Experts see high chance of ‘global catastrophe’ within 10 years

Paco Dennis

SF VIP
Location
Mid-Missouri
As we head into the future there are some real concerns that need our attention and action. My hope is that we understand the dangers and prepare for them, plus elect leaders to make policies to alleviate these dangers.

LondonCNN —
Humanity faces a perilous future, marked by an explosion of disinformation turbocharged by artificial intelligence and the devastating effects of climate change.

The gloomy outlook comes from an annual survey by the World Economic Forum (WEF) of people paid to identify and manage global risks.

According to the report published Wednesday, nearly two-thirds of respondents expect an “elevated chance of global catastrophes” in the next decade. About 30% expect the same in the next two years.


While the report does not define a “global catastrophe,” it describes “global risk” as an event that would “negatively impact a significant proportion of global gross domestic product, population or natural resources.”

In a statement, the WEF said its latest report “warns of a global risks landscape in which progress in human development is being chipped away slowly, leaving states and individuals vulnerable to new and resurgent risks.”

Results from the survey “highlight a predominantly negative outlook for the world in the short term that is expected to worsen over the long term,” it added.

The report, which comes ahead of the WEF’s glitzy annual meeting in Davos, Switzerland, next week, is based on responses from 1,490 risk experts primarily from business, but also academia, government, and civil society. The survey was launched on September 4 and closed on October 9, 2023, two days after the terrorist attack by Hamas on Israel.

Misinformation threat in huge election year

For the first time in the survey’s near-20-year history, experts identified misinformation and disinformation as the most severe risk in the next two years. That coincides with an unprecedented year for elections globally, with close to 3 billion people expected to head to the polls in 2024.

The American Psychological Association defines misinformation as “false or inaccurate information — getting the facts wrong.” Disinformation, on the other hand, “is false information which is deliberately intended to mislead.”

AI has made it much easier to spread false information in order to influence voters, including through the use of deepfakes, according to Carolina Klint, one of the report’s authors and chief commercial officer for Europe at Marsh McLennan, a professional services firm.

“There’s a fear we’ll see much more of it (this year),” she told CNN. “That could potentially (call) the elected government’s legitimacy into question, which could then in turn impact societal polarization.”


Supporters of Taiwanese presidential candidate Hou Yu-ih chant slogans during an election campaign rally in Taoyuan on January 6, 2024. Around half of the world's adult population will vote in national elections this year.
Sam Yeh/AFP/Getty Images
Extreme weather events were ranked the number two short-term risk, demonstrating heightened awareness about the environment and climate change in a year plagued by rising temperatures and rampant floods and wildfires. Last year was the hottest on record.

Cyber insecurity also made it into the top five short-term risks, for the first time in a decade. It ranked number four, behind societal polarization and ahead of interstate armed conflict.

AI has made the threat of cyber attacks “more immediate,” because the technology can be used by cyber criminals to complete challenging tasks such as coding, according to Klint. A “malicious actor doesn’t have to be that smart,” she said. “It’s broadened the opportunity for cyber criminals… it speeds up cyber attacks as well,” she noted, but added that, on a more positive note, AI could also help detect malicious activity.

For the third consecutive year, concerns about the environment dominate over a 10-year time horizon. The top five long-term risks comprise extreme weather events; critical change to Earth systems; biodiversity loss and ecosystem collapse; natural resource shortages; and misinformation and disinformation.

Recession concerns

WEF managing director Saadia Zahidi told journalists that the longer term outlook was more pessimistic overall than the previous survey, and concerns about “economic hardship” were largely to blame.

“We might be starting to contain inflation, but prices are a lot higher (than a year or two ago),” she said.

Lack of economic opportunity, persistently high inflation and an economic downturn were ranked sixth, seventh and ninth on the list of short-term risks respectively. “Inequality is on the rise and for some people that means their living standards have started to fall,” Zahidi said.


She stressed, however, that the survey should not be viewed as “a crystal ball” containing “set predictions.” “Most of these things are in the hands of decision-makers.”

John Scott, head of sustainability risk at Zurich Insurance Group, which collaborated with the WEF on the report, also emphasized that there was opportunity to address these risks. “The fact is we’re all going to have to take action,” he said.

To rank the top 10 risks over the short and long term, the WEF asked respondents to estimate the likely impact of each of a list of 34 global risks on a scale from 1 (low severity) to 7 (high severity). A simple average based on the scores selected was then calculated. Participants were also allowed to add any other risks not on the list.
https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/10/business/wef-global-risks-report/index.html
 

Anyone who calls themselves an "expert" is most always a liar! Real experts do not have to tell us, they know what they know...

And few will predict gloom and doom! The few that do, will qualify their prediction...
 
I'm dying laughing here. All of the gullible people already swallowing the 2024 line that "censorship is safety."

The most "Democrat" of the Republicans running is even calling for a registration requirement for access to the Internet. I can only imagine this is an echo from across the pond ramping up to Davos.

The people are the enemy of the people? Seriously?
 
Was surprised this morning to see a news article from a major news media outlet actually addressing a newly released science organization paper on planet sustainability. Selfish, media manipulating and dominant endless economic and infrastructure growth and development advocates are probably already foaming at the mouth through their coffee.

Human ‘behavioural crisis’ at root of climate breakdown, say scientists

Merz and colleagues believe that most climate “solutions” proposed so far only tackle symptoms rather than the root cause of the crisis. This, they say, leads to increasing levels of the three “levers” of overshoot: consumption, waste and population...

“Essentially, overshoot is a crisis of human behaviour,” says Merz. “For decades we’ve been telling people to change their behaviour without saying: ‘Change your behaviour.’ We’ve been saying ‘be more green’ or ‘fly less’, but meanwhile all of the things that drive behaviour have been pushing the other way. All of these subtle cues and not so subtle cues have literally been pushing the opposite direction – and we’ve been wondering why nothing’s changing.”...

The paper explores how neuropsychology, social signalling and norms have been exploited to drive human behaviours which grow the economy, from consuming goods to having large families. The authors suggest that ancient drives to belong in a tribe or signal one’s status or attract a mate have been co-opted by marketing strategiest to create behaviours incompatible with a sustainable world.


“People are the victims – we have been exploited to the point we are in crisis. These tools are being used to drive us to extinction,” says the evolutionary behavioural ecologist and study co-author Phoebe Barnard. “Why not use them to build a genuinely sustainable world?”...
 
The "Experts" also predicted the world would end in Y2K.
Which experts were those? I remember hearing some scientists warning about computer problems associated with Y2K but they actually did the warning back in the late 80s (maybe early 90s) and the problems got addressed. I don't remember hearing about any actual experts talking about it all ending in 2000.
 
Hey Paco...please till us more about the "overwhelming majority of climate scientists" Then you comment that some 'scientists.' stated that it is "extremely likely" that human activities have been the dominant cause of global warming....

You guys always talk about the 'overwhelming majorities.' but no one ever tell us how many or what that overwhelming majority is....and last no one ever provide SOURCES for all this science! Back up these comments....just because you read this doesn't make it true!
 
Remember what the OP stated "people paid to identify and manage global risks."

If they don't identify problems, they have nothing to manage and don't get paid.
 
Out of the entire article this caught my attention.

quote
"WEF managing director Saadia Zahidi told journalists that the longer term outlook was more pessimistic overall than the previous survey, and concerns about economic hardship were largely to blame.
We might be starting to contain inflation, but prices are a lot higher (than a year or two ago),” she said."

WOW that is a huge surprise.

Inflation around the world, over the past two years

Pew Research Center
Pew Research Center › ... › Economy & Work
Jun 15, 2022 — According to the latest report from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the annual inflation rate in May was 8.6%, its highest level since 1981, as ...

3% rate of inflation might sound good until you realize the prior inflation rate is cumulative. Those living on a fixed income and at or below poverty level are feeling the effects of that accumulation.
 
Remember what the OP stated "people paid to identify and manage global risks."

If they don't identify problems, they have nothing to manage and don't get paid.
Some of those "people paid to identify and manage global risks" include the CIA; someone, without mentioning climate at all, asked a fairly-high ranking CIA official last year (IIRC) which areas in the world they were expecting to be political trouble spots in coming years and he rattled off the same places that are likely to be the most affected by climate change (rising sea levels, famine, drought, etc.).
 
Don't be baited into responding to the percentages numbers as deniers will only bog it down in a morass of circular obfuscation. A casual web forum like this is a futile place to debate such a complex issue and those making challenges know that so are playing games.

Instead just point to the below Wikipedia article that takes apart denier tactics and that is not surprising primarily about economics and politics, primarily in the United Sates. Below are just a couple of short snippets from the below long article link, anyone serious about the issue can read.


Climate change denial

Climate change denial - Wikipedia

Climate change denial (also global warming denial or climate denial) is pseudoscientific dismissal or unwarranted doubt that contradicts the scientific consensus on climate change. Those promoting denial commonly use rhetorical tactics to give the appearance of a scientific controversy where there is none. Climate change denial includes doubts to the extent of how much climate change is caused by humans, its effects on nature and human society, and the potential of adaptation to global warming by human actions. To a lesser extent, climate change denial can also be implicit when people accept the science but fail to reconcile it with their belief or action.Several social science studies have analyzed these positions as forms of denialism, pseudoscience, or propaganda.

Many of the issues that are settled within the scientific community, such as human responsibility for global warming, remain the subject of politically or economically motivated attempts to downplay, dismiss or deny them—an ideological phenomenon categorized by academics and scientists as climate change denial. Climate scientists, especially in the United States, have reported government and oil-industry pressure to censor or suppress their work and hide scientific data, with directives not to discuss the subject in public communications. The fossil fuels lobby has been identified as overtly or covertly supporting efforts to undermine or discredit the scientific consensus on global warming.

Activities to undermine public trust in climate science are organized by industrial, political and ideological interests. Climate change denial has been associated with the fossil fuels lobby, the K brothers, industry advocates, ultraconservative think tanks and ultraconservative alternative media, often in the United States. More than 90% of papers that are skeptical on climate change originate from right-wing think tanks. Climate change denial is undermining the efforts to act on or adapt to climate change, and exerts a powerful influence on politics of global warming and the manufactured global warming controversy.

In the 1970s, oil companies published research which broadly concurred with the scientific community's view on global warming. Since then, for several decades, oil companies have been organizing a widespread and systematic climate change denial campaign to seed public disinformation, a strategy that has been compared to the organized denial of the hazards of tobacco smoking by the tobacco industry. Some of the campaigns are even carried out by the same individuals who previously spread the tobacco industry's denialist propaganda.


Denial networks
United States

The climate change denial industry is most powerful in the United States. In the 2016 United States election cycle, every R presidential candidate, and the R leader in the U.S. Senate, questioned or denied climate change, and opposed U.S. government steps to address climate change.

In 2015, a Pentagon report pointed out how climate change denial threatens national security A study from 2015 identified 4,556 individuals with overlapping network ties to 164 organizations which are responsible for the most efforts to downplay the threat of climate change in the U.S.

In 2013, the Center for Media and Democracy reported that the State Policy Network (SPN), an umbrella group of 64 U.S. think tanks, had been lobbying on behalf of major corporations and conservative donors to oppose climate change regulation.

According to an investigative report in the Chronicle of Higher Education, influential academic papers used to support climate change denialism were written by authors affiliated with Harvard, MIT, and Georgetown University who had undisclosed conflict of interest...
 
Last edited:
We have been at such a point ever since the development of ‘The Bomb.’ All it takes is one maniac to push the right buttons. Fullment of prophesy? Predictions of same have been around for quite a while.
 
here are some scientific sources for global warming reports:

  1. NASA Science - Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet: This site provides comprehensive information about NASA’s Earth Science Data Systems (ESDS) program, and EOSDIS data, information, services, and tools. It also offers near real-time EOS data and imagery from 10 instruments1.
  2. IPCC — Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change: The IPCC is the United Nations body for assessing the science related to climate change. It provides a comprehensive summary of what is known about the drivers of climate change, its impacts and future risks, and how adaptation and mitigation can reduce those risks2.
  3. Climate Reports | United Nations: This report draws on the expertise of 114 scientists and health practitioners from 52 research institutions and UN agencies, including the World Health Organization, to provide its most comprehensive assessment yet, tracking the relationship between health and climate change across five key domains and 47 indicators3.
  4. The Conversation: This site provides a CliffsNotes version of thousands of papers published regarding the science, risks, and social and economic components of climate change4.
These sources offer a wealth of information on the topic of global warming and climate change. They are widely recognized and respected in the scientific community. Please note that understanding the science of climate change requires careful study and analysis of the data presented in these resources.
 
As we head into the future there are some real concerns that need our attention and action. My hope is that we understand the dangers and prepare for them, plus elect leaders to make policies to alleviate these dangers.

LondonCNN —
Humanity faces a perilous future, marked by an explosion of disinformation turbocharged by artificial intelligence and the devastating effects of climate change.

The gloomy outlook comes from an annual survey by the World Economic Forum (WEF) of people paid to identify and manage global risks.

According to the report published Wednesday, nearly two-thirds of respondents expect an “elevated chance of global catastrophes” in the next decade. About 30% expect the same in the next two years.


While the report does not define a “global catastrophe,” it describes “global risk” as an event that would “negatively impact a significant proportion of global gross domestic product, population or natural resources.”

In a statement, the WEF said its latest report “warns of a global risks landscape in which progress in human development is being chipped away slowly, leaving states and individuals vulnerable to new and resurgent risks.”

Results from the survey “highlight a predominantly negative outlook for the world in the short term that is expected to worsen over the long term,” it added.

The report, which comes ahead of the WEF’s glitzy annual meeting in Davos, Switzerland, next week, is based on responses from 1,490 risk experts primarily from business, but also academia, government, and civil society. The survey was launched on September 4 and closed on October 9, 2023, two days after the terrorist attack by Hamas on Israel.


Misinformation threat in huge election year

For the first time in the survey’s near-20-year history, experts identified misinformation and disinformation as the most severe risk in the next two years. That coincides with an unprecedented year for elections globally, with close to 3 billion people expected to head to the polls in 2024.

The American Psychological Association defines misinformation as “false or inaccurate information — getting the facts wrong.” Disinformation, on the other hand, “is false information which is deliberately intended to mislead.”

AI has made it much easier to spread false information in order to influence voters, including through the use of deepfakes, according to Carolina Klint, one of the report’s authors and chief commercial officer for Europe at Marsh McLennan, a professional services firm.

“There’s a fear we’ll see much more of it (this year),” she told CNN. “That could potentially (call) the elected government’s legitimacy into question, which could then in turn impact societal polarization.”


Supporters of Taiwanese presidential candidate Hou Yu-ih chant slogans during an election campaign rally in Taoyuan on January 6, 2024. Around half of the world's adult population will vote in national elections this year.
Sam Yeh/AFP/Getty Images
Extreme weather events were ranked the number two short-term risk, demonstrating heightened awareness about the environment and climate change in a year plagued by rising temperatures and rampant floods and wildfires. Last year was the hottest on record.

Cyber insecurity also made it into the top five short-term risks, for the first time in a decade. It ranked number four, behind societal polarization and ahead of interstate armed conflict.

AI has made the threat of cyber attacks “more immediate,” because the technology can be used by cyber criminals to complete challenging tasks such as coding, according to Klint. A “malicious actor doesn’t have to be that smart,” she said. “It’s broadened the opportunity for cyber criminals… it speeds up cyber attacks as well,” she noted, but added that, on a more positive note, AI could also help detect malicious activity.

For the third consecutive year, concerns about the environment dominate over a 10-year time horizon. The top five long-term risks comprise extreme weather events; critical change to Earth systems; biodiversity loss and ecosystem collapse; natural resource shortages; and misinformation and disinformation.


Recession concerns

WEF managing director Saadia Zahidi told journalists that the longer term outlook was more pessimistic overall than the previous survey, and concerns about “economic hardship” were largely to blame.

“We might be starting to contain inflation, but prices are a lot higher (than a year or two ago),” she said.

Lack of economic opportunity, persistently high inflation and an economic downturn were ranked sixth, seventh and ninth on the list of short-term risks respectively. “Inequality is on the rise and for some people that means their living standards have started to fall,” Zahidi said.


She stressed, however, that the survey should not be viewed as “a crystal ball” containing “set predictions.” “Most of these things are in the hands of decision-makers.”

John Scott, head of sustainability risk at Zurich Insurance Group, which collaborated with the WEF on the report, also emphasized that there was opportunity to address these risks. “The fact is we’re all going to have to take action,” he said.

To rank the top 10 risks over the short and long term, the WEF asked respondents to estimate the likely impact of each of a list of 34 global risks on a scale from 1 (low severity) to 7 (high severity). A simple average based on the scores selected was then calculated. Participants were also allowed to add any other risks not on the list.
https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/10/business/wef-global-risks-report/index.html
Polar shift
 
Brain Surgery obviously, is not anything like predicting climate change! One is theory the other is based on actual comprehensive knowledge.

Just another deflection....

Paco Dennis...thanks for providing some actual SOURCES that can be read and evaluated. I will take the time to check these out...
 
Last edited:
re: Matthew 24:6-8
Since those things were actually occurring at the time it was hardly a prediction; it's always happening somewhere; lapses are short.
 


Back
Top