Did Government Policy Cause the Subprime Mortgage Crisis? - Global Dynamics Part 4.11

Pundits and market fundamentalists often cite the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) and other government initiatives as the cause of the Sub-Prime Mortgage Crisis. But is this accurate?

A report from the Federal Reserve says no. Here is the abstract, and a link to the report:

Abstract:

A growing literature suggests that housing policy, embodied by the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) and the affordable housing goals of the government sponsored enterprises, may have caused the subprime crisis. The conclusions drawn in this literature, for the most part, have been based on associations between aggregated national trends. In this paper we examine more directly whether these programs were associated with worse outcomes in the mortgage market, including delinquency rates and measures of loan quality.
We rely on two empirical approaches. In the first approach, which focuses on the CRA, we conjecture that historical legacies create significant variations in the lenders that serve otherwise comparable neighborhoods. Because not all lenders are subject to the CRA, this creates a quasi-natural experiment of the CRA's effect. We test this conjecture by examining whether neighborhoods that have been disproportionally served by CRA-covered institutions historically experienced worse outcomes. The second approach takes advantage of the fact that both the CRA and GSE goals rely on clearly defined geographic areas to determine which loans are favored by the regulations. Using a regression discontinuity approach, our tests compare the marginal areas just above and below the thresholds that define eligibility, where any effect of the CRA or GSE goals should be clearest.
We find little evidence that either the CRA or the GSE goals played a significant role in the subprime crisis. Our lender tests indicate that areas disproportionately served by lenders covered by the CRA experienced lower delinquency rates and less risky lending. Similarly, the threshold tests show no evidence that either program had a significantly negative effect on outcomes.

Link: The Subprime Crisis: Is Government Housing Policy to Blame?

The Global Economic Collapse - GD Part 4.1

The Financial Collapse of 2007-08 affected everyone- globally. It has exposed inherent flaws in our globalized world- our banking and monetary systems are interconnected today to a degree that never existed before. Economists since the 1990s have been talking of "contagion;" financial turmoil in one part of the world can now easily spread throughout the entire global financial system and crush economies, bankrupt entire nations, or merely cause recessions.

The scale of the disaster is not yet known. As of right now, the US seems to believe the emergency has passed, at least if you ask officials publicly-- but high-level officials are still scrambling to fight the spread of the turmoil. That is why Europe's problems are still front-and-center in the news, and partly why it would be disastrous if any country in the Eurozone defaulted on its debt- it would begin a domino effect in Europe which could easily spread to other parts of the world.

Many economists and news sources compare the financial meltdown of 2007-08 to the Great Depression. Indeed, there are many similarities. However, the response has differed on many levels, and the result is that "the biggest economic downturn since the Great Depression" still doesn't quite match the scale of the devastation wrought in those years. Yet, there still is danger on the horizon, and the experience is not quite finished.


Causes of the Collapse

Beginning in the United States and then spreading to the rest of the world due to our globalized finance system, the financial meltdown was a case of reckless investing, fraud, and regulatory neglect. What a lot of Americans don't realize is that it was a direct result of the 1999 removal of vital legislation (the Glass-Steagal Act) that was enacted in the United States following the 1929 Crash that led to the Great Depression. The Glass-Steagal Act of 1933 was designed to prevent the very type of incident that wound up happening in 2008.

In a nutshell, Glass-Steagal prevented commercial banks (banks that make loans and hold your money) from being the same institutions that buy/sell/make investments. This basically kept the banks that hold your money and loans from gambling in the stock market or reinvesting their assets and liabilities in risky financial instruments. Among several other pieces of Depression Era legislation, Federal Deposit Insurance agencies were set up to ensure that the deposits of customers at these banking institutions were protected in the case that their money was somehow lost (due to robbery, physical destruction of bank notes, bank failure, etc.). 

The repeal of these laws led to a dangerous entanglement of financial institutions- commercial banks, investment banks, securities handlers/private investment insurers and hedge funds were hopelessly interrelated with no firewall in place in case of calamity or market failure. Worse yet, in some cases they were insured by both private and federal agencies. 

Even more troubling, in a bid to make big profits even bigger, major banking institutions began leveraging their assets as high as 40:1 and investing in securities, derivatives and hedge funds to distribute the risk. American institutions were the inventors of these practices during the 1990s, but banking instituions in the rest of the world were so impressed with the profits being made, they soon began engaging in these same risky practices. What had been created was an illusion. There was a promise of well-distributed risk, but in reality the risks were mounting higher and higher while infecting every corner of the global financial system.

When the bottom dropped out of the Mortgage-backed Securities market and CDOs, banks and insurers both began to fail at an alarming rate. These institutions had just gone through a rapid merger and consolidation process throughout the 1990s and 2000s, leading to the creation of institutions that were so large their failures were a systemic risk to the economy of the entire world-- not just the US economy.

This 11-minute video explains what happened with the CDOs and Mortgage-backed Securities rather succinctly:

"The Crisis of Credit Visualized" by Jonathan Jarvis

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bx_LWm6_6tA

Since the scale of the collapse was so immense, the government of the United States was faced with a rather ludicrous paradox to its capitalist system: we now had to resort to a form of socialism in order to prevent the collapse of capitalism. The banks got bailed out, through several means. 


Flawed Responses

Overtly, TARP (Troubled Assets Relief Program) was administered by the Bush and Obama administrations, followed by several economic stimulus programs at an ever-increasing price tag of over $3 trillion (subsidized, of course, by the American taxpayer). 

Covertly-- mainly to secure confidence in the system-- the Federal Reserve also implemented "secret" loans to some of the largest banking institutions in the world (not just American banks). These loans were delivered as short-term loans at what is known at the Fed as the "discount window" in which interest rates are at or close to zero. 

Page 131 of the GAO's Report. Dollar amounts are in billions.

The main idea behind this was to save these institutions from total collapse while encouraging lending between banks and (hopefully) to consumers in general. The Federal Reserve handed out loans to major banks worldwide (but mainly US & European banks) valuing a total of $16 trillion. It worked- but only halfway. The institutions stayed open, but credit was not freed up. This prevented a total economic collapse, but failed to stop the global Great Recession.

Aside from this arrangement, the Fed also secured a currency-swap with the Central Banks of the EU, the United Kingdom, South Korea, Switzerland, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Canada, Australia, Brazil, Mexico, Singapore, and Japan, in which the Fed lent $10 trillion USD in exchange for the currencies of these countries (secured at the cost of dollars/unit of currency of the day, with no appreciation or depreciation). 


Total price tag of the Federal Reserve's efforts was $26 trillion USD. Read the GAO's report on the Federal Reserve's Activities during the bailout here: 
http://www.sanders.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/GAO%20Fed%20Investigation.pdf

Page 131 again, with emphasis added. These loans were administered without the knowledge or consent of the US Congress.

This information only came to light due to the first-and-only audit of the US Federal Reserve since its creation. The audit was administered by the Government Accountability Office and only investigated the activity surrounding the financial collapse and emergency relief funds extended to banks during the aftermath. As it turns out, the loans were largely repaid. Only about $1 trillion remained outstanding at the time of the audit. Banks mostly were able to afford this because of two things: they didn't extend credit like they were supposed to, and they levied interest and fee increases on their customers.

So in other words, the people paid for this crisis twice (or three times, depending on how you count): Once in lost assets, once in tax money administered by the government bailouts in all forms, and then once again in fee increases imposed upon banks' customers.

No wonder the economy was in such a shambles! The money at the Federal Reserve is "printed" at our expense; the banks financed their repayment of the debt to the Fed on fees imposed on you & me, and the banks still refused to resume lending. You may remember that at the time during & following the bailout, credit card companies began charging ridiculous interest rates on new and at-risk customers-- rates far beyond what used to be called "usury" -- up to 75%.

Meanwhile, homeowners- even ones in good standing- began to experience the loss of their biggest investment. House prices fell so rapidly that many homeowners suddenly realized they were paying on mortgages that far outmatched the present value of their homes (we call these "underwater mortgages").

Foreclosure rates not seen since the Great Depression ensued, and unemployment skyrocketed (While it's important to be sure the scale of today's problems aren't understated, it's worthwhile noting that the home foreclosure and unemployment rates never really came close to the rates of foreclosures and unemployment during the Great Depression). We had entered the Great Recession.

Socialism For the Rich, Capitalism for Everyone Else

What followed these events led to the eruption of populist uprisings like Occupy Wall Street (OWS). The average American was outraged that, not only had the government bailed-out these irresponsible banks, but they refused to institute effective regulation of these institutions. The OWS battle cry became, "Banks got bailed out; we got sold out!" the core concepts of capitalism seemed to be torn asunder. Bernie Sanders (I-Vermont) said of the bailouts, "This is a clear case of socialism for the rich and rugged, you're-on-your-own individualism for everyone else."

For the banks, this institutionalized a concept called "moral hazard" in which the banks know they are too big to fail, and that if they are on their way down, the government must step in to save them, or risk the collapse of the entire system and contagion to the rest of the Global Economy, thus incentivizing systemic risk if the potential short-term gains are high.

Countries in the European Union are still reeling from this disaster, and while it cannot be said that it was the only cause of their woes, the financial collapse was the catalyst that caused countries like Spain, Greece, Ireland and Italy to slip toward bankruptcy.

The Federal Reserve Bank continues to treat the problem by "Quantitative Easing" (inflating the money supply domestically) and by sending trillions of dollars to the EU, to prop up their Central Bank. Normally, this would cause inflation rates to soar, but the problem we could be facing in absence of this tactic would be massive deflation.

To be clear: there are many details and inner workings of the real economy that complicate and exacerbate the situation of frozen credit markets; large corporations often borrow money to cover R&D, new acquisitions and, yes, even employee payroll. Thus, the reason for rampant unemployment: if companies can't get easy credit, they can't expand as easily, nor can they afford to hire American workers.

My opinion is that the bailouts, while repugnant to the core principles of capitalism, were utterly necessary to prevent a second Great Depression. Where the US government's response failed was at three points:

1. The bailouts weren't big enough to solve the credit crisis, and banks remained leery of loaning money, even to each other.

2. U.S. banking institutions should have been dismantled to pre-1999 sizes, separating commercial banks from investment banks, and should have been led through government-managed bankruptcy proceedings as a condition of accepting federal funds.

3. Homeowners whose mortgages were threatened by falling home prices and frozen credit should have had their debts forgiven by failing banks. At least then there would have been an equitable extension of "socialism" for all and a suitable punishment for the banks and financial institutions that caused the crisis, while freeing up what little liquidity there still was in the private economy.

The real betrayal happened in more recent days, however. While the US is still facing high unemployment, the stock market has regained almost all of its losses, the GDP of the US is higher than ever (albeit at a slightly reduced rate of growth) and corporate profits after taxes are at record highs. While many common folk seemed to (bafflingly) blame the government for this predicament, the onus falls squarely on bankers and the directors of large corporations.

Yet, the "solutions" proposed by this group of the richest people in the world are the same exact reckless philosophies that led to the crisis in the first place. They are demanding reduced regulations in banking and lower corporate, individual and Capital Gains taxes.

The question at the root of all of this is whether or not to support what some economists call "Market Fundamentalism" in which a free, unregulated market allegedly functions perfectly and makes "natural" corrections, or to return to what is known as Keynesian Economics, in which the government allows a certain amount of economic freedom in a pre-determined market, while controlling liquidity and interest rates through a government-supervised Central Bank. 

I personally think the concept of "Market Fundamentalism" (an extreme view of neo-liberal economic policies) is more akin to "Economic Anarchy." Think of it on a social scale: if there were no laws, there would be no police and no judicial system. Would that eliminate crime? Would society "correct itself" and regulate itself? I'd hate to see the brutal Darwinist world that would emerge from such a policy, just as I'd like to avoid the emergence of a Darwinist economic anarchy of a "truly free" market as these fundamentalists envision. What would inevitably emerge would be giant corporations and megalithic monopolies that would steamroll over small business and crush workers. We may as well submit to feudalism.

We've already seen the consequences of loosening regulations. I don't need any more proof. Do you? 

For additional information on this topic, I highly recommend "Freefall: America, Free Markets, and the Sinking of the World Economy" by the Nobel Prize-winning Economist Joseph Stiglitz.

You can find an excellent film called "Inside Job" on this topic at Netflix.com or at your local video rental location.

For additional historical perspective on this topic and how it relates to Globalism and Free Trade Agreements, please watch this PBS series, "Commanding Heights: The Battle for the World Economy."

What is the Self?

What is the Self?

Are we just cogs in a social machine? Are we just independent particles floating in an endless ocean? Are we each insignificant specks of dust in an emotionless Universe? Or are we fundamentally connected?

Science now knows our bodies are made of trillions of separate organisms- viruses, bacteria, as well as your own body cells- and we cannot live without this interspecies collaboration that exists within our skin. Each of us is our own biosphere. Nature is made of the same type of interdependence, and the boundary of our Earthling biosphere is a fuzzy border. Where does "Nature" end? Not at the highest layer of our atmosphere-- not at the edge of the Moon's orbit, not beyond our Sun.

Western culture loves to apply a Cartesian dualism to each of its studies-- but we're quickly learning this is not accurate. We are not separate. Want empirical proof? You can study the interdependence of beings in any ecosystem, you can look to the smallest pieces of observable matter in quantum physics, or you can study the effects of gravitation on the Earth's tide, Solar winds and cosmic rays emanating from space and their affect on life on Earth. Everything is connected and interdependent.

For more information on the makers of the above video, go to:
http://www.scienceandnonduality.com/

Global Dynamics: What is this all about?

The Global Dynamics series is an interdisciplinary examination of the limiting factors and inherent problems posed by sustained growth of consumption in the world today, and the non-linear relationships between different realms or aspects of our Human world.

We live in a finite world with finite resources; it is not possible to continue increasing our consumption, our expenditures, or our production forever. The problems that face us as we move through the next century are dependent on many factors- population, economics, political policy, culture, international law, individual behavior, natural processes, industrialization, and war. None of these problems exist within a vacuum-- every single one is intertwined with another, and as we move forward in analyzing the major categories of challenges, we will understand to what extent these are interrelated.

The largest factors in the equation are growth in consumption and growth of population, as they will tend to influence all other areas within our Human world. We must understand growth in order to understand where we stand today and where we are certainly headed for tomorrow.

Here are two videos on the subject that I highly recommend watching:

One is by Dr. Albert Bartlett, from the University of Colorado:

Another is called "There is No Tomorrow," which I think is an entirely unfortunate title. However, this video concisely sums up many of the issues I will be addressing in more detail throughout the Global Dynamics series:

As Global Dynamics progresses, I will be bringing the discussion back to a 1971 book by Prof. Jay W. Forrester, of MIT, called "World Dynamics," after which I have named this series (you can find that on Amazon.com or through inter-library loan). His book studies the effects of reaching the limits of consumption and growth-- and addresses the consequences.

I would like to point out one more detail, and I hope that I can get this across effectively: Our Human world does not exist within a vacuum. We share our planet with countless other species, our world is part of a system of bodies that revolve around our sun, and our sun is influenced by the motion of our galaxy-- which in turn is influenced by the universe itself. None of the events that happen here on Earth, whether in our Human world, within the physical confines of the planet, or at any point in outer space, are entirely closed systems.

Quantum physics has shown us that particles created under similar conditions can become "entangled" and affect each others' behavior over great distances in "no time"-- and this provides a fantastic allegory for understanding the world-- and even the universe-- at large.

Quantum physics is the study of laws of particles-- these govern processes that cause the phenomenon we call "chemistry" to operate. Chemistry is a driving force of biology, behavior and physics are major influences on chemistry and biology, biology and what we call "history" determine the behavior of people around the world, the environment influences our lifestyle and our culture, which influences our political processes, our economics, and the shape of our future. Ultimately we influence the environment, the chemical processes that govern the Earth, and these processes will influence the individual behaviors (and very existence) of all individual organisms on the planet.

Seemingly unrelated factors in the world are "entangled" to an extent that we are only in the earliest stages of beginning to understand, and the Earth is guided by cosmic (and sometimes intergalactic) forces that we have not yet even imagined.

Up until this point in Human history, we could write off our destructive tendencies to our ignorance or our more animal impulses. But we now have the cause and opportunity to create a world that is governed by rules that are both Ethical and Rational. Up until now, the Human race has failed quite stupendously in doing this.

We can do better.

The War on Terror - Historical Overview (GD Part 3)

For the Record,

My statement as a citizen of the United States is as follows:

The United States is in a state of distress. Our way of life is under attack and the very fundamentals of our republican democracy are threatened. If We, The People, do not act quickly and decisively, we risk losing the core values that truly make this nation great.

Our nation is in peril, not because of the actions of hijackers or jihadists, but because of the US government's unilateral move toward ceaseless revenge and the stripping away of protections guaranteed to citizens by the US Constitution.

The US government response to the events of September 11, 2001 was flawed and disproportionate. Bush's doctrine of pre-emptive war and divisive foreign policy has created an aura of hostility and distrust, both at home and internationally-- and has put our soldiers in unnecessary harm by engaging in conflicts which were illogical, immoral, and illegal.

The US government has established an undeclared and never-ending war of aggression, with neither a clear battleground, nor a clear enemy- an illegal engagement with any person, nation or organization (anywhere!) that chooses to engage our nation with violence or the [perceived] threat of violence. This conflict continues to be waged under the current President.

The US government's heavy-handed military reaction to the events on September 11, 2001 has created far more terrorists and dissidents than ever had existed before, and continues to create more every day.

The War on Terror must end.


A Rapid Transformation

Things happened very quickly in the days and weeks following September 11th. First, Congress passed The Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40), which continues to authorize any current US President to use military force against any person, nation or organizations that he determines planned, carried out, or harbors/supports terrorists, or otherwise participated in the attacks of September 11, 2001. This law is still in effect today, has no expiration date, and has been applied more and more broadly as time has progressed. It has led to an undeclared war with neither clear boundaries, nor specific enemies. It can be fought anytime, anywhere, and against anyone.

Second, George W. Bush penned an Executive Order for the purposes of freezing and seizing assets of persons or organizations suspected of ties to terrorist organizations. The selection is an apt (and official) description of terrorist activity:

Executive Order 13224 (September 23, 2001):
“Sec. 3. For purposes of this order:
...
(d) the term "terrorism" means an activity that --
(i) involves a violent act or an act dangerous to human life, property, or infrastructure; and
(ii) appears to be intended --
(A) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
(B) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or
(C) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, kidnapping, or hostage-taking.”.

George W. Bush at the ruins of the World Trade Center.
"...and the people who knocked these buildings down
will hear all of us soon..."

Third, George W. Bush threatened the government of Afghanistan with the use of military force to unseat them from power, unless they handed Osama bin Laden and any members of his organization dubbed al-Qaeda over to the US immediately. US intelligence agencies thought these suspects were hiding in the notoriously difficult terrain along the Pakistani-Afghan border, which would have made even locating these suspects nearly impossible.

Bush was convinced that the Afghan government (the Taliban regime) was harboring Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda. He decided to influence the policy of the government of Afghanistan through intimidation and coercion, and gave them a next-to-impossible deadline. When that failed to produce the specific results desired, Bush used violent acts dangerous to human life, property and infrastructure intended to intimidate and coerce a civilian population and influence the policy and conduct of the Afghan government- tactics he had personally described as "acts of terrorism" only a few weeks before- and informed the entire world that these were the types of tactics that he would also be using on other nations if they didn't cooperate.

After the bombing began, the Taliban claimed they could deliver bin Laden to Saudi Arabia for detention, given evidence of his involvement in the terrorist acts of 9/11. Bush refused. We all know what happened after that. It's been over 10 years.

Fourth, the USA PATRIOT Act (Public Law 107-56) was passed by Congress giving government, law enforcement, intelligence agencies, and the military broad sweeping powers (which were originally designed to expire) to investigate and apprehend anyone it suspected of being a terrorist or otherwise tied to designated terrorist groups. Civil rights advocate groups insist that the USA PATRIOT Act infringes on and erodes the protections guaranteed in the Bill of Rights. This law has been re-authorized several times by both the Bush and Obama administrations and now has several new parts and additional legislation based upon it.

While all of this was happening, most Americans were still in a state of disbelief and shock. Some were outraged by the events on 9/11, and rightly so. However, it primed the population to accept the terms presented by the government. Citizens permitted them to pass unconstitutional laws and to take away their liberties. Those Americans who objected were branded "cowards," "terrorist sympathizers," "anti-American," or- my personal favorite- "Communists."

When confronted with the fact that these laws were dangerous, unconstitutional and anti-American themselves, the most common response was, "Why should I care-- I'm not a terrorist!" I personally had this conversation many times and was called any number of foul epithets for questioning my government's actions and motives.

Fifth, the US government began "arresting" persons they suspected of terrorist activities and hiding them in secret prisons. The US military installation at Guantanamo Bay was begun to be used as a major holding location for "enemy combatants," which was the term used by the Bush administration (and later by Obama) to avoid having to adhere to procedures and preconditions set forth both by United States criminal law and by the Geneva Convention's International Law regarding the treatment of Prisoners of War.

Sixth, a number of scandals erupted regarding the US government's operations in apprehending and detaining these enemy combatants, including widespread incidents of warrantless secret searches/wiretapping, entrapment and torture. Several US law enforcement agencies including the FBI and the DHS have been accused of using the "tools" provided to them under the USA PATRIOT Act to obtain information for investigations that are not related to terrorism. Many of these have not officially come to light since there is a "Patriot Act gag order" that makes it a federal offense and a breach of national security to discuss them in detail.


Roots of the Conflict

As is nearly always the case in history, the conflict did not begin with a single episode. September 11, 2001 was not the beginning of this particular string of events, any more than it was the end of it. The roots of the conflict emerged during and following the Cold War.

"We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them."
-Albert Einstein

After the collapse of the Soviet Union, US policymakers felt that a hard-won victory had been achieved. The US had engaged in conflicts with the Soviets indirectly (by proxy), most notably during the US-Vietnam Conflict and during the USSR-Afghanistan Conflict.

Both sides of the Cold War had engaged in relentless covert operations: psy-ops, influencing elections, funding and training armies, assassinations, hostage-taking, selective missile strikes, sanctions and economic embargoes.

While it seemed prudent to engage each other indirectly throughout the Cold War, these tactics sculpted an increasingly dangerous world. Nations (mostly in the "Third World") were used as pawns, abandoned- often in a state of ruin- at the end of their usefulness, leaving power vacuums presiding over undereducated and tormented populations. They often became breeding grounds for fundamentalism of all kinds.

The CIA has done a lot of things you don't know about. If you are motivated enough to spend the rest of your life reading declassified CIA documents filed by date of creation, go to http://www.foia.cia.gov/  for more details.

History will show that while the US had the chance to decisively win the Cold War, there really was no winner. The US failed at the most critical stage. It didn't help rebuild the world that fifty years of Cold War had ravaged; it didn't even try.

While many assumed an era of peace and prosperity would be ushered in by globalization, what many nations experienced was a new wave of imperialism and domination at the hand of western nations- economic imperialism.

Having installed and/or supported dictatorships and warlords all over the world based merely on the fact that they were not Communists, the US began experiencing what the intelligence community calls "blowback," which is a kind of secularized euphamism for "karma."

The people (and sometimes the governments) of the nations who had been used as proxies in the fight against Communism all over the world were left with a rather bad taste in their mouths. They had been manipulated and discarded. In some cases, people had no recollection of how it happened or why, but remembered that the US had a hand in causing their trauma.

As the US came to see itself as a beacon of hope and a liberator of the world, others came to see it as a great evil that had tormented them during the Cold War and now was attempting to "own them" in the aftermath.

The US government was careless, and in the aftermath of the collapse of the USSR, the US virtually abandoned or ignored everyone it had used or abused- claiming victory. In a sense, it was the arrogance of US policy-makers and their faith in neo-liberal economics that created the world we lived in on September 11, 2001.


Pax Americana

When George W. Bush announced his cabinet members, it was clear that the administration would follow a fairly predictable agenda. Most of his senior staff were members of a group of neoconservatives engaged in a foreign policy think tank called The Project for the New American Century (PNAC).

***PLEASE NOTE***
The Project for the New American Century (PNAC) has been disbanded, and all of these links are now dead.
There is currently a movement of denialists who attempt to denounce & discredit anyone who even mentions PNAC as some kind of "conspiracy theorist" and attempts to shut-down any argument that follows on that basis.
If you are interested in reading primary sources, you can search for them-- many have been reposted on separate websites.
PNAC was a legitimate neo-conservative think tank, and many prominent Republicans drafted letters & missives-- or at least signed them.
What follows is a non-"tinfoil hat" account of what that organization's objectives & concerns were, and a quick look at the members who "happened to be" also members of the Bush administration:

This group seemed fixated on punishing Iraq- most notably Saddam Hussein- and harshly criticized President Bill Clinton for not doing more to dispose of this madman and to control Iraq. They also put forth their theory that Iraq had been coordinating with terrorists in an article by Gary Schmitt in The Weekly Standard (a conservative political magazine edited by PNAC member William Kristol) in November 2000. Among other concerns were the objective of building a missile defense shield that was a direct violation of the ABM (Anti-Ballistic Missile) Treaty, and establishing a period of peace relying on unquestioned American military superiority- Pax Americana.

They argued that the Cold War world was a bipolar world, where there were two superpowers keeping the world in line, but that since the collapse of the Soviet Union, the US government had the opportunity- nay, the duty- to create a unipolar power structure, with the US as the unchecked guardian of peace and the sole military superpower. They even went so far as to suggest that the only viable strategy was to also prevent any other government or coalition of governments to rise to a status that would threaten this position. In short, they were talking about an implicit American Empire that would more or less rule the world. You know, since Americans are the "good guys."

The Project for the New American Century published a paper called Rebuilding America's Defenses in September 2000, one month before election day and one year before 9/11, which argued strongly in favor of permanent American military preeminence and stated that due to the lack of popularity of defense expenditure,

"...the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event - like a new Pearl Harbor," (Thomas Donnelly, Rebuilding America's Defenses, Sept. 2000, pg. 51).

It added,

"A sensible plan would add $15 billion to $20 billion to total defense spending annually through the Future Years Defense Program; this would result in a defense “topline” increase of $75 billion to $100 billion over that period, a small percentage of the $700 billion onbudget surplus now projected for that same period. We believe that the new president should commit his administration to a plan to achieve that level of spending within four years." (Donnelly, pg. 75)

President Clinton had drawn down US Defense spending to around $250 billion. Members of The Project for the New American Century thought it was reckless to spend any less on defense than the entire rest of the world combined.

George W. Bush did this in only two years, and over the next eight years he doubled spending, from around $250 billion to over $525 billion... Not included in this figure is the cost of creating and maintaining an entirely new cabinet-level governmental department that seems a bit redundant, unless you're establishing a police state: The Department of Homeland Security (also not included in the Defense budget: Iraq and Afghanistan).

For perspective, here is the United States' defense expenditure compared to the rest of the world:

The questions nobody seemed to ask, as the foreign policy of the nation was hijacked by neoconservative extremists, were:

1. Does the US have the right or the authority to preside over its own specific brand of "peace" or "freedom," anywhere in the world outside its own borders?

2. Does the US have the right or authority to dictate the terms of government or economic conditions in sovereign nations?

3. Does spending more money on the military actually translate to a state of peace? Or does it cause more opportunity for war?

4. Isn't it both Ethical and Rational to solve the problems that cause violence, rather than answering violence with more violence?

5. Does it advantage anyone to remain locked in a cycle of violence?

I believe that the members of the Bush administration manipulated Congress and the American public into this War on Terror and used 9/11 as a springboard to achieve their agenda.

Authorization for Use of Military Force in Iraq

When the Bush administration turned their sights on Iraq, they claimed that Saddam Hussein was collaborating with the terrorist group al-Qaeda, that he had weapons of mass destruction including chemical and biological weapons, that he was "very close" to building a nuclear weapon and that he was "an imminent threat to national security." None of the evidence turned out to be true. So why did the administration use these specific reasons to justify an invasion? Because Congress would only authorize (and fund) such an operation if all of these things were a concern.

Further, such funding & authorization was subject to review every 60-90 days under the War Powers Resolution of 1973, which is why the Iraq invasion and occupation was never included in the Defense budget, and why Bush had to go before Congress and ask for money piecemeal- $60 billion here, $80 billion there.

The administration sought international approval and Secretary of State Colin Powell was sent to deliver a very misleading testimony to the United Nations. The UN was wholly unconvinced of Iraq's threat to the US and Kofi Annan (the UN Secretary General at the time), said in 2004 that the invasion, "...was not in conformity with the UN charter from our point of view, from the charter point of view, it was illegal." The Bush administration ignored these allegations and proceeded with the operation even though the international community was against it.

Once again, Bush used threats of military force to influence and coerce the civilian population and the government of Iraq. Following the threats, the invasion began. It was an unprovoked act of aggression, employing violent acts dangerous to human life, property or infrastructure and appeared to be intended --

"(A) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
(B) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or
(C) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, kidnapping, or hostage-taking.” [ http://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/sanctions/Programs/Documents/terror.pdf ].

Reading between the lines, the message put forth by the US government appears to be, "It's not terrorism when we do it."

The entire way through, from conception to execution, Operation Iraqi Freedom was so poorly managed it's hard to believe it was merely due to incompetence:

1. All of the "reasons" for invading were false-- some were cherry picked, some delivered out-of-context, and some were intentionally fabricated.

2. The invasion began with "Shock and Awe," in which thousands of Iraqi civilians were killed- "collateral damage"- by US missiles aimed at about 1,000 military and infrastructure targets. Electricity and water systems were damaged. Seven years later, Iraqi civilians were still subject to complete power outages/rolling blackouts, lack of drinking water and waste management, a broken roadway & transit network, and limited access to medical care.

Bush delivered his "Mission Accomplished" speech on May 1, 2003,
 after landing on the deck of the USS Abraham Lincoln Aircraft Carrier in his own fighter jet.

3. There was no plan for occupation or for reconstruction, as administration officials believed the US would be welcomed as liberators and that Iraqi oil would fund the reconstruction. When US officials were sent to implement reconstruction, they were under-funded, under staffed, had a paucity of resources- including limited access to desks, chairs, phones, telephone directories, translators, and had revolving staff members that were frequently pulled out of Baghdad after six month stints, never to return. Some staff members were described as "fresh out of college" and had little to no experience. Most staff members spoke none of the local dialects. Their superiors- those making policy (most notably L. Paul Bremer "Governor of Iraq" under Bush, and a PNAC member)- did not speak the language, had little grasp of the culture and spent very little time in the country overall. Persons involved in the reconstruction effort said these factors crippled their potency and caused them to waste time and effort continually searching for new leadership contacts within the community.

4. There was no exit strategy.

5. Bush asked insurgents and terrorists to engage our troops in Iraq. One could say he even taunted them to do so by saying, "Bring 'em on," during a televised press briefing.

6. The administration had little to no knowledge of or concern over the sectarian tensions that existed in Iraq, and thus, no plan for dealing with them.

7. Operations by US officials and private contractors (mercenaries AKA "private military contractors" and corporations) were notoriously under-managed and ran amok, typically running wildly over budget while delivering shoddy, substandard services. The activities of several such companies have been described as "fraudulent" and "criminal."

8. The Defense Department mismanaged funds and "lost" billions of dollars on several occasions.

9. US troop levels were insufficient to adequately secure Iraqi Army weapons and ammunition dumps, markets, museums and cultural centers, but not the oil fields.

10. The administration decided to "fire" the Iraqi Army in May 2003 and the Iraqi National Guard late in 2004, leaving over 250,000 angry men unemployed, but well armed.

11. Terrorists and insurgents from elsewhere began migrating to Iraq to engage the US military, as Bush had suggested. Iraq became an on-the-job training program for anti-American terrorists and militants.

12. Many of these factors contributed to an unconscionable amount of civilian casualties. There are no official accounts of how many, to date, as the Army claimed they "don't do body counts." Media outlets disagree on the specific amount of civilian casualties, but civilian deaths due to the conflict are known to be somewhere between 100,000 to 120,000. It depends on who you ask. Some surveys estimate as many as 500,000 civilian deaths. Most of those numbers are based on reports from Iraqi morgues and reports by international journalists. These figures do not include persons who died non-violent deaths that may be related to the invasion, such as lack of access to food, medical care or clean water.

Suicides outnumbered combat fatalities in 2010. 
US military suicides were at 30-year highs in '09 and'10.

13. In contrast, a 2007 estimate of terrorists and/or insurgents killed in the conflict was around 19,000. According to Wikipedia's 2011 estimate, that number may be as high as 26,000.

14. There is a high incidence of PTSD (Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder) among American troops coming home from Iraq, and GI suicides have been at unprecedented rates for several years.

President Obama promised to bring the troops home and in December of 2011, after almost nine years of occupation he made good on that promise, beginning the withdrawal. However, he did intend to leave a small number of troops in place, but the Iraqi government "refused to grant American troops immunity from prosecution under local laws," so he withdrew all troops who were not assigned to the US Embassy security team.


Indefinite Detention

A deceased prisoner at Abu Ghraib, Iraq.

Once the US had engaged in acts of torture and mishandling of terrorism suspects and "enemy combatants," it had little choice but to keep these suspects out of the US criminal justice system. After all, the methods used in apprehending, detaining and interrogating many of the suspects would mandate their release under traditional US criminal laws; i.e., they would be set free "on a technicality," and therefore could not be tried in criminal courts. Additionally, many of the detainees had been captured in countries over which the US has no legal jurisdiction, unlawfully transported internationally, and had been held without charges in secret facilities-- a court might ask whether the suspect was arrested or if he was actually a victim of kidnapping.

Map of some secret prison facilities used by the CIA and other US government agencies

Terrorism suspects at a military detention center.
(No official explanation as to why their pants are pulled down)

In December of 2011, Congress passed the NDAA of 2012 with some notes on detention of terror suspects. It was now legal for the US to hold suspects "without trial, until the end of hostilities under the law of war," which basically means that these suspects will never be released. If they ever do see trial, it will be before a US military tribunal.

The law, inserted into a routine defense spending bill, has been cited by civil rights groups as being an unconstitutional attack on civil liberties. It would be an effective tool of oppression in the wrong hands, and like the Authorization for Use of Military Force, it has no specific expiration date. As careful read-through implies there is no requirement of military detention for US citizens or legal resident aliens, but it does not specifically prohibit military detention without trial for US citizens/legal resident aliens accused of terrorism. President Obama signed this into law on December 31, 2011, despite having serious reservations about Sec. 1021. Since a major campaign promise of Obama's was to close "Gitmo," the actual reasons for drafting this bill and the political maneuvering surrounding it may have had less to do specifically with the War on Terror than to inconvenience and discredit a president who was disliked by certain members of Congress.

Jose Padilla, a US citizen, was held in military custody
as an "enemy combatant" for three and a half years.

Senators Joe Lieberman and Scott Brown have co-sponsored a bill aimed at stripping citizenship from terror suspects, whether they are natural-born or naturalized US citizens, to remove those pesky Constitutional Rights altogether. The net result would be that if a government agency believes a US citizen is a terror suspect (if they are engaged in acts of terrorism directly or indirectly, or if they materially support/harbor known terrorists, directly or indirectly, whether they know or should know that they have done so), they could be held in a military prison without trial until the end of the War on Terror (perpetually)-- without the burden of proof and without providing any of the legal rights guaranteed to US citizens.


Drone Warfare

Given the problematic state of fighting global terrorism with ground troops or extradition treaties, the Obama administration has turned to using drone aircraft to assassinate individuals the President determines are involved in terrorist activity. Drone strikes have been used to eliminate targets in several countries. This is entirely of presidential discretion. No authorization from Congress is necessary.

A Predator drone fires a missile.

Bill Clinton used "surgical missile strikes" to assassinate individuals and influence the policy of other governments throughout his presidency, so it's not unheard of, but Obama has taken this a bit further-- some of his targets were US citizens. Attorney General Eric Holder insists that "due process is not the same as judicial process," and therefore the administration is justified in killing terrorism suspects wherever they may be in the world- even if they are US citizens. What exactly does he think "due process" means?

Disturbingly, these drone aircraft are often piloted from within the US- bringing the battlefield home. Now, the bases from which these aircraft are piloted remotely are legitimate military targets. That means that the War on Terror is officially being waged from inside the United States.

While using drones may ensure the relative safety of our military personnel, these assassinations are still bombings that kill innocent bystanders and have been used to assassinate US citizens. Innocent bystanders and children are often killed along with suspected militants.

What do you think the response would be from the US government, if a nation sent drone aircraft into US airspace to perform a missile strike on their perceived enemies? What if that missile strike killed even one innocent civilian child? Why does the United States government believe the rules do not apply in their case?


Entrapment

The FBI, the Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF) and several other government agencies have been using aggressive means to identify and apprehend terrorism suspects. Translation: entrapment. The FBI was involved in several counter-terrorism cases in which they approached persons who they identified as "radicals" or "extremists" undercover, and provided them with encouragement to commit acts of terrorism-- including supplying weapons and/or explosives, specific targets, and a plan for executing the attack. In the case of Amine El Khalifi, a 29 year-old Moroccan  immigrant who was targeted by the entrapment program, the weapons and explosives provided had reportedly been "rendered harmless" by FBI agents.

"In the wake of 9/11, it no longer is enough for law enforcement officers to solve crimes after their commission. Investigative activity that preempts crimes, particularly terrorism in a post-9/11 world, has become commonplace. To help ensure a successful prosecution, law enforcement officers need to recognize the risks associated with proactive investigations and anticipate affirmative defenses, such as entrapment, as they initiate undercover operations. With proper planning and execution, law enforcement officers can use all available tools to prevent another terrorist attack and to help effectively overcome an entrapment defense."  

- Avoiding the Entrapment Defense in a Post-9/11 World, By David J. Gottfried, J.D.  
http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/law-enforcement-bulletin/january-2012/avoiding-the-entrapment-defense-in-a-post-9-11-world

Entrapment, aside from being an extremely unethical and illegal method in law enforcement, can also have other more terrible consequences. For example, the ATF implemented a program (created by the Obama administration's Justice Dept.) called "Fast and Furious" in which they supplied guns to weapons traffickers in Mexico using undercover agents posing as gun runners. Apparently the plan was to be able to keep track of the weapons and expose every step in the trafficking process to ATF agents who could then make arrests in connection to drug cartels. Unfortunately, the ATF lost the ability to track the guns-- many have been found to be related to miscellaneous cases-- and one turned up later as the murder weapon during the investigation of the death of a US Border Patrol agent.

What if the FBI, the JTTF or the Dept. of Homeland Security "loses" their terrorism suspect, whom they have incited, trained and armed? What if that person is able to pull off an attack?


A Never-Ending State of Emergency

The powers granted to the executive branch of the US government with which to engage the "emergency" of terrorism are broad and sweeping. These are powers that are marginally constitutional-- and are meant to be temporary. The very terms by which the US has conducted the War on Terror, paradoxically, imperils national security at every step. The result is that unless the United States chooses a more Ethical and Rational path, it cannot return to a state of peace.

There are several reasons why the War on Terror will never be over, much less ever be won:

1. Terrorism is a CRIME that is politically motivated. It is NOT an act of war. When terrorism occurs in a war zone (whether perpetrated by soldiers or other agents), it is a War Crime.

2. The US government picks and chooses which groups, agents and/or individuals are considered terrorists- depending on what government or agency is being attacked. More important than that, the United States itself has (and continues to be) engaged in activities which can be interpreted as acts of terrorism by an outside observer.

3. The US's attacks of aggression and disregard for the protection of innocents continues to manufacture terrorists and extremists all over the world, as well as within the United States.

This is a never-ending, un-winnable war, with no borders or boundaries; one that compromises both national security and the "inalienable rights" of US citizens. The War on Terror must be stopped at any cost.

The Story of Our Survival: Science and Myth (GD Part 1.1)

The world as we know it is poised for a series of cascading crises, some of these will be caused by forces of Nature and some by Human hands. A number of these are avoidable, but many are not. Our species has survived cataclysm after cataclysm in the relatively short period of time we have inhabited the Earth, and in some cases, only barely.

A startling revelation occurs when we examine the intersections between several disciplines of modern science and some of Humankind's oldest legends and myths. It seems there is a message, which has been sent to us by the people of the distant past- an answer to surviving the upcoming crises that threaten our very existence. This is my interpretation of that message: it is not competition that advances and protects civilization (although competition can surely enhance it), but it is cooperation.

While Humans are not the only species that uses cooperation as a survival mechanism, we are the only ones who use cooperation to create complex cultural constructs that dynamically evolve over time-- and we must be aware of the kind of culture that we create. I suggest that the myths- but especially the creation myths- of all world religions have this one central message encoded within them - as well as a kind of oral history of the world - and I have picked a few to share with you in this article, as well as their correlation to actual events in Humankind's prehistory.


In the Beginning

We know that Homo sapiens did not invent the first wood and stone tools. The first tools originated in remote moments as far back as two million years ago, most likely by our ancient ancestors Homo ergaster or Homo erectus. Toolmaking was taught to each successive generation (just as modern chimps have been observed doing) not just for survival, but often for convenience. We, like our chimp cousins and our ancient progenitors, seek to better our present circumstances through the invention and construction of handy tools.

Homo erectus used tools, but it's unclear
what their language capabilities were like.

One of the most fantastic inventions credited to the Human race is language. Although it turns out several other species on Earth use vocal signals and body language to convey meaning, Homo sapiens are thought to be the only ones who do this to relate highly complex ideas. There exists no definitive evidence supporting or refuting claims that language with a high level of abstraction were developed by any of our early relatives like Homo heidelbergensis. However it is likely, given their methods of hunting and shelter building, that both Homo heidelbergensis and our hominin cousins, Homo neanderthalensis, used fairly complex verbal language.

Emerging from hazy depths of prehistoric consciousness there is a wealth of information that was faithfully memorized and relayed from one generation to the next. Some ideas were merely mechanical, for instance, how to build simple shelters and tools of wood and stone, while others may have included highly abstracted stories of gods and men, the creation of the world and the meaning of life.

Over most of Human history, oral traditions have transmitted the bulk of our knowledge from generation to generation. Then, at some unknown moment in the past, Humans applied yet another innovation to the tool called language: writing. This has enabled us to communicate across vast distances of time and space and is often cited as the spark that created civilization as we know it.

In these oral traditions and writings, there are over five hundred creation myths across the world in which animals and/or mankind emerge from a watery abyss. Most insist that the world was completely covered in water until the first speck of dirt emerged from the surface, sometimes including an animal or spirit who either raises the mud from the waters, or causes the waters to retreat from the land.

While it may seem like an obvious recounting of scientific facts- to those of us who have studied geology and the theory of evolution- these ideas were not discovered by ancient peoples through scientific investigation. Some original source had experienced this "creation" and had relayed the idea to their offspring. But where and when did these ideas originate, if there was indeed some experiential basis?

Throughout the last few million years, Earth has been prone to consistent cycles of drastic natural climate changes- fluctuations of global average temperature of 5-7 degrees Celsius- which casts the Earth into periodic Ice Ages lasting over 80,000 years (temperature fluctuations at high latitudes are seen to be significantly wider; 7-12 degrees C). During this time, while much of the Earth's water is frozen in glaciers, sea levels are known to be over 390 feet lower than they are at present, extending coastlines outward miles and miles farther than they are today, suggesting that shorelines were right at the edge of the continental shelves.

This graph shows sea levels changes in the last 140,000 years

We are taught in school about the Bering Land Bridge which connected Asia to North America during the last Ice Age- this is the theoretical route taken by the ancestors of the First Nations of North America as they migrated, over 15,000 years Before Present (BP). There are similar structures around the world which emerge from the water during these global Ice Ages, including land bridges that may have allowed the inhabitants of southern Asia to merely walk to some parts of what are now the island nations of Indonesia and Malaysia, or from mainland Europe to what is now called England.

That's not all. The amount of water trapped in polar glaciation of these Ice Ages is so extreme that the weight of the ice compresses the Earth. This causes the entire planet to bulge at the equator, pushing landmasses in the area higher and higher. Geologists claim that since the glaciers began melting at the beginning of the current Interglacial Period (called the Holocene Era, beginning about 20,000 years BP), land in the Northern Hemisphere has risen around 180 meters (600ft) and is continuing to rise today, while the "equatorial bulge" has decreased significantly.

Our planet is wildly changeable, and it's hard to imagine exactly what the landmasses looked like during the periods of heavy glaciation. Were the landmasses above sea level 20,000 years ago once inhabited? We may never know- given the difficulty of underwater archaeology- and that is what fascinates me the most. We'll come back to this.


Survivors of Global Cataclysm - The Scientific Observations

Looking deeper into our Human prehistory, we come across solid information indicating incredible hardships. Geneticists estimate that there was an event about 75,000 years BP that culled the Human race to less than 10,000 members (some researchers say as few as 2,000). This type of occurrence is known as a "bottleneck event"- in which we were left with genetic variations that are unusually narrow in scope. Most living species on Earth demonstrate much higher genetic variation within their populations than Homo sapiens. The prevailing theory is that it is because most of the Human population was killed off at that time.

The bottleneck event which occurred around 75,000 years BP was the eruption of the Mt. Toba supervolcano, located on the island that is now known as Sumatra, Indonesia. Geological evidence implies that the eruption of Mt. Toba was forty times larger than the largest eruption in recorded history. It is considered to be the second largest explosive eruption of the last 450 million years and the largest volcanic eruption of the last two million years.

Lake Toba, Sumatra, Indonesia

The fact that Mt. Toba is known as a "supervolcano" is no hyperbole. The eruption site is called a caldera, not a crater, and is about 30km wide by 100km long. The caldera is now a large lake. The eruption was so gigantic, geologists think it exploded for several days and had an immediate impact on the climate of the entire world. Volcanic ash (pulverized rock) and a cocktail of gases containing sulfur dioxide mixed with water vapor to form massive clouds of sulfuric acid which coated the planet's atmosphere. Clouds of this type have the unfortunate effect of reflecting sunlight back into space and researchers think that this eruption produced acid rains which destroyed a large part of flora and fauna all over the world. Perhaps hardest hit was the area within two or three thousand miles to the west of the eruption: central and southern Asia, the Middle East, eastern Africa, and the subcontinent of India, whose Human population may have dropped to less than six hundred (this estimate is based on interpretation of genetic information). Archaeological evidence suggests that a large population of archaic Humans and other hominins inhabited a region spanning from northern Europe to China. This population appeared to dwindle abruptly following the Mt. Toba eruption.

Imagine a world without the Bornean Orangutan...
(No... no, that's too sad)

Paleontologists and geneticists say several other large mammal species experienced specific effects and extinctions due to this eruption: Cheetahs, Bornean Orangutans, East African Chimpanzees, Central Indian Macaques, and the Tiger all recovered from extremely low populations following this event. Also following this cataclysm we find the separation of the gene pools of the Eastern and Western Gorilla, who were virtually indistinguishable prior to this time.

Estimations of the disaster include many conflicting details, but most agree that Mt. Toba caused a "volcanic winter" that lasted for six continuous years and caused global average temperatures to drop several degrees Celsius, for perhaps hundreds or thousands of years.

It was soon after the time of the Mt. Toba eruption, that despite the cold of northern climes, groups of Humans began a massive exodus from Africa- probably to escape the horrifically toxic environmental consequences of this incredible eruption. They did not know equatorial Africa was probably the least affected place at the time, neither did they know that they were heading toward an environment that had led to the elimination (or near extinction) of every other population of hominins.

Apart from the harsh environment produced by Mt. Toba, the world was already experiencing the onset of a new global Ice Age (the bulk of the last few million years has been one Ice Age after another, separated by brief warm spells known as Interglacial Periods). This was to be the next disaster for Humankind and other hominids. During the most recent Ice Age, Neanderthal man met their extinction and the last remaining archaic Homo sapiens became the emerging population of truly anatomically-modern Homo sapiens.

After scores of thousands of years of migrations and adaptations- frequently to very cold climates- Humans faced another ecological disaster: Global Warming. Around 20,000 years BP, the Earth began to rapidly heat, with global average temperatures rising 5-7 degrees C, culminating in the current Interglacial Period. During this time, the environment and the landscape changed drastically all over the world.

Modern glacial melt in Greenland

Melting glaciers created new rivers and lakes, while causing flooding that lasted for hundreds if not thousands of years at a time. Sea levels at this time rose over 120 meters (~393ft), pushing coastlines back for miles and wiping out land bridges and any possible coastal settlements. This did not happen during one episode or in one place, but repeatedly and in many locations over thousands of years. Dramatic effects would have been witnessed many, many times over all across the world. This is, I believe, the reason there are so many flood myths in traditional creation stories. Our ancestors actually lived through these catastrophic events.

Seventy-five percent of the overall rise occurred in only 5,500 years (between 14,500-9,000yrs. BP). Even in the last 8,000 years- very recently- there were incredible variations of sea level. The following graph shows Western Pacific Sea level changes over the last 22,000 years BP. The present day is located on the left side. We can see that there were several sudden increases of sea level, with several periods of apparent stability.

Many studies containing sea level change graphs and charts from across the globe all have very similar data, including floods of more than 20m (~65ft) at a time. Almost all show sea levels rising 120m (~393ft) or more in the last 20,000 years.

We can actually see from this diagram, that there was an initial rising of sea level- the exact amount not shown- which was higher than the present day shoreline. If we go back to the graph showing sea levels for the past 140,000 years, it seems that at some point around 8,000-6,000 years ago, sea levels were as much as 10m (~32ft) higher than they are today, but then retreated.

The Biblical flood of Noah may correlate to this most recent rise and drop in sea level beginning around 7,500 years ago and the data suggests that compared to most of the previous rises in sea level, it was a relatively minor flood. The timing of this event is probably what made it so historically significant, as anthropologists think this was not long after Human settlements became highly dependent on agriculture. Even relatively minor periodic floods would have utterly destroyed almost the entire food supply of the rapidly expanding population.

Interpretation

After the toxic effects of the Mt. Toba eruption were absorbed by nature, Humankind would have had 20,000-30,000 years to establish new settlements and civilizations before the termination of the last Ice Age and would have been concentrated in places where life was easier. Most of the largest Human migrations are thought to have occurred at this time.

During the latter stages of the most recent Ice Age, lower sea levels and colder temperatures in northern latitudes would have placed most of Humankind's settlements closer to the equator and/or mostly concentrated in little pockets near the ocean or riverbanks where food was plentiful and the climate was mild. I think those who were engaged in exploration of northern latitudes would likely have been "survivalists" and small bands of explorers or nomadic tribes.

When the Ice Age finally ended and the globe began to rapidly heat up, the glaciers melted at an extremely high rate. As this happened, the weight on the poles decreased and the planet actually changed shape fairly rapidly. There would have been major earthquakes and disappearing landmasses- due to rising seas, and also due to the "Geoid Collapse," in which some equatorial land "sunk" into the ocean. For one example, the land bridge from southern Asia through the present-day countries of Indonesia and Malaysia then became a series of islands.




The increased heat of the air would have allowed for immense amounts of moisture to be collected, resulting in seasonal rains and regular deluges where there had previously been very dry conditions. Entire regions of the Earth would undergo a complete transformation as the global average temperature rose almost 6 degrees C in less than 5,000 years.

The survivalists and nomadic tribes along the northern latitudes and highlands would have been among the most advantaged of the Human population at this time- as their environment was becoming milder and they were beginning to experience short "seasons" of warmer temperatures during the summer months. However, as the thaw progressed, these wayfarers in the north and the highlands would have been subjected to more and more extreme climatic shifts- extreme rainstorms, flooding, intermittent earthquakes, and disappearing sea ice.

The survivors of these catastrophic events may have a vivid memory of the period of flooding and the process of change, but not the stable glacial landscape that existed before. Taking this view, stories of the world being created out of a watery abyss are entirely consistent with the scientific account.

We must face the possibility that some of the more advanced/most densely populated ancient Human settlements from this prehistoric period have been washed away by these rising tides and are now under more than 120m (~393ft) of ocean water, miles away from present-day shorelines and buried under thousands of years of sand and sediment.


Survivors of Global Cataclysm - Ancient Oral Records and Scripture

Between 11,000-11,500 years BP, sea levels rose about 30 meters (~100 feet). Curiously, this corresponds to exactly the time when, according to Plato's version of the story, "Atlantis" is said to have disappeared into the sea. The story of Atlantis, in extremely broad strokes, goes like this:

A very Hellenic depiction of Atlantis

About 9,000 years before Plato, there stood an extremely advanced civilization, on an island (or series of islands), that had mastered all forms of magic/technology. But they had become careless and rather conceited in their superiority.

In some versions of the story, their hubris angers the gods and they are destroyed. In other versions, their great power grows beyond their control; the people grow ignorant of their magic/technology's true nature and they destroy themselves by inadvertently setting into motion a virtual self-destruct sequence. In either case, it is said that due to their unacceptable behavior this paradise and pinnacle of civilization was swallowed by the sea, never to be seen again.

This follows a fairly long list of references from Classical Antiquity to an earlier Golden Age, in which there existed a perfect Utopia. Plato and many of his contemporaries considered themselves vastly inferior to this previous civilization- no more than a shadow of its former glory.

It is likely that places like Atlantis are at least in some part based on fact- there would have been many settlements that were swallowed by the sea by rising tides or had sunk due to earthquakes. In terms of the idealized memory of these places- for now, let's just say that there is a basic Human need to put a positive spin on people and places that are gone forever.

Many cultures have stories that do not recount the beginning as a flood at all, but as a lush paradise where food grew everywhere and life was incredibly easy. Human beings had been simply deposited in this "Heaven on Earth" by the gods. The cuneiform engravings of ancient Babylon, thought to be the some of the oldest writings in the world, tell a story of creation that is very similar to the one found in the pages of Genesis in the Judeo-Christian texts:

At some point, man commits some unforgivable sin and the gods/God expels man from this paradise into a cold, harsh world where the land is barren and mankind is required, for the first time, to work for their foods by farming and hunting.

The first Humans were cast out of Paradise

This sounds a lot like the conditions surrounding the time of the Mt. Toba eruption. In Africa, the soil- indeed the very air itself- had been poisoned, which is most likely why people left in the migrations described by geneticists and archaeologists. Food would have been difficult to find no matter where Humans went. On top of the six-year volcanic winter caused by Mt. Toba's eruption, the most recent Ice Age had begun. After leaving Africa through passages to the north, Humans required much more clothing- portable, personal shelters from the cold.

When Humankind was "expelled" from the paradise we know as the Garden of Eden, the world was indeed more harsh. Everywhere they went it was harder than the "paradise" they had recounted in oral histories. This could be why the people kept going-- they were trying to get back to this idyllic "Garden" which existed in their social memory- and no place had yet measured up.

The cultures which preserve the story of an "Antediluvian" (before the flood) origin of Humankind report that the civilization before the flood was a thriving, vibrant civilization with a high standard of living. The story of the Tower of Babel, which appears in Hebrew, Assyrian, Babylonian and Sumerian texts, depicts an antediluvian civilization whose amazing achievements make the gods either nervous or jealous.

Unfortunately, as the story typically goes, the antediluvian culture had become "wicked" and was ultimately purged by the gods through the experience of a cataclysmic flood-- this story can also be found in The Epic of Gilgamesh from ancient Babylon (found to be based upon stories from the previous civilization of Sumer).

An original copy of The Epic of Gilgamesh

Mostly, the stories of antediluvian cultures in the Middle East and the Mediterranean region are short and vague- although it seems that Plato's account of Atlantis (if taken literally and not allegorically) represents the oral history of an antediluvian culture that had been omitted from most of the written accounts for some reason, or perhaps was just a creative Greco-Roman revision of these earlier Mesopotamian texts.

There are few cultures which have stories that are thought to be older than these texts of the ancient Tigris and Euphrates River valley. The creation stories of the Hopi of Arizona, the Vedic texts of ancient India, and traditional Tibetan legends of creation claim to be the oldest creation stories on Earth and share some fantastic correlations.

In these cultures, Humanity has risen -several times- to great heights only to be "humbled" through periodic/cyclic cataclysms. The Hopi legends describe these ages as "Worlds," and state that we have witnessed the destruction of three previous worlds- and are now in the Fourth World. According to The Book of the Hopi by Frank Waters (based on oral histories told to him by Hopi Elders in the 1960s), the story goes something like this:

Tokpela, the First World, was created by the gods and people lived in a rich and vibrant culture which understood "the nature of man himself," (The first chapter of this book goes on to describe what sounds almost identical to the Far-Eastern concept of chakras or energy points in the body)- these people experienced no sickness and lived in a virtual paradise... but there were those "of Two Hearts" which allowed evil to exist within them. Gradually, they forgot their connection to the gods, "and used the vibratory centers of their bodies for solely earthly purposes, forgetting that their primary purpose was to carry out the plan of Creation..."

After this, animals became frightened of Humans and the people split up and became different from each other (different races were created). Soon after, the "chosen people" from all over the world (those who had not forgotten their true nature or who had not lost their "inner wisdom") were led to a place where they would be safe, and the First World- with all its "wicked" inhabitants- was destroyed.

An interesting side-note here, which is very important to the Hopi story, is that these "chosen people" went to live underground with the Ant People, who were nearly the size of Humans at the time. They are seen as a model for Humanity, in their industriousness and their example of order and peace within society. It is said that "they obey the plan of Creation."

While the chosen people were underground, the gods destroyed the First World (whose leaders had been known as the Fire Clan), with fire.

"Sótuknang... rained fire down upon it. He opened up the volcanoes. Fire came from above and below and all around until the earth, the waters, the air, all was one element, fire, and there was nothing left except the people safe inside the womb of the earth. This was the end of Tokapela, the First World." (Waters, pp 14)

The creation myth goes on to tell that their coexistence within the world of the Ant People was so long, and the Ant People so generous- that by the charity of the Ant People, Humans survived even as the Ant People deprived themselves of nourishment- which is why ants today are so small around the waist.

The trouble in the Second World, Tokpa, began when people began to barter and trade with one another, instead of simply farming and storing food like the Ant People had taught them. As these people of the Second World grew to have more and more, their hunger for the easy life grew as well. They then began to war with one another and only a few good people sang the praises of the gods.

The gods saved the good people by sequestering them underground with the Ant People, while they destroyed the world yet again-- this time, with ice.

"[They] had hardly abandoned their stations when the world, with no one to control it, teetered off balance, spun around crazily, then rolled over twice. Mountains plunged into the seas with a great splash, seas and lakes sloshed over the land; and as the world spun through cold and lifeless space it froze into solid ice. This was the end of Tokpa, the Second World." (Waters, pp 16)

The gods kept this world frozen for many years, while Humankind was again cared for by the Ant People. The gods then prepared the Third World. In this new world, Humans were very prosperous and made a great civilization. However, the greatness of the civilization was again rivaled by the wickedness of its people.

The Third World is the most fascinating to me because in this world, the people made pátuwvota (a shield made of hide) "...and with their creative power made it fly through the air." These became aircraft which were used to mount surprise attacks on competing cities (this bears an incredible similarity to stories from the Vedas of ancient India in which the gods fly around in Vimana -flying temples- and battle each other mid-air). The people all over the Hopi's Third World were soon waging war with each other in this way, and it led to the gods' destruction of that world- this time, by water.

"Dammit, Joe! We missed the boat. Why, oh, why did we stop for Starbucks?"

This story gets more and more interesting, as the "chosen people"  are instructed by the gods on how to build boats and travel across the seas. They find many islands along the way which look perfect, but are told by the gods that life was too easy there and they would quickly fall back into wickedness. They float along until they come to a land where they are to eventually settle-- North America, the Fourth World (Túwaqachi). They then travel by foot in every direction and explore the boundaries of their new world. The gods tell them not to venture through the "Back Door" which is sometimes called the "White Way" in the north (aka The Bering Land Bridge). This method of overseas travel would have allowed the Hopi to leave Asia later than people crossing over the Arctic, but to arrive in the lower latitudes of the Americas much earlier.

The story notes that many people arrive through the "Back Door," including the Navajo, who the Hopi take in and teach. When the Navajo arrive, they at first refuse to eat food cooked in pots, insisting on eating food cooked over open flame instead. They are described as unkempt, wearing rough animal skins and having a more or less haggard look which you would expect of people who had just wandered across an Arctic wasteland (my apologies to any Navajo reading this who object to this particular depiction-- I'm just repeating the "official" Hopi story).

The Hopi see themselves as the original inhabitants of North and South America and claim that every civilization in the Fourth World is an offshoot of their own. The newcomers from the "Back Door" merely have joined them.

I highly recommend reading The Book of the Hopi by Frank Waters. The Hopi have a very interesting outlook on life and civilization, and claim to have taken residence on the Three Mesas in northern Arizona specifically because it is not an easy place to live.  In their view, it is an easy and convenient life which leads to wickedness and the degeneration of culture. While people are struggling and life is hard, they have no time to become wicked.

"Hopi Mesa" - Photo by Adam Clark Vroman, ca. 1897

The Hopi story is significant not only in scope, but in the description of the double-edged sword of Human culture and civilization. It has the power to save us, to sustain us and to elevate us to great advancements. It even can make our lives luxurious, wherein lies the second edge of the blade; we forget our connection to the Earth and we become lazy, greedy and individualistic when our lives are too easy.

I found this particular creation story interesting because of the three times the world has been destroyed- first by Fire, second by Ice and third by Water. It does seem to have an incredible amount in common with some scientific data. As far as oral histories go, this one is very extensive and has relevance to the scientific model of actual events in paleoclimatology.

Imagine that a population living near enough to Mt. Toba to witness such an event- destruction of the world by fire- had fled toward the east after taking shelter, perhaps in caves (or maybe the destruction of the First World is actually the story of the previous Interglacial Period over 100,000 years ago!). Over time, they would have migrated far toward eastern or northern Asia and experienced a long Ice Age. At the onset of the current Interglacial Period, long after the people had learned to adapt to the cold, the world began to thaw and their homeland sunk beneath the sea, forcing them to travel by boat until reaching the Fourth World.

If we examine the correlation between Tibetan, Indian and Hopi creation stories, it pushes their origin a bit further back in history than most anthropologists are willing to consider. The relationship between Tibet and India is direct and fairly recent, as they both have linguistic connections to ancient Sanskrit. But if the Hopi story of cyclic creation and destruction comes from the same source as these Asian cultures, we are forced to believe that the story originated more than 15,000 years ago, around or before the time that the first Hopi ancestors crossed from Asia to the Americas.

When we turn our attention back to the Middle East, which we consider the "Cradle of Civilization," we find that some of the earliest civilizations seemed to have emerged pretty much complete. Sumer, considered by anthropologists and archaeologists to be one of the first "true" civilizations, appeared almost overnight with fully formed writing systems, law, doctors, religion, astronomy, highly advanced mathematics and architecture, markets, and money.

Annunaki, the Sumerian mythological  figures
(Only some of them had bird-heads, FYI)

According to writings found in the ancient cities of Sumer, the Annunaki (a group of godlike creatures upon which it is likely the Greco-Roman pantheon was based) actually were responsible for instructing the Sumerians on how to build the social aspects and physical monuments of their civilization. The Sumerians were contemporaries with ancient Egyptians, who also displayed a sudden emergence of high culture.

Some of the most fantastic structures ever built were thought to be made at this time, during the "earliest" moments of our civilization- Such as the Great Pyramid of Giza.

 Is it possible that some of these ancient stories are correct-- that we have achieved great levels of advancement in the past, only to have them washed away by rising seas or other cataclysms? Were these early civilizations built upon the memory and knowledge of previous civilizations which have been forever lost to us? Did these early civilizations immediately build megalithic structures of advanced geometry specifically because they were likely to withstand floods, earthquakes and other natural disasters-- not as monuments to their own kings or cultures, but as a message to the people of the future?

If so, what does that mean to us here and now?


A Culture of Interdependence

Regardless of the specific level of advancement of the previous Human populations, it is important to note that what actually helped us to survive these periodic cataclysms (other than intervention of the gods) was our ability to adapt and to cooperate. Our greatest invention- a tool called language, allows us to convey highly abstracted ideas and attach meaning through the use of symbols. It is certain that we have used these meanings and symbols to make alliances and create a Culture of Interdependence.

In the modern era, we have extended our interdependence far beyond what is reasonable. It is simultaneously our greatest strength and our most crippling weakness. Entire regions of the world are now completely dependent upon each other to provide food or natural resources which sustain our way of life.

Non-industrialized (often referred to as "underdeveloped") nations often depend on industrial nations for food (from industrialized farming), technology and/or financial support, and they trade fuel, cash crops or other raw material resources in exchange for these. The central hub of the interdependence between the non-industrialized and industrialized nations is the global transportation network, which depends on the availability of cheap energy resources.

The modern lifestyle enjoyed by the industrialized world revolves entirely around the constant generation and distribution of electricity. It shuts down completely given any interruption of incoming resources- most cities have only a few days to a week's supply of food & drink or fuel on hand for their incumbent populations.

Most inhabitants of the industrialized world are highly specialized, either in terms of urban survival (street smarts) or in highly advanced and very narrow fields-- few individuals seem to have even a rudimentary concept of how to construct or configure any of the component parts of our modern systems, and even fewer still are adept at survival in the raw wilderness of the natural world, even under "normal" circumstances. Could we survive another global cataclysm? If so, how?

"Yo- Jesse... can I stay at your house tonight?
I got some... uh... plumbing problems..."

It seems the instructions for survival and for our success in the aftermath are recorded in the myths and legends of the ancient disasters- strict adherence to our spiritual codes. These do not require an allegiance to an ancient belief system. Rather, each culture which presents these myths of creation and destruction notes a similar structure of a sociological nature.

Within advanced civilizations, a polarization occurs: life becomes very easy for some but more difficult for others, who must now navigate a much more complex social structure which is increasingly more exclusive as each member's role becomes more specialized. This social stratification is also responsible for removing a number of social members from directly interacting with the Earth for survival.

The individuals on both sides of this polarization turn to a similar tactic- the advantaged become more lazy, self-centered and greedy, taking advantage of others for material gain and convenience, as the disadvantaged of the society are forced to work harder, becoming more self-focused and individualistic as a function of personal survival in an increasingly hostile and competitive environment.

There is a fundamental "falling away" from the accepted notions of social responsibility and interconnectedness which helped to facilitate the advancement of the culture in the first place. This is the  "sin" which is usually cited as what "destines" the civilization for destruction by vengeful gods: the people have "stopped singing their praises," by disregarding the most basic values of brotherhood and their connection to the Earth.

The "chosen people," who are to survive the coming cataclysm, remain "faithful to the gods" by adherence to the core values that every world religion/spiritual discipline promotes: kindness, brotherhood, generosity, honesty, mercy, mutual respect, faithfulness, working for the common well-being of the people, stewardship of the Earth, etc.

In reality, these core values help group members survive cataclysms, as the "faithful" work together for everyone's survival; while the "faithless" more or less trample each other in a self-interested & panic-stricken stampede. Even if the "faithless" survive the initial cataclysm, their behavior is remembered as counterproductive or dangerous to the group's well being and they are not allowed back into the fold for the reconstruction period.

Treating your fellow man as a brother
has practical applications, after all.

Reconstruction involves (aside from a physical or social rebuilding) a distillation of the civilization's core values and incorporates the struggle for survival (and the triumph of "the way" of the spiritually devout) into the mythos of the culture.

The emergent culture may have either a distorted/incomplete view of the original form of the spiritual discipline, or a more pure and concentrated understanding of its tenets. In either case, the cataclysm/crisis/disaster is held up as a testament to the greatness or "rightness" of its belief system.

Let's face it- if the ground beneath your feet suddenly explodes and everyone else is killed by fire & poisonous gases, or if your entire civilization is swallowed by the sea before your very eyes while you drift away on a boat your crazy uncle constructed on the roof of his house, you are quite likely to consider yourself "blessed" or "favored" by the gods for your ability to escape and start anew. The sheer incomprehensibility of your luck may escape all other explanations. 

(see: Survivor Bias)

Where this often takes a wrong turn is in the belief that this specific viewpoint is superior to others, or that the details of a specific dogma are more important than the general sense of working together for the common good of all Humankind.

Anatomically modern Humans are thought to have first emerged around 200,000 years ago. Several other hominin species have met extinction during this very same time period- possibly due to the same events that have nearly wiped out Homo sapiens-- I have outlined only a few of the known disasters of the last 100,000 years.

Whether it's a major climate disaster caused by Humans (or by Nature), or some extra-terrestrial event like a meteor strike, we must expect drastic and sudden change in our environment. It has been the "norm" in our short history on Earth.

On top of that, we now have the power to utterly destroy our Human world all on our own- through any number of anthropogenic ecological disasters, or with the power of nuclear weapons/other weapons of war, through our mismanagement of resources (fuels, food & water, building materials, capital/finances), or by neglecting the treatment of diseases which are entirely curable or manageable with nutrition & modern medicine.

The underlying message from the ancient world is that with a little luck, through cooperation and service to our fellow Humans, we can survive our emergence into the "Fifth World"- and thrive. We can create a new kind of interdependence which is not profit-motivated; a society which is both Ethical and Rational. It is time for the Human race to grow up and really start taking care of each other - and our world. If we do this we will survive, just as our ancestors did, but we will have a more complete story to tell, with a deeper and richer cultural heritage.