThe perspective that could change everything.
