# Predictions for the future: are we headed for a calamity? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [November 5, 2018, 6:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/predictions-for-the-future-are-we-headed-for-a-calamity/824029 "2018-11-05T18:39:40Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Mijin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mijin/32/9369_2.png) [@Mijin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mijin)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2018, 1:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/predictions-for-the-future-are-we-headed-for-a-calamity/824029/21 "2018-11-06T13:27:41Z")
> [@](#): > > An apocalyptic computer model, processed by one of the world’s largest computers in 1973… Well I’m convinced. That computer solved tic tac toe dontchakno ---
**Author:** ![Quartz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quartz/32/267_2.png) [@Quartz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Quartz)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2018, 1:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/predictions-for-the-future-are-we-headed-for-a-calamity/824029/22 "2018-11-06T13:34:54Z")
Outside events beyond humanity’s control (disease, meteor impact, super-volcano, etc), I think the world is not heading for calamity. The world has been getting better and better in leaps and bounds since the Renaissance. We’re gradually dealing with CO2 and CFCs. We could cut CO2 emissions significantly within a few years if we moved to nuclear power. Famines are a thing of the past outside Africa. And so on. ---
**Author:** ![Sage\_Rat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sage_rat/32/399_2.png) [@Sage\_Rat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sage_Rat)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2018, 1:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/predictions-for-the-future-are-we-headed-for-a-calamity/824029/23 "2018-11-06T13:49:18Z")
Fusion Energy Vat-grown produce Battery-powered vehicles VR businesses ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2018, 1:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/predictions-for-the-future-are-we-headed-for-a-calamity/824029/24 "2018-11-06T13:52:23Z")
> [@andros](#): > > The number of murders annually, worldwide, is essentially zero. This precipitous fall, clearly supported by any rational researcher you choose to ask, stands in stark contrast to the alarmists who claim that people are still ever murdered. > > I choose to define “murder” as “intentional death by musketfire.” > > I’m happy to provide a handy chart, if you need further convincing. I think the better summation of the libertarian position is, “Deaths in auto accidents are declining; therefore we should stop improving auto safety.” > [@WillFarnaby](#): > > If nobody can criticize the methodology of the chart creators or produce alternative data, I think we are done here. > > Embarrassing analogy failures are not the stuff of compelling conversations. Do you not believe that deaths from an unwarned catastrophic weather event would generally be higher than an event for which people had a chance to evacuate? I would suggest that a metric like property damage due to climate change would be more enlightening, mainly because a Galveston-like death toll from a hurricane is going to be much, much rarer today (notwithstanding the kooks who think that basically nobody died in Puerto Rico last year). ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2018, 2:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/predictions-for-the-future-are-we-headed-for-a-calamity/824029/25 "2018-11-06T14:44:17Z")
> [@WillFarnaby](#): > > If nobody can criticize the methodology of the chart creators or produce alternative data, I think we are done here. Of course we are done, the writers did the equivalent of people noticing that when more ice cream is sold more people are murdered, that therefore we should stop ice cream sales /s > **[Causation vs. Correlation Explained With 10 Examples](https://science.howstuffworks.com/innovation/science-questions/10-correlations-that-are-not-causations.htm)** > > If you step on a crack, you'll break your mother's back. Surely you know this jingle from childhood. It's a silly example of a correlation with no causation. But there are some real-world instances that we often hear, or maybe even tell? Where your chart is misleading in the extreme is that it concentrates on an item that AFAIK it has not been an specific reason why to deal with climate change now, even when one looks at the ones reporting that disaster may come they are talking about the future, not what has been observed so far. So, less people die from extreme weather events now. But, that is more dependent on the advances in climate research too. (And again, we should be thankful to the overwhelming numbers of climate and weather scientists out there, but you will continue to check the few contrarians for info). What the chart omits is that the costs many are currently concerned about are related more to economics. > **[Clean Energy Is Needed Now (Climate Scientists & Climate Economists Agree)...](https://cleantechnica.com/2012/03/02/clean-energy-is-needed-now-climate-scientists-climate-economists-say/)** > > Sign up for daily news updates from CleanTechnica on email. Or follow us on Google News! Climate action is trillions of dollars cheaper than climate inaction. Investing in a clean energy economy is not cheap. It is actually projected to cost... > [@](#): > > Nordhaus went on to further dispel the myth that CO2 limits will hurt the economy. In fact, the opposite is true: > > > [@](#): > > > > “My research shows that there are indeed substantial net benefits from acting now rather than waiting fifty years. A look at Table 5-1 in my study A Question of Balance (2008) shows that the cost of waiting fifty years to begin reducingCO2 emissions is $2.3 trillion in 2005 prices. **If we bring that number to today’s economy and prices, the loss from waiting is $4.1 trillion. Wars have been started over smaller sums.** > > > > ``` > > My study is just one of many economic studies showing that economic efficiency would point to the need to reduce CO2 and other greenhouse gas emissions right now, and not to wait for a half-century. Waiting is not only economically costly, but will also make the transition much more costly when it eventually takes place. Current economic studies also suggest that the most efficient policy is to raise the cost of CO2 emissions substantially, either through cap-and-trade or carbon taxes, to provide appropriate incentives for businesses and households to move to low-carbon activities.” > > > > ``` Economics can tells us that even if people avoid death from extreme weather events, it points to people being displaced in big numbers, causing unrest and even death that is not added by misleaders like in the article you posted. Not to mention (and the writers of the article don’t) the fact that the effects of climate change are being observed, and as the Ice loss shows, the effects can accelerate up to the point where more death can eventually be registered coming \*\*directly \*\*from extreme weather events. We are not quite there yet, and a lot of it can be avoided. But the main point is that the most worrisome aspect right now is economical, and from items that cause unrest we can then go to wars with deaths not directly caused by climate change but as a result of it, deaths that the misleaders will not bother to add to the likely deaths that will be caused by extreme weather due to climate change. > [@WillFarnaby](#): > > Embarrassing analogy failures are not the stuff of compelling conversations. Indeed. ---
**Author:** ![WillFarnaby](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/willfarnaby/32/514_2.png) [@WillFarnaby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WillFarnaby)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2018, 2:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/predictions-for-the-future-are-we-headed-for-a-calamity/824029/26 "2018-11-06T14:45:51Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > I think the better summation of the libertarian position is, “Deaths in auto accidents are declining; therefore we should stop improving auto safety.” > > Do you not believe that deaths from an unwarned catastrophic weather event would generally be higher than an event for which people had a chance to evacuate? I would suggest that a metric like property damage due to climate change would be more enlightening, mainly because a Galveston-like death toll from a hurricane is going to be much, much rarer today (notwithstanding the kooks who think that basically nobody died in Puerto Rico last year). Of course, and I thank capitalism and fossil fuel technology for the abundance of energy needed for society to be rich enough to divert resources into forecasting capability. ---
**Author:** ![WillFarnaby](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/willfarnaby/32/514_2.png) [@WillFarnaby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WillFarnaby)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2018, 2:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/predictions-for-the-future-are-we-headed-for-a-calamity/824029/27 "2018-11-06T14:50:59Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > Of course we are done, the writers did the equivalent of people noticing that when more ice cream is sold more people are murdered, that therefore we should stop ice cream sales /s > > [Causation vs. Correlation Explained With 10 Examples | HowStuffWorks](https://science.howstuffworks.com/innovation/science-questions/10-correlations-that-are-not-causations.htm) > > Where your chart is misleading in the extreme is that it concentrates on an item that AFAIK it has not been an specific reason why to deal with climate change now, even when one looks at the ones reporting that disaster may come they are talking about the future, not what has been observed so far. So, less people die from extreme weather events now. But, that is more dependent on the advances in climate research too. (And again, we should be thankful to the overwhelming numbers of climate and weather scientists out there, but you will continue to check the few contrarians for info). > > What the chart omits is that the costs many are currently concerned about are related more to economics. > > [Clean Energy Is Needed Now (Climate Scientists & Climate Economists Agree) - CleanTechnica](https://cleantechnica.com/2012/03/02/clean-energy-is-needed-now-climate-scientists-climate-economists-say/) > Economics can tells us that even if people avoid death from extreme weather events, it points to people being displaced in big numbers, causing unrest and even death that is not added by misleaders like in the article you posted. > > Not to mention (and the writers of the article don’t) the fact that the effects of climate change are being observed, and as the Ice loss shows, the effects can accelerate up to the point where more death can eventually be registered coming \*\*directly \*\*from extreme weather events. We are not quite there yet, and a lot of it can be avoided. But the main point is that the most worrisome aspect right now is economical, and from items that cause unrest we can then go to wars with deaths not directly caused by climate change but as a result of it, deaths that the misleaders will not bother to add to the likely deaths that will be caused by extreme weather due to climate change. > Indeed. The OP talked about catastrophe. I consider death and starvation to be catastrophic and both have plummeted. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2018, 2:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/predictions-for-the-future-are-we-headed-for-a-calamity/824029/28 "2018-11-06T14:53:23Z")
> [@WillFarnaby](#): > > Of course, and I thank capitalism and fossil fuel technology for the abundance of energy needed for society to be rich enough to divert resources into forecasting capability. Again, you are deftly avoiding who to thank: > **[What Climate Change Taught Us About Hurricanes](https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-climate-change-made-our-hurricane-predictions-way-more-accurate/)** > > Cities torn apart. Thousands of people displaced. Impassable roads and a search for the missing and the dead in rubble that stretches for miles. Anyone reading … > [@](#): > > Cities torn apart. Thousands of people displaced. Impassable roads and a search for the missing and the dead in rubble that stretches for miles. Anyone reading the news following Hurricane Michael’s landfall on Wednesday knows how devastating a single hurricane can be. So it’s no surprise that, until relatively recently, forecasters’ emphasis was on individual storms — whether a hurricane would form, where it might go and when to issue an evacuation order. > > But today researchers are also able to think of hurricanes collectively, as a series of connected events. Over the last 30 years, we’ve become better able to predict hurricane risk — both in terms of individual storms and the risk a full season might bring. We can prepare for hurricanes more effectively today than we could a generation ago. \*\*And, experts say, climate change is partly to thank for that. > > Or, rather, climate change research.\*\* > > This change in our understanding of how hurricanes work really began with the work of William Gray, who developed the first data-driven seasonal hurricane forecasts in the early 1980s, said James Elsner, a professor at Florida State University who researches hurricanes and tornadoes. Although Gray was famously a skeptic of the idea that humans caused climate change, he was one of the first people to make connections between large-scale climate variations and the number and intensity of hurricanes that form in a season. The very same people that you refuse to take advise from. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2018, 2:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/predictions-for-the-future-are-we-headed-for-a-calamity/824029/29 "2018-11-06T14:59:03Z")
> [@WillFarnaby](#): > > The OP talked about catastrophe. I consider death and starvation to be catastrophic and both have plummeted. And we can all see that you did not read the post. Do you then agree with anti vaccine people that since there are less polio deaths that then we should not vaccinate people for it anymore? Of course not, so why listen to the ones that misleadingly tell you about weather deaths that are more preventable nowadays when ocean rise alone means that we will get a refugee problem much much bigger than the one president bone spurs is scaring us about now? ---
**Author:** ![WillFarnaby](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/willfarnaby/32/514_2.png) [@WillFarnaby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WillFarnaby)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2018, 3:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/predictions-for-the-future-are-we-headed-for-a-calamity/824029/30 "2018-11-06T15:00:05Z")
Oh perhaps you have a surreptitious recording of me murmuring phrases against climate research in my sleep because I have never taken such a position in my waking life. You on the other hand have cited dozens of anti-capitalist and anti-fossil fuel screeds from activist websites. Taking perhaps the most privileged perspective in the history of human discourse, you deny that fossil fuel technology has brought warmth to the huddling masses cheaply and relatively cleanly compared to the surface energy foraging it replaced. ---
**Author:** ![Ulfreida](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ulfreida/32/8014_2.png) [@Ulfreida](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ulfreida)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2018, 3:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/predictions-for-the-future-are-we-headed-for-a-calamity/824029/31 "2018-11-06T15:05:18Z")
> [@WillFarnaby](#): > > The OP talked about catastrophe. I consider death and starvation to be catastrophic and both have plummeted. I actually do not think either one of those is catastrophic. Like everyone else posting, you are thinking only about one species – ours – and as if this species existed essentially inside our own machines. We don’t. We are supported, and only supported, by a web of climate, soil, water cycle, and biotic connections which we have not the intelligence to grasp the complexity of, nor the soul to understand the importance of. If 95% of human beings died tomorrow, that would be the best thing that could possibly happen to the planet. That this is not going to happen, is the calamity I am talking about. ---
**Author:** ![WillFarnaby](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/willfarnaby/32/514_2.png) [@WillFarnaby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WillFarnaby)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2018, 3:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/predictions-for-the-future-are-we-headed-for-a-calamity/824029/32 "2018-11-06T15:10:10Z")
> [@Ulfreida](#): > > I actually do not think either one of those is catastrophic. Like everyone else posting, you are thinking only about one species – ours – and as if this species existed essentially inside our own machines. We don’t. We are supported, and only supported, by a web of climate, soil, water cycle, and biotic connections which we have not the intelligence to grasp the complexity of, nor the soul to understand the importance of. > > If 95% of human beings died tomorrow, that would be the best thing that could possibly happen to the planet. That this is not going to happen, is the calamity I am talking about. Yes I give priority to human beings. Those who do not share this value judgement should not listen to my positions until they have corrected themselves on this. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2018, 3:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/predictions-for-the-future-are-we-headed-for-a-calamity/824029/33 "2018-11-06T15:15:04Z")
> [@WillFarnaby](#): > > Oh perhaps you have a surreptitious recording of me murmuring phrases against climate research in my sleep because I have never taken such a position in my waking life. Then show it, stop going on as if that is the case. The ones who made the article you rely on make a life of being against what normal climate change researchers are doing. > [@WillFarnaby](#): > > You on the other hand have cited dozens of anti-capitalist and anti-fossil fuel screeds from activist websites. And that is yet more evidence that you do not check cites, and that you are relying more on ignorance here. The people at clean technica are looking at the new businesses cropping up, and Nordhaus would be wondering why he is an anti-capitalist when he became/was president of the American Economic Association, and just won the Nobel price in economics for his work. > **[William Nordhaus](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Nordhaus)** > > Heterodox > William Dawbney Nordhaus (born May 31, 1941) is an American economist. He was a Sterling Professor of Economics at Yale University, best known for his work in economic modeling and climate change, and a co-recipient of the 2018 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences. Nordhaus received the prize "for integrating climate change into long-run macroeconomic analysis". > Nordhaus was born in Albuquerque, New Mexico, the son of Virginia (Riggs) and Robert J. Nordhaus, who co-founded the ... Mind you, **he is considered a moderate on this** , others do think that his taxation on carbon emissions do not go far enough. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2018, 3:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/predictions-for-the-future-are-we-headed-for-a-calamity/824029/34 "2018-11-06T15:22:00Z")
> [@WillFarnaby](#): > > Taking perhaps the most privileged perspective in the history of human discourse, you deny that fossil fuel technology has brought warmth to the huddling masses cheaply and relatively cleanly compared to the surface energy foraging it replaced. Nope, that is called a straw man. Nowhere I do deny that, in fact in past discussions it is clear that going for personals attracts is a common thing directed at me. Suffice to say that I commented before (and you also ignore or is not aware of that) that I \*\*also \*\*acknowledged all the horses that died while giving power to human transportation before the arrival of fossil fuel technology. But I do not anthropomorphize or sentimentalize about them like the fossil fuel defenders are going on about. The point is that once we de-carbonize our sources of energy we can acknowledge how useful they **were** , and go forward with the new ways to warm up that give us a better environment too. ---
**Author:** ![senoy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/dbc845/32.png) [@senoy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/senoy)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2018, 3:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/predictions-for-the-future-are-we-headed-for-a-calamity/824029/35 "2018-11-06T15:33:24Z")
Yes, we are heading for a calamity simply because we are always heading for a calamity. Periods of peace and prosperity are rare creatures that even when they exist tend to be localized and sooner or later the next wave of destruction will hit. Maybe the climate, maybe a disease, maybe a war, rest assured that something is coming and the best you can hope for is to die before it hits. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2018, 3:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/predictions-for-the-future-are-we-headed-for-a-calamity/824029/36 "2018-11-06T15:57:55Z")
> [@WillFarnaby](#): > > Of course, and I thank capitalism and fossil fuel technology for the abundance of energy needed for society to be rich enough to divert resources into forecasting capability. And in the future we can have even better forecasting capability and even more prosperity without having to rely on fossil fuels and their damaging effects. Yet, some simpletons think we must remain chained to fossil fuels no matter what the consequences. That’s really what this is about: it isn’t about taking away things that have been achieved with fossil fuels. It’s about improving upon them. ---
**Author:** ![WillFarnaby](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/willfarnaby/32/514_2.png) [@WillFarnaby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WillFarnaby)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2018, 4:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/predictions-for-the-future-are-we-headed-for-a-calamity/824029/37 "2018-11-06T16:32:31Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > And in the future we can have even better forecasting capability and even more prosperity without having to rely on fossil fuels and their damaging effects. Yet, some simpletons think we must remain chained to fossil fuels no matter what the consequences. > > That’s really what this is about: it isn’t about taking away things that have been achieved with fossil fuels. It’s about improving upon them. It is about limiting access to fossil fuel technology through legislation, no? If you take away access, you take away energy and drive energy prices up. This means humans must divert resources from other fruitful avenues of research and capital investment and find ways to produce energy without fossil fuels. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2018, 4:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/predictions-for-the-future-are-we-headed-for-a-calamity/824029/38 "2018-11-06T16:50:18Z")
> [@WillFarnaby](#): > > It is about limiting access to fossil fuel technology through legislation, no? If you take away access, you take away energy and drive energy prices up. This means humans must divert resources from other fruitful avenues of research and capital investment and find ways to produce energy without fossil fuels. Yes, and as a conservative economist like Nordhaus told us, it will be more costly to all if we do not change. By now it looks more likely that it will be combination of basic economics (Alternative sources of power are getting cheaper than oil or gas) and stopping the insane preference to fossil fuels that some governments are harping about. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2018, 5:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/predictions-for-the-future-are-we-headed-for-a-calamity/824029/39 "2018-11-06T17:08:26Z")
> [@Ulfreida](#): > > If 95% of human beings died tomorrow, that would be the best thing that could possibly happen to the planet. This stuff always makes me laugh. It’s completely unscientific to assume that “the planet” is somehow in danger because of us. That there is some scientifically definable good condition for “the planet” to be in. And that’s not even touching on the moral aspect of wishing death to 95% of the people alive today (one wonders if that includes you and your family members in the pool of potential fatalities). > [@](#): > > That this is not going to happen, is the calamity I am talking about. Your argument just went from unscientific to logically contradicting itself: > [@](#): > > Absolutely and then some. We are heading straight into catastrophic climate change and the extinction of most higher life forms, probably including ourselves. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2018, 5:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/predictions-for-the-future-are-we-headed-for-a-calamity/824029/40 "2018-11-06T17:25:28Z")
The [chart](https://www.forbes.com/sites/erikaandersen/2012/03/23/true-fact-the-lack-of-pirates-is-causing-global-warming/#384e398c3a67) says that to fix the problem we need more pirates. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/predictions-for-the-future-are-we-headed-for-a-calamity/824029.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/predictions-for-the-future-are-we-headed-for-a-calamity/824029.md?page=3)