THE DON JONES INDEX…

 

GAINS POSTED in GREEN

LOSSES POSTED in RED

 

11/13/15…  15,623.45

  11/6/15…  15,583.34

 

  6/27/13…  15,000.00

 

(THE DOW JONES INDEX: 11/13… 17,448.87; 11/6… 17,910.22; 6/27/13… 15,000.00)

 

LESSON for NOVEMBER 13, 2015 – The Politics of Hunger

 

In last week’s Lesson, we noted that humans can live five minutes without breathable air, five days without water.  What more do we need?

Well… how about food?

As a species goes, we rank about in the middle of the pack as far as what we consume to stay alive and what we can eat if we have to.  Better than the panda bears, certainly, who would die off if their supply of bamboo were to be cut off.  Better than the polar bears, lions and tigers and, even, dogs… carnivores as need a constant and consistent supply of fresh meat to eat… better off than the herbivores, too.  You could try feeding a horse or antelope the choicest filet mignon and it would starve to death.  We, fortunately, have adapted so as to be able to survive on animal or vegetable foodstuffs – our capacities limited only by faith (no bacon for the Jews and Muslims, no steak for devout Hindus, no coffee for the Mormons and the Seventh-Day-Adventists… which explains why the good Dr. Carson always seems so sleepy) and squeamishness (some people can and do eat bugs, finding them tasty and nourishing, but most find the prospect repulsive, to say nothing of consuming other taboo treats like baby seals and puppy dogs or, for the most part, each other).

Some other species, on the other hand, would get along fine on a meal of the other hand, or pretty much anything that is at hand.  Baby cockroaches grow up on diets of their parents’ excrement before moving on to the usual comestibles found in dirty households plus substances like glue and paper; termites will eat your households and, as for rats… enough said.

Even so, many human beings find it difficult to find enough to eat.

When an abundance of people… over six billion on a planet that would reasonably sustain about a billion… pursue a disabundance of food, the consequence is a famine.  The ubiquitous Wikivolk describe famine as “a widespread scarcity of food, caused by several factors including crop failure, population unbalance, or government policies,” and observes that “nearly every continent in the world has experienced a period of famine throughout history.” According to the Wiks, China has experienced 1,828 famines since the second century BC while, during the Middle Ages, Britain  endured 95.

To tally up the worst of the worst… from the first recorded famine, 441 BC in Rome up to this year’s great hungers in Yemen and South Sudan and including the Skull Famine of India (11 million dead in 1790 on the heels of the Chalisa and Great Bengal Famines, each of which killed ten million a few years earlier), the mid-19th century Taipeng, China (60 million dead) and Irish Potato (less than two million, but millions more emigrated to America) Famines and the Russian/Ukrainian famines of 1932-3 (from ten to possibly twenty million dead)… check out the mortality report here.

We’ve included plenty of charts and graphs following the week’s Index, one of which contains incidents of famine and its stepchildren – malnutrition, hunger and food-related diseases – assembled and ranked by nation courtesy of the FAO… not the toy store (which has trademarked the initials) but the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.  Said U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization estimates that about 805 million people of the 7.3 billion people in the world, or one in nine, were suffering from chronic undernourishment in 2012-2014. Almost all the hungry people, 791 million, live in developing countries, representing 13.5 percent, or one in eight, of the population of developing counties. There are 11 million people undernourished in developed countries.

Poverty is considered the principal cause of hunger, according to the World Hunger Organization.  Other factors named include “Conflict” (aka wars… notably in Pakistan, Nigeria, Libya, Somalia and, although after issuance of their 2015 report, Iraq and Syria), “Harmful (aka unequal) Economic Systems” (not the least of which is in the United States, almost alone among the developed nations) and a corollary, “Food and Agricultural Policy”, population growth and, as below, climate change.

WHO, for its part cited an article by Scientific American’s Lester Brown entitled “Could food shortages bring down civilization?” and answered, effectively, by a belief that this planet does have a limit to the population of humans it can support and, when we reach that limit, Mother Nature will abruptly step in and make a major correction through famine, disease and resulting conflict.  But we seem to be creatures of crisis, noted a commentator, “better at being reactive - proactive is not our strong suit.”

Incidentally, the New Age belief that Mother Nature (aka Gaia) is alive and pissed off draws some stark revelations and extreme conclusions from the faculty at Fort Lewis College in Colorado, who postulate that “the biosphere will respond to human activities by homeostatic actions that modulate or dampen the environmental changes that are occurring,” and… in what they acknowledge as an extreme view; “if it’s necessary for preservation of a living planet, the perpetrators of damage (i.e. humans) could be eliminated or their influence curtailed.”  (They suggest AIDS as a Gaian remedy!)

Among their less extreme suggestions is “regulating the amount of consumption worldwide” (in other words, dispatching U.N. bureaucrats to monitor the dinner table at every American household to be sure that no meats, eggs, gluten, milk or sugar or anything tasty is consumed.

Some might prefer government-created epidemics!

Steven Smith of SHAPINGTOMORROWSWORLD.ORG notes that the increases in food production that have enabled the planet to keep up with population growth and actually improve the diets of some peoples (the Chinese are importing more of the world’s soybeans and eating more meat) may not be maintained through the 21st century due to the usual suspects, particularly a scarcity of natural gas-based fertilizers and phosphates.  “Business as usual is not an option for future food production,” Smith concludes. “Science and technology can help but does not have all the answers. Improved crop varieties will be created but improvements are likely to be incremental rather than transforming. We will need to adjust to different food supplies and expectations. Seasonal food should be appreciated. We will need to make better use of the food we produce. The cost of food will increase with energy costs and people in the West should expect to spend an increasing proportion of their income on food.”

“At some point in the early years of the 21st century, there will be a clash of two giant forces: overpopulation and oil depletion,” concurs Peter Goodchild of countercurrents.org.  While not predicting (or promoting) the total eradication of people, Goodchild believes that there will come a culling of the human herd – probably by about half.  “(I)t will be impossible to get those two giant forces into equilibrium in any gentle fashion, because of a matter that is rarely considered: that in every year that has gone by — and every year that will arrive — the population of the earth is automatically adjusted so that it is almost exactly equal to its carrying capacity. We are always barely surviving. Population growth is soaring, whereas oil production is plunging. If, at the start of any year, the world’s population is greater than its carrying capacity, only simple arithmetic is needed to see that the difference between the two numbers means that mortality will be above the normal by the end of that year. In fact, over the course of the 21st century there will be about 4 billion deaths (probably about 3.6, to be more precise) above normal.

Let us refer to those 4 billion above-normal deaths as "famine deaths," for lack of a better term, since "peak oil" in terms of daily life is really "peak food." There will, of course, also be famines for other reasons. It is also true that warfare and plague will take their toll to a large extent before famine claims those same humans as its victims.

letsthinkabout.us unravels the next thirty years, as he/she/it views them contested between generations… the boomers, Gen. X, millennials and what h/s/I calls the “Homeland Generation”.   The 2020’s will be seen “as an absolute low-point of all humanity up to this point” as a “ true global crisis will have exploded onto the world scene, not seen since 1939” and then, after a decade of “disease, famine, natural disaster, war and any combination” Millennials will take over and impose a stagnant, insect-like dictatorship until 2040, when they are overthrown by the HG, who will bring stability, a sustained and growing economy and human/computer “integration”.  In brief, we will ascend, or descend, from our heritage as killer apes to insects, finally to machines.

While the most immediate predictions we discussed here are dark and gloomy, please remember this: the last 3 generational cycles (14 generations ago) starting with the founding of America have achieved technology, an economy, a standard of living, and a level of human freedom never before seen at any other time in history. As the world descends into barbarism during this era, it is merely the winter to the glorious spring that will emerge.

But perhaps the most august and reputable analysis of food policies, perils and persnickities comes from a handful of government, transgovernment, international and private sector think tanks such as the World Health and World Hunger Organizations (operated by the United Nations), various private-sector groups (usually with a political agenda… overt or covert) and American federally-funded agencies such as the CIA and the National Climate Assessment and Development Advisory Committee (NCADAC) often shortened to the NCA.

The NCADAC was established under the Department of Commerce in December 2010 and is supported through the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. A Federal advisory committee established as per the Federal Advisory Committee Act of 1972, it oversees the development of voluminous reports, the third of which was published in May, 2014.. NCA describes its members as “diverse in background, expertise, geography, and sector” as well as, for better or worse, just about as heavily cross-pollinated with agencies of a similar intent and slant as would be any major corporate board… NOAA’s Deputy Assistant Administrator Ko Barrett is also Vice-Chair of the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

The Third Report included a detailed description of American agriculture – past, present and future – and perhaps represents the most orthodox explication of the prospects of American farmers to increase crop yields at a time when arable land is shrinking and population… our own, and also that of other nations which we may be expected to support via trade or charity… is increasing.

“The United States produces nearly $330 billion per year in agricultural commodities, with contributions from livestock accounting for roughly half of that value,” the Assessment begins.  “Production of all commodities will be vulnerable to direct impacts (from changes in crop and livestock development and yield due to changing climate conditions and extreme weather events) and indirect impacts (through increasing pressures from pests and pathogens that will benefit from a changing climate). The agricultural sector continually adapts to climate change through changes in crop rotations, planting times, genetic selection, fertilizer management, pest management, water management, and shifts in areas of crop production. These have proven to be effective strategies to allow previous agricultural production to increase, as evidenced by the continued growth in production and efficiency across the United States.”

Increases in consecutive dry days and hot nights will have negative impacts on crop and animal production, said the scientists.  “High nighttime temperatures during the grain-filling period (the period between the fertilization of the ovule and the production of a mature seed in a plant) increase the rate of grain-filling and decrease the length of the grain-filling period, resulting in reduced grain yields. Exposure to multiple hot nights increases the degree of stress imposed on animals resulting in reduced rates of meat, milk, and egg production.”

The NCA predicts that the world will seek to feed nine billion people by 2050.  “U.S. agriculture exists as part of the global economy and agricultural exports have outpaced imports as part of the overall balance of trade,” claimed the NCA, but also listed several factors as potentially impacting this scenario…

1.  CLIMATE CHANGE

“Climate disruptions to agricultural production have increased in the past 40 years and are projected to increase over the next 25 years. By mid-century and beyond, these impacts will be increasingly negative on most crops and livestock.”

Beginning on Sunday, the Tri-Societies (American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America and Soil Science Society of America) will hold its annual meeting in Minneapolis joined, for the first time, by the Entomological Society of America (ESA) to connect more than 7,000 scientists, professionals, educators, and students.

At the close of its October, 2011 conference conducted in San Antonio (October, 2011) their report team concluded that… “Evidence that climate change has had and will have impacts on crops and livestock is based on numerous studies and is incontrovertible.”  This report has become fundamental to the mission and findings of the NCA.

By mid-century, when temperature increases are projected to be between 1.8°F and 5.4°F and precipitation extremes are further intensified, yields of major U.S. crops and farm profits are expected to decline.  Citing recent volatility in corn pricing and production, the Societies warned that : “Overall implications for production are for increased uncertainty in production totals, which affects both domestic and international markets and food prices.”

The scientists observed that rising temperatures will cause the production areas of various crops to shift (usually northwards) and a shortage of water (see last week’s Lesson ) will particularly impact some of the crops grown in drought areas such as California’s Central Valley.  There, crops like alfalfa, safflowers and corn will be minimally impacted, tomato, rice and wheat growers will face more difficulty and, by the year 2090, effects on cotton and sunflowers will be only little short of catastrophic.

Many crops depend on insect pollination and the number of frost days.  Apples, for example, have a “winter chilling requirement” (hours when temperatures are between 32°F and 50°F) which, in the Northeast, amounts to 400 hours and will be more easily met, over time, than chilling requirements for plums, cherries, peaches and some nut trees.

California grape vines have a low chilling requirement of about 90 hours per year, but increasing temperatures on the warmer, drier Pacific Coast will first affect the quality of wines before, late in the century or into the 2100s, curtailing production entirely.

2.  CARBON DIOXIDE

Carbon dioxide emissions, irregardless of temperature, have what the NCA researchers call a “mixed effect”.  Higher atmospheric concentrations can actually increase plant growth and increase water use efficiency.  Unfortunately, those plants most enhanced by the CO2 are weeds, which compete with the cultivated crops for light, air and nutrients.  The gas also reduces the nitrogen and protein content of crops such as soybeans and alfalfa as well as “reducing the ability of pasture and rangeland to support grazing livestock.” (see below)

3.  LIVESTOCK

The NCA reported that changing climatic conditions affect animal agriculture in four primary ways:  a) feed-grain production, availability, and price; b) pastures and forage crop production and quality; c) animal health, growth, and reproduction; and d) disease and pest distributions.

The optimum animal core body temperature exists within a narrow 4°F to 5°F range – deviations, reported the scientists, can cause animals to become stressed.  “This can disrupt performance, production, and fertility, limiting the animals’ ability to produce meat, milk, or eggs. In many species, deviations in core body temperature in excess of 4°F to 5°F cause significant reductions in productive performance, while deviations of 9°F to 12.6°F often result in death.  For cattle that breed during spring and summer, exposure to high temperatures reduces conception rates. Livestock and dairy production are more affected by the number of days of extreme heat than by increases in average temperature.  Elevated humidity also exacerbates the impact of high temperatures on animal health and performance.”

4.  WEEDS, DISEASES and PESTS

As above, exotic weeds, diseases, and pests… in addition to extant species already in the U.S….  have particular significance in that: a) they can often be invasive (that is, arrive without normal biological/ecological controls) and highly damaging; b) with increasing international trade, there are numerous high-threat, high-impact species that will arrive on commodities from areas where some species even now are barely known to modern science, but which have the potential to emerge under a changed climate regime to pose significant risk of establishment in the U.S. and economic loss; and c) can take advantage of “disturbances,” where climate variability acts as an additional ecological disturbance.

“Improved models and observational data related to how many agricultural regions will experience declines in animal and plant production from increased stress due to weeds, diseases, insect pests, and other climate change induced stresses will need to be developed,” the NCA advised.

The scientific literature is beginning to emerge, concluded the NCA, but “there are still some unknowns about the effects of biotic stresses, and there may well be emergent “surprises” resulting from departures from past ecological equilibria. Confidence is therefore judged to be medium (the NCA assesses predictions as very high, high, medium… “a few sources, limited consistency, models incomplete, methods emerging, etc.” ...  or low) that many agricultural regions will experience declines in animal and plant production from increased stress due to weeds, diseases, insect pests, and other climate change induced stresses.”

Will the participation of the bug scientist in next week’s Tri-Societies forum reinforce, refute or expand upon the problem?  We’ll find out – or you can.  

5.  SOIL EROSION

Soil is a critical component of agricultural systems, and the changing climate affects the amount, distribution, and intensity of precipitation. Soil erosion occurs when the rate of precipitation exceeds the ability of the soil to maintain an adequate infiltration rate. When this occurs, runoff from fields moves water and soil from the field into nearby water bodies.

Soil erosion is affected by rainfall intensity and there is evidence of increasing intensity in rainfall events even where the annual mean is reduced.   “Unprotected soil surfaces will have increased erosion and require more intense conservation practices,” the NCA acknowledged, “…shifts in seasonality and type of precipitation will affect both timing and impact of water availability for both rainfed and irrigated agriculture.”  Even before the commencement of an El Nino year, they prognosticated that: “Evidence is strong that in the future there will be more precipitation globally, and that rain events will be more intense, even if separated by longer periods without rain.”

As an example, the Assessment noted that, while there has not been an increase in total annual precipitation in the state of Iowa, “there has been a large increase in the number of days with heavy rainfall”. ((2001 through 2011)  They did not consider the effect of wildfires (either as affecting agriculture or human habitats) on runoff and soil erosion but it is hoped that the devastations of the past year will be included in their 2015 report.

6.  ADAPTATION

“Agriculture has been able to adapt to recent changes in climate; however, increased innovation will be needed to ensure the rate of adaptation of agriculture and the associated socioeconomic system can keep pace with climate change over the next 25 years.”

Even in the worst-case scenarios, human adaptability might rescue us from the dangers of runaway temperatures and either too much or too little water.  Or not.

Nonetheless, the NCA reported that certain measures could be taken outside of the intent of reducing global pollutants.

Warmer-season crops, such as melons, would grow better in warmer areas, while other crops, such as cereals, would grow more quickly, meaning less time for the grain itself to mature, reducing productivity.  Taking advantage of the increasing length of the growing season and changing planting dates could allow planting of more diverse crop rotations, which can be an effective adaptation strategy.

Livestock production systems that provide partial or total shelter to reduce thermal environmental challenges can reduce the risk and vulnerability associated with extreme heat. In general, livestock such as poultry and swine are managed in housed systems where airflow can be controlled and housing temperature modified to minimize or buffer against adverse environmental conditions. However, management and energy costs associated with increased temperature regulation will increase for confined production enterprises and may require modification of shelter and increased water use for cooling.

The NCA, contrary to opponents who have castigated it as a liberal, Socialist or (certainly) Obahamian power-grab, offered an olive branch to those they consider “responsible” representatives of Big Agra.  “Limits to public investment and constraints on private investment could slow the speed of adaptation, yet potential constraints and limits are not well-understood or integrated into economic impact assessments. The economic implications of changing biotic pressures on crops and livestock, and on the agricultural system as a whole, are not well-understood, either in the short or long term.   Adaptation may also be limited by availability of inputs (such as land or water), changing prices of other inputs with climate change (such as energy and fertilizer), and by the environmental implications of intensifying or expanding agricultural production.”

Although agriculture has a long history of successful adaptation to climate variability, the Assessment noted,  the accelerating pace of climate change and the intensity of projected climate change represent new and unprecedented challenges to the sustainability of U.S. agriculture. In the short term, existing and evolving adaptation strategies will provide substantial adaptive capacity, protecting domestic producers and consumers from many of the impacts of climate change, except possibly the occurrence of protracted extreme events. In the longer term, adaptation will be more difficult and costly because the physiological limits of plant and animal species will be exceeded more frequently, and the productivity of crop and livestock systems will become more variable.”

7.  FOOD SECURITY

So, is it advisable to move to a remote location, buy Meals Ready to Eat, guns (and lots of sunscreen) and await the Killoff?

Maybe.

“Climate change effects on agriculture will have consequences for food security, both in the U.S. and globally, through changes in crop yields and food prices and effects on food processing, storage, transportation, and retailing,” concludes the 2013 Assessment. But be of good cheer… “Adaptation measures can help delay and reduce some of these impacts.”

On the other hand, the NCA also concluded that: “Given the evidence base and remaining uncertainty, there is high confidence that climate change impacts will have consequences for food security both in the U.S. and globally through changes in crop yields and food prices, and very high confidence that other related factors, including food processing, storage, transportation, and retailing will also be affected by climate change. There is high confidence that adaptation measures will help delay and reduce some of these impacts.”

Venturing outside of the parameters of the producers, NCA offered this tentative gesture of bowing to political and economic reality.  “Food security includes four components: availability, stability, access, and utilization of food.   Following this definition, in 2011, 14.9% of U.S. households did not have secure food supplies at some point during the year, with 5.7% of U.S. households experiencing very low food security.   Food security is affected by a variety of supply and demand-side pressures, including economic conditions, globalization of markets, safety and quality of food, land-use change, demographic change, and disease and poverty.”  The noted that a “globalized food system” might buffer the impact of climate, but could also “increase the global vulnerability of food security by transmitting price shocks globally.”

Without noting the political complications that a potential famine would cause, the NCA advised that “…(s)upplies can be maintained through adaptations such as reducing waste in the food system, making food distribution systems more resilient to climate risks, protecting food quality and safety in higher temperatures, and policies to ensure food access for disadvantaged populations and during extreme events.”

Whether the production and distribution systems presently in place could accommodate such “extreme events” (either sudden – like wars, volcanoes, hurricanes) or longer-term (like an extended drought or global warming… or as a critic below posits… global cooling)… that the scientists have left to the politicians.

 

Tracking other sources, the World Hunger Organization has noted that ‘the vast majority of hungry people live in developing regions, which saw a 42 percent reduction in the prevalence of undernourished people between 1990–92 and 2012–14. Despite this progress, about one in eight people, or 13.5 percent of the overall population, remain chronically undernourished in these regions, down from 23.4 percent in 1990–92. As the most populous region in the world, Asia is home to two out of three of the world’s undernourished people.”  The estimate of 276 million chronically undernourished people in Southern Asia (India, Pakistan and Bangladesh) for the period 2012–14 is only marginally lower than the number  in 1990– 92.   Eastern Asia (where China is by far the largest country) and South-eastern Asia (including Indonesia, Philippines, Mynamar, Vietnam and others) have reduced undernutriton substantially as has Latin America.  The least progress was reported in the sub-Saharan region, where more than one in four people remain undernourished – the highest prevalence of any region in the world. Nevertheless, the prevalence of undernourishment in sub-Saharan Africa has declined from 33.3 percent in 1990– 92 to 23.8 percent in 2012–14, although the number of undernourished people has actually increased.

 

 Of course, there are doubters, dissenters and deniers.  One of the more rational of these is the Cato Institute, a Republican-trending-towards-Libertarian think tank with a haughty scoffing of any mention of damaging consequences of the burning of fossil fuels and the resultant superprofits to Big Petro.

Calling the Assessment “pseudoscience”, the Catographers damned it as overly focusing “on the supposed negative impacts from climate change while largely dismissing or ignoring the positives from climate change.

The bias in the National Climate Assessment (NCA) towards pessimism (which we have previously detailed here) has implications throughout the federal regulatory process because the NCA is cited (either directly or indirectly) as a primary source for the science of climate change for justifying federal regulation aimed towards mitigating greenhouse gas emissions. Since the NCA gets it wrong, so does everyone else.

“This National Assessment is much closer to pseudoscience than it is to science. It is as explanatory as Sigmund Freud. It clearly believes that virtually everything in our society is tremendously dependent the surface temperature, and, because of that, we are headed towards certain and inescapable destruction, unless we take its advice and decarbonize our economy, pronto. Unfortunately, the Assessment can’t quite tell us how to accomplish that, because no one knows how.

“In the Assessment’s 1200 horror-studded pages, almost everything that happens in our complex world — sex, birth, disease, death, hunger, and wars, to name a few — is somehow made worse by pernicious emissions of carbon dioxide and the joggling of surface average temperature by a mere two degrees.”

Another right-wing negative assessment of the NCA’s negative assessment of climate change (although on a different scientific premise) comes from John L. Casey, a former NASA engineer now  President of the climate research company, the Space and Science Research Corporation (SSRC), in Orlando, Florida.  Mr. Casey calls himself “the leading advocate in the US for a national and international plan to prepare for the next climate change to one of a dangerous cold climate era. This new cold era is caused by a historic decline in the Sun’s energy output,” which he calls a “solar hibernation” in his magnum opus “Cold Sun”.  Unlike the Big Petro apologists, Casey does not deny global warming, he hails it as a counter-measure to what might otherwise be a coming Ice Age.

On the left, FAIR (Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting) … which calls itself “progressive” and which “believes that structural reform is ultimately needed to break up the dominant media conglomerates, establish independent public broadcasting and promote strong non-profit sources of information,” While not specifically condemning the NCA’s Assessment as corporate doublespeak, it and others have questioned the legitimacy and bias of the IPCC, which has come under fire from climatechange.org.  Across two decades and thousands of pages of reports, the world's most authoritative voice on climate science has consistently understated the rate and intensity of climate change and the danger those impacts represent, say a growing number of studies on the topic. 

“This conservative bias, say some scientists, could have significant political implications, as reports from the group – the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change – influence policy and planning decisions worldwide, from national governments down to local town councils.”

“When it comes to U.S. media coverage of global warming ,” scolds FAIR, “superficial balance—telling “both” sides of the story—can actually be a form of informational bias.” 

And finally, there is the age-old argument that whether the Earth is growing hotter or colder and whether the sun is expanding, contracting or just loafing around is all irrelevant because the end of not only the world, but the Universe is at hand and Jesus is coming back to gather up the believers, cast the climate change advocates into a pit more fiery than the fiery planet they envision within a few years or centuries and recycle the whole into Paradise.  Newsweek, at the dawn of Y2K, reported that: “Forty percent of all Americans and 45  percent of Christians believe that the world will end, as the Bible predicts, in a battle at Armageddon between Jesus and the Antichrist.”  So… why worry?  Why conserve?

“The earth we inhabit is not a permanent planet, nor was it ever intended to be,” contends gotquestions.org, a Christian website. “The environmental movement is consumed with trying to preserve the planet forever, and we know this is not God's plan. He tells us in 2 Peter 3:10 that at the end of the age, the earth and all He has created will be destroyed: "But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, and then the heavens will pass away with a loud noise, and the elements will be dissolved with fire, and the earth and the works that are upon it will be burned up" (NKJV).

In “America's Providential History”, a popular reconstructionist high-school history textbook, authors Mark Beliles and Stephen McDowell tell us that: "The secular or socialist has a limited resource mentality and views the world as a pie ... that needs to be cut up so everyone can get a piece." However, "the Christian knows that the potential in God is unlimited and that there is no shortage of resources in God's Earth. The resources are waiting to be tapped."

Much of what may be termed an end-times version of the “wise use” environmental policies derive fromJames Watt, Ronald Reagan’s Interior Secretary from 1981 to 1983, who famously derided environmentalists for their carping against Big Oil and other extractive corporations inasmuch as the world was going to end shortly and God, like your mother, would be offended if His children left anything (food, energy, clean air, water, etc.) on their plates before they were raptured away.

Ten years ago, he both backtracked and doubled down on his beliefs in an op-ed piece for the Washington Post, complaining that some of his more flamboyant statements had been misinterpreted…

“Now political activists of the religious left are refreshing those two-decades-old lies and applying them with a broad brush to whole segments of the Christian community: "people who believe the Bible," members of Congress and "Rapture proponents." If these merging groups -- the extreme environmentalists and the religious left -- are successful in their campaign, the Christian community will be marginalized, its conservative values maligned and its electoral clout diminished.

“The National Council of Churches issued a statement "in an effort to refute" what NCC theologians "call a 'false gospel' . . . and to reject teachings that suggest humans are 'called' to exploit the Earth without care for how our behavior impacts the rest of God's creation. . . . This false gospel still finds its proud preachers and continues to capture its adherents among emboldened political leaders and policymakers."

But, he added, citing the “conservationist” tendencies within conservatism…

“If such a body of belief exists, I would totally reject it, as would all of my friends.”  He now denies having made statements like: "God gave us these things to use. After the last tree is felled, Christ will come back."

And Accuracy in Media’s Mark Musser draws a line connecting environmentalism with the Third Reich.  “Historians have either overlooked or forgotten that sweeping Nazi environmental laws, all signed by Hitler and considered to be his pet projects, preceded the racially charged Nuremberg Laws, reflecting the fact that Nazi racism was rooted in ecology.  By the summer of 1935, right before the Nuremberg laws were set up, Nazi Germany was by far the greenest regime on the planet.”

The liberal and some moderate religionists have turned the argument on its head, retorting that God commanded humans to be “stewards” of the earth and Revelations even commands that those who destroy God’s earth be themselves destroyed.

“All of the problems the world is facing stem from overpopulation,” states Galaxy Man in response to Brown’s Scientific American article. “However, religious groups put intense pressure on followers to procreate like mad because it is 'glorifying God'.”  (It is also because the Abrahamanic religions… Judaism, Islam and Christianity… still follow the principles of Deuteronomy 20 and require population grown to breed soldiers to kill those

“The Bible says that we are to be fruitful and multiply,” responds another poster, Bill R., “but it limits that by saying we are to fill the earth. I think we all need to admit that we have finished filling the earth and it is time to get into a sustaining mode.”

The economy was particularly fruitful for Don Jones, with employment, wages and exports rising, leading to a much-improved balance of payments.  Of course, the good news prompted the bean-counters at the Fed to count their beans and hint at a rise in the interest rates, which set the Dow tumbling… leading to its overwhelming humiliation by the Don.  But there was more good news for all as American military forces celebrated Veterans’ Day by retaking the key Iraqi town of Sinjar (with a little help from the Kurds) and blowing up arrogant little Jihad Johnny, who has beheaded his last infidel.

And now, some charts and graphs…

 

 Undernourishment around the world, 1990-2 to 2012-4
Number of undernourished and prevalence (%) of undernourishment

 

1990-2 No.

1990-2 %

2012-4 No.

2012-4 %

World

1,014.5

18.7

805.3

11.3

Developed regions

20.4

<5

14.6

<5

Developing regions

994.1

23.4

790.7

14.5

Africa

182.1

27.7

226.7

20.5

  Sub-Saharan Africa

176.0

33.3

214.1

23.8

Asia

742.6

23.7

525.6

12.7

  Eastern Asia

295.2

23.2

161.2

10.8

  South-Eastern Asia

138.0

30.7

63.5

10.3

  Southern Asia

291.7

24.0

276.4

15.8

Latin America & Carib.

68.5

15.3

37.0

6.1

Oceana

1.0

15.7

1.4

14.0

Source: FAO The State of Food Insecurity in the World 2014 p. 8

 

THE DON JONES INDEX

 

CHART of CATEGORIES w/ VALUE ADDED to EQUAL BASELINE of 15,000.00

(REFLECTING… approximately… DOW JONES INDEX of June 27, 2013)


See a further explanation of categories here…

Simply recording gains or losses is deceptive, because some of the indices here represent GOOD things (like incomes and life expectancy) while others represent BAD things (unemployment, terror).  So, increases in good things and decreases in bad things are considered GOOD (and are depicted in GREEN) – decreases in good things and increases in the bad are considered BAD (and are depicted in RED).

The sum of good things, less the sum of bad things, equals the week’s gain (or loss) to Don Jones.

 

ECONOMIC FACTORS (60%)

 

DON JONES’ PERSONAL ECONOMIC INDEX  (45% of TOTAL INDEX POINTS)

 

 

    INCOME

(24%)

BASE

6/27/13

RECKONINGS

LAST       CHANGE     NEXT

DON

11/6/15

DON

11/13/15

                                OUR SOURCE(S) and COMMENTS

 

 

 

Wages (hourly, p/c.)*

 

10%

 

1500 points

 

11/13/15

 

  +0.47%      

 

   Nov.

 

1549.68

 

1557.03

 

http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-states/wages   21.18

 

 

Median Income (dc)

4%

600

11/13/15

  +0.04%  

11/20/15

615.57

615.80

http://www.usdebtclock.org/   29,013

 

 

Unemployment

4%

600

11/13/15

 +2.00%                    

Nov.

916.63

934.96

http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000000    5.0

 

 

         Official #mil.

2%

300

11/13/15

 -1.09%              

11/20/15

442.24

437.41

http://www.usdebtclock.org/      7.872

 

 

     Unofficial #mil.

2%

300

11/13/15

-0.79%             

11/20/15

445.35

448.84

http://www.usdebtclock.org/    15.300

 

 

Workforce Participation

       Number

       Percentage

2%

300

11/13/15

 

+0.11%                     +10.46%             

11/20/15

293.02

299.37

Americans in/not in workforce (mil.)

In: 149.184 Out:  94.585 Total: 243.769

http://www.usdebtclock.org/    61.20%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

http://ycharts.com/indicators/labor_force_participation_rate  62.40% nd

 

 

         OUTGO

 

15%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total Inflation

9%

1350

10/16/15

-0.2

11/20/15

1321.97

1321.97

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/cpi.nr0.htm      -0.2 nd

 

 

          Food

2%

300

10/16/15

+0.4

11/20/15

 285.77

 285.77

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/cpi.nr0.htm      +0.4

 

 

            Gas

2%

300

10/16/15

-9.0

11/20/15

 386.33

 386.33

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/cpi.nr0.htm      -9.0

 

 

 

     Medical Costs

2%

300

10/16/15

+0.3

11/20/15

 285.34

 285.34

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/cpi.nr0.htm      +0.3                            

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

WEALTH

6%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dow Jones

 2%

300

11/13/15

-2.58%      

11/20/15

322.56

314.23

Dow Jones Index   17,493.10

 

 

Home Sales

Home Valuations

 

 1%

 1%

150

150

10/23/15 10/23/15

sales  + 4.52%        price -  2.97%              

11/20/15      11/20/15

198.33     206.30

198.33     206.30

http://www.realtor.org/research-and-statistics

Sales (M):  5.55 Valuations (K):  221.9 nd

 

 

Debt (Personal)

2%

300

11/13/15

+0.22%      

11/20/15

278.34

277.27

http://www.usdebtclock.org/    53,629

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

UNITED STATES ECONOMIC INDEX  (15% of TOTAL INDEX POINTS)

 

 

 

NATIONAL

 

 

10%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Revenues (trillions.)

2%

300

11/13/15

 +0.18%      

11/20/15

363.87

364.54

http://www.usdebtclock.org/       3.273

 

 

 

Expenditures (tl.)

2%

300

11/13/15

+0.13%      

11/20/15

283.60

283.22

http://www.usdebtclock.org/       3.706

 

 

 

U.S. Natl. Debt (tl.)

3%

450

11/13/15

+0.73%    

11/20/15

403.22

400.27

http://www.usdebtclock.org/     18.604

 

 

 

Total Debt* (tl.)

3%

450

11/13/15

+0.16%    

11/20/15

403.76

403.12

http://www.usdebtclock.org/     65.824

 

 

*   U.S. Total Debt includes household, business, state and local government, financial institutions and the Federal Government  (source – Federal Reserve)

 

 

 

GLOBAL

5%

 

 

 

 

 

Foreign Debt (tril.)

2%

300

11/13/15

+0.02%       

11/20/15

   324.59

   324.53

http://www.usdebtclock.org/        6.105

 

 

Exports (bl.)

1%

150

11/13/15

 +1.51%      

11/20/15

   146.97

   149.19

http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/statistics/highlights/congressional.html   187.9

 

 

Imports (bl.)

1%

150

11/13/15

 -2.069%      

11/20/15

   140.99

   143.89

http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/statistics/highlights/congressional.html   228.7

 

 

Trade Deficit (bl.)

1%

150

11/13/15

+18.38%             

11/20/15

   106.94

   126.60

http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/statistics/highlights/congressional.html     40.8

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

                                  SOCIAL FACTORS (40%)

 

LIBERTY and SECURITY INDEX           (15%)

 

 

      ACTS of MAN

      9%

 

 

 

 

 

World Peace

3%

450

11/13/15

nc

11/20/15

414.16

414.16

US media caught in gaffe “hailing” a victory by Syrian dictator Assad (with his Russian and Iranian allies) over ISIS.  Admittedly a tough call, but…

 

Terrorism

2%

300

11/13/15

+2.2%

11/20/15

272.08

278.07

American/Kurdish forces recapture town of Sinjar, Iraq and despicable beheader Jihad Johnny gets droned.

 

Freedom

2%

300

11/13/15

-1.4%

11/20/15

303.38

307.63

Human rights activist Aung San Suu Ky elected President of Myanmar (soon to be back to Burma).  Goodfellas” and Lufthansa robber gets sprung from the pokey.

 

Corruption

1%

150

11/13/15

+0.5%

11/20/15

160.53

159.73

Sexting secret service agent found to be mad about fourteen.  Some varieties of Italian virgin olive oil turn out to be not virginal.

 

Crime

1%

150

11/13/15

+0.3%

11/20/15

131.59

131.98

Some of the idiots who like to shine eye-destroying green lasers into airplane and helicopter cockpits get busted in the Bronx.  Lock ‘em up!

 

 

 

     ACTS of GOD

       6%

      (with, in some cases, a little… or lots of… help from men, and a few women)

 

Environment/Weather

3%

450

11/13/15

    +0.2%

11/20/15

422.72

421.87

Tornadoes in Iowa this time.  Presidential candidates flee.

 

Disasters      

3%

450

11/13/15

    -0.2%

11/20/15

390.25

389.47

Small plane crashes into house, big plane catches fire… pilot of the Allegiance Air plane smells smoke and safely evacuates passengers.  His reward?  He’s fired… he cost the company money.  Revoke their licenses NOW!

 

 

 

LIFESTYLE and JUSTICE INDEX        (13%) 

 

Education

4%

    600

     11/13/15

-0.5%

As manifests

587.66

584.72

Cowardly president of U. of Mizzou capitulates to loudmouth protesters (because they are football players who could have cost the U. money if they boycotted).  Predictably, this spreads to Claremont-McKenna college in California, even though they have no football time.  PC at its slimiest.

 

Equality

4%

    600

11/13/15

nc

As manifests

729.51

729.51

The good?  Actress Jennifer Lawrence joins fight for Hollywood pay equity and starts aiming her bow at execs.  The bad?  Utah judge yanks baby away from lesbian couple.

 

Health (Life Exp.)

2%

    300

11/13/15

-0.1%

As manifests

289.46

289.17

After calling for ban on bacon, docs pronounce that the limits of healthy blood pressure should be reduced from 140 to 120.  Everybody’s gonna DIE!

 

Health (Other)

2%

   300

11/13/15

-0.1%

As manifests

287.80

287.51

Women sue birth control pillmaker for faulty pills, demand to be compensated for the cost of raising the consequences into adulthood.  Just what the kids need – court documents proving that their lives are a mistake.

 

Justice

1%

   150

11/13/15

+0.1%

As manifests

159.90

160.06

New York calls fantasy football leagues gambling and says “geddoutahere!”  You want to gamble, play the state lottery.

 

 

 

 

MISCELLANEOUS and TRANSIENT INDEX        (13%)

 

 

All transient incidents

10%

1000

11/13/15

nc

11/20/15

1007.95

1007.95

Walmart moves Black Friday up a day.  Who cares about Thanksgiving, let’s SHOP!

 

Misc. cultural foibles      

 3%

300

11/13/15

+0.2%

11/20/15

309.45

310.07

Trump/Carson etc. continue to amaze and amuse.  Who needs fake reality TV as long as these clowns are loose?

 

 

 

 

SUMMARY:

The Don Jones Index for the week of November 6th through 12th was UP 39.89 points

The Don Jones Index is sponsored by the Coalition for a New Consensus: retired Congressman and Independent Presidential candidate Jack “Catfish” Parnell, Chairman; Brian Doohan, Administrator/Editor.  The CNC denies, emphatically, allegations that the organization, as well as any of its officers (including former Congressman Parnell, environmentalist/America Firster Austin Tillerman and cosmetics CEO Rayna Finch) and references to Parnell’s works, “Entropy and Renaissance” and “The Coming Kill-Off” are fictitious or mere pawns in the web-serial “Black Helicopters” – and promise swift, effective legal action against parties promulgating this and/or other such slanders.

 

Comments, complaints, donations (especially SUPERPAC donations) always welcome at: feedme@generisis.com or: speak@donjonesindex.com