I’ve waited half a year to share this research on one of my blogs. The key to news getting published in media is: ”If it bleeds, it leads.” I’ve been wanting to share this report, but D insisted on keeping blogs focused on positive news that readers could act on. This is as negative a piece of information as I’ve seen. Yet, it seems the result of considerable research. How to react to this level of dissonance? Ignore it? Discredit the source? Change what I’ve been doing? Try to get others to also change? Comments afterwards.
● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Earth on Track to Become Uninhabitable, Scientists Say
“Policymakers and the public remain largely unaware of the risks
posed by what would effectively be a point-of-no-return transition.”
Futurism
Feb 14, 2026
Surprise, surprise: all that climate stuff scientists have been warning us about is coming back to bite us. And by us, of course, we mean all of humanity.
As reported by The Guardian, scientists just published a warning that Earth is approaching a point of no return. A new study in the journal, One Earth, shows multiple climate systems — the Greenland ice sheet, the West Antarctic ice sheet, boreal permafrost, the Amazon rainforest — are all much closer to collapse than previously thought.
The researchers urged …
“Research shows that several Earth system
components may be closer to destabilising
than once believed. While the exact risk is
uncertain, it is clear that current climate
commitments are insufficient.”
The analysis is based on climate “tipping points,” meaning collapses of environmental systems that lead other climate systems beyond their own tipping points, creating a snowball scenario where the planet spirals into a worst-case-scenario known as “hothouse Earth.” Under this scenario, the long-term temperature is projected to rise about 9 degrees Fahrenheit above pre-industrial averages — which would be really bad.
Christopher Wolf, a scientist at the environmental group Terrestrial Ecosystems Research Associates, said …
“Crossing even some of the [tipping point]
thresholds could commit the planet to
a hothouse trajectory. Policymakers
and the public remain largely
unaware of the risks posed by
what would effectively be a
point-of-no-return transition.”
What makes this all particularly insulting is the fact that the poor people of the world — those who will suffer the earliest and deepest losses as a result of climate change — are powerless to stop these tipping points from boiling over. And not for lack of will: the global climate movement is growing
steadily, as Americans have perhaps never been more aware that climate change will impact the low-income people of the world the most.
Unfortunately, the power to reverse these decisions doesn’t belong to the people, but to a small cabal of the ultra-rich. The future of the planet is so far out of our control that some environmental experts argue not even the world’s most powerful governments can stop the collapse.
As University of Manitoba professor David Camfield and author of the 2022 book “Future on Fire: Capitalism and the Politics of Climate Change” has explained, the level of political power held by the ultra-rich and their corporations is so immense that even a government with popular support and commitment to emissions cuts would struggle under the weight of corporate investment strikes, pressure from credit agencies, and catastrophic
Camfield asserts …
“To weaken those political obstacles sufficiently
that a government could get a just transition
underway would take massive pressure of
the kind that only movements can unleash.”
The math, in other words, is brutal. Capitalism’s logic demands unending accumulation of wealth, leading to a world in which corporations must grow or die, no matter the consequences.
To transition out of this mess would mean weakening capital’s entire grip on power — something which has only ever been achieved when the great masses of toiling people come together to demand a better world.
● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
The reports about global warming indicate the impact is worse closer to the equator, least the further north or south from it. We’re already seeing millions starving in those areas. That brings government instability, weaponry and killings. What’s normally a non-zero-sum game, in which all can win, becomes a zero-sum game in which only the fittest survive.
The ultra wealthy can create their own kingdoms or super-yachts, and enslave survivors to grow their food and serve their needs. I imagine some of the “Mad Max” kind of scenarios. And that depresses me. So …
I’ve created a home that’s about the same size and cost as the average home, is aesthetically nicer than any other in which I’ve lived, and also is off-grid with 100% renewables, except for phone/internet. It’s far less expensive in which to live. And it leaves the surrounding site better than it was when I got there … an ethic from my canoe-tripping days. But no matter how “pure and saintly” this might seem, it won’t change billions … or Earth’s survival.
To help others, I’ve written three books on sustainability, produced several videos, had thousands visit and experience our small net zero garden atrium community, and I send out a free weekly blog with helpful sustainable living ideas. I’m not sure I’ll be able to cause the kind and amount of change we need for Earth to remain habitable – except to tell readers that the best I can tell, it is that serious. So … I’m asking D for suggestions …
“This does not have to happen.
“If each person started to do something that was for the planet, such as: switching all your home oil-based products toward electric – electric cooktops, electric ovens, electric cars, electric heating and cooling – as examples. And use solar power when at all possible.
“If each person chooses to say ‘I have enough. I don’t need more clothing, cars, dishes and things.’ we could drop consumerism and have less made.
“Our point is: less is more.
“The constant need for more is killing the planet.
“Keep your phone for another year or two. Choose the need for less space in a house. Choose fewer cars per household. Less is more. That will begin the shift towards changing the planet. If everyone were to do it – especially everyone not living at or below subsistence levels, such as in the United States, you can save the planet.”
Dinosaurs died out due to their inability to adapt to their changing environment. In this case, we’re the ones causing the changing environment. We should be smart enough to know what we need to do. The question:
Do we have the commitment?
