We are killing our planet, and thus our selves.

The Earth has nine biophysical thresholds beyond which it cannot be pushed without disastrous consequences, the authors of a new paper in the journal Nature report. Ominously, these scientists say, we have already moved past three of these tipping points.

BY Carl Zimmer, for Yale360

Human civilization has had a stable childhood. Over the past 10,000 years, as our ancestors invented agriculture and built cities, the Earth remained relatively stable. The average global temperature fluttered slightly, never lurching towards a greenhouse climate or chilling enough to enter a new Ice Age. The pH of the oceans remained steady, providing the right chemical conditions for coral reefs to grow and invertebrates to build shells. Those species, in turn, helped support a stable food web that provided plenty of fish for us humans to catch. The overall stability of the past 10,000 years may have played a big part in humanity’s explosion.

Now, ironically, civilization has become so powerful that it can reshape the planet itself. “We have become a force to contend with at the global level,” as Johan Rockstrom of the Stockholm Resilience Center in Sweden, puts it. Humans have changed the chemistry of Earth’s oceans, lowering their pH and causing ocean acidification. We are shifting the composition of the atmosphere, raising levels of carbon dioxide higher than they’ve been in at least the past 800,000 years.

A number of scientists have warned in recent years that if we keep pushing the planet this way, we will cause sudden, irreversible damage to the systems that made human civilization possible in the first place. Typically, they’ve just focused on one of these tipping points at a time. But in today’s issue of the journal Nature, Rockstrom and 27 of his fellow environmental scientists argue that we have to conceive of many tipping points at once. They propose that humans must keep the planet in what they call a “safe operating space,” inside of which we can thrive. If we push past the boundaries of that space — by wiping out biodiversity, for example, or diverting too much of the world’s freshwater — we risk catastrophe.

Read the entire article from Yale360 here.

More from Yale360 on climate change:

Let's hope.

The Obama administration is quietly putting together plans for a major new scientific study of the environmental impacts of mountaintop removal coal mining.

On Friday, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency published a notice seeking nominations for scientists to serve on an ad hoc panel to "provide expert advice to the EPA on a draft assessment of the ecological impacts" of mountaintop removal.

The Obama administration has already promised to take "unprecedented steps" to reduce the damaging environmental impact from mountaintop removal across the Appalachian coalfields.

Unlike other EPA moves on mountaintop removal, though, agency officials on Friday did not issue a news release or other media announcements concerning the science panel. Instead, the announcement was a simple notice published in the Federal Register.

The announcement said, "Recent published scientific information reveals that mountaintop mining and valley-fill operations in Southern Appalachia may be linked to degraded water quality and adverse impacts on in-stream biota."

The federal government already spent nearly seven years and $5.5 million on a broad study of mountaintop removal as part of a court settlement of a major lawsuit over mining permit practices.

That study, released in final form in October 2005, concluded that mountaintop removal was devastating the region's environment, destroying hills and forests and burying or otherwise damaging hundreds of miles of streams. President George W. Bush's administration reversed the study's intended purpose -- to come up with tougher new regulations -- and instead drafted plans to streamline permitting of new mines.

Since that study was completed, research by EPA experts and other scientists has continued to detail mountaintop removal's damage and point out that stream restoration and land reclamation projects by mining companies don't seem to work.

Read more from The Charleston (Va.) Gazette.

Further reading: G20 agrees on phase-out of fossil fuel subsidies (Reuters)

You'd think we'd have evolved past discrimination by now, but no. We're too busy picking at each other's faults and failing to find ways to better our collective lot in life.

We -- meaning the white majority -- are always looking for some minority group to repress because we're scared of losing our number one spot in, well, damn near everything.

The news that undocumented immigrants would be allowed to enroll at community colleges throughout the state came as a relief for some advocates. However, now that they've examined the big picture they're pointing to faults in the government's new plan, which really only boils down to legal discrimination.

These students aren't asking for a free ride, they're asking for a chance. Instead of allowing them opportunity, our government -- with its long history of repressive laws -- feels it's OK to dangle college just out of their reach then moan and groan about how we -- the taxpayers -- are being taken advantage of.

I'm calling bull shit on that nonsense. Immigrants pay taxes, too.

Moreover, it's well known, the more education someone has the more they're able to take care of themselves, their families and give back to society. Now, why wouldn't we want that?

Well, dear readers, because we're perpetually scared of "others," that's why. What if they're smarter or more skilled in some way than we are? What if we have to get off our lazy asses and work harder so they won't take our jobs? What if all people, every where, realize no one is actually better than anyone else? *gasp*

You can "what if" yourself into a mental hospital, if you like, or you can accept the truth: There are no "others," dig? We're all human beings and, brothers and sisters, that means we're all pink underneath.

The decision from the State Board of Community Colleges allows undocumented students to enroll in degree programs at all of the state's 58 campuses, but it won't take effect until at least next fall because of a slow-moving administrative rules review process. And if enough people object, the rule could face a vote by the legislature, which has the power to kill it.

If the rule is approved, undocumented students will get last priority for classes at a time when surging enrollments have filled classrooms to capacity. And out-of-state tuition of $7,700 per year will be out of reach for many of the children of low-wage workers.

"We cannot call this a victory," said Andrea Bazan, a long-time activist who has pushed for in-state tuition for illegal immigrants.

Read more from Charlotte.com.

A former undocumented immigrant, now a citizen and a teacher speaks out:

When will those dingleberries in Washington learn to read the bills they're voting on? Or, better, when will they pay attention to what their office staff writes in those bills before they present them for a vote?

In the GOP's rush to penalize ACORN, after members of their wing nut movement set them up in a sting operation, they pushed a bill through Congress that could also mean the end of Bush II's beloved Blackwater program. Whoopsi daisy.

You remember Blackwater, right? They're the North Carolina-based, ultra-conservative, blood-thirsty, paramilitary group that thought the Iraqi war was their chance to spark a Biblical holy war. Oh, and they've received over $1 billion -- with a 'B' -- in government funding (which is a 2007 number, before Blackwater reorganized as Xe.)

They've been sued by the families of the American's they've killed. The Iraqi government is expected to file criminal charges for their murder of innocent Iraqi citizens. The F.B.I. is investigating them, which -- by the way, costs us a pile in taxpayer dollars. They've lied to Congress, wasting everyone's time and, again, taxpayer dollars. And, yet, they are still receiving massive amounts of funding from our government. More, the Obama administration has increased their funding.

Because, why, again? Our own military forces aren't good enough, or something?

Meanwhile, darn those ACORN folks for trying to help poor people.

Yeah, ACORN, like any large group of humans, has a few bad seeds. Fortunately, they've been caught and penalized. But, at least that organization wasn't mowing down innocents in an effort to rush Armageddon.

I mean, really, shame on ACORN for reporting their own voter registration irregularities. Thanks to them, all of those falsified registration forms were brought to light and no voter fraud occurred. And, shame on that one lady for thinking she was Candid Camera. I mean, $3 million -- with a 'M' -- per year for 15 years.

With more than a billion dollars funneled to an organization led by a religious fundamentalist to kill innocents versus $50 million to help American's poor, it's easy to see where our priorities lie as a nation. In the battle of war and nation building versus helping our own less fortunate citizens, war wins.

Overly-broad language used by lawmakers intending to pull government funding for community organizing group ACORN may have the unintended effect of forcing the government to also pull funds from much of the military-industrial complex, a Tuesday report revealed.

"The congressional legislation intended to defund ACORN, passed with broad bipartisan support, is written so broadly that it applies to 'any organization' that has been charged with breaking federal or state election laws, lobbying disclosure laws, campaign finance laws or filing fraudulent paperwork with any federal or state agency. It also applies to any of the employees, contractors or other folks affiliated with a group charged with any of those things," wrote Huffington Post reporter Ryan Grimm.

"In other words, the bill could plausibly defund the entire military-industrial complex. Whoops."

Mother Jones was quick to note that could mean any firm in the Project on Government Oversight's contractor misconduct database could be facing a removal of government funds -- including the private security firm formerly known as Blackwater Worldwide.

House Minority Whip Eric Cantor (R-VA) praised the result, calling it a victory for a “united Republican effort.” The Associated Press referred to it as a “GOP-led strike.”

Sensing a window of opportunity with the GOP's overly-broad language, Rep. Alan Grayson (D-FL) is looking to build a list of firms that may also be lumped in with ACORN under the legislation.

"You see, regardless of what you think of ACORN, it is laudable to stop taxpayer money from going to organizations that commit fraud against the government," he said in a statement. "So as per the bill's text, I'm going to put into the Congressional record a list of organizations who have committed fraud against the government or employs anyone who has."

Grayson's list is now online and growing, and he's soliciting the Internet's help to add firms which have committed fraud against the government.

The as-of-yet unverified list reads like a who's who list of the most influential American corporations, including Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, General Electric, Raytheon, L-3 Communications, Blackwater Worldwide (now known as Xe Services, LLC), Kellogg Brown & Root, Bank of America, IBM, Halliburton, AT&T, Hewlett-Packard Company, DynCorp International Inc., CACI International, Inc., Dell, Inc., Exxon Mobil and many, many more.

More from The Raw Story.

More about Blackwater, our shadow army. This is part one, click these hyperlinks to view parts two, three and four.

The truth and lies about ACORN:

Last week, we posted a blog item called “CIGNA wants woman dead.” This is a new blog post related to that one. From MoveOn.org:

Last week, you were one of over 100,000 MoveOn members who stood with Dawn Smith to demand that CIGNA cover the treatment for her brain tumor.

CIGNA had been denying Dawn's requests for two years, but when she went public, with the help of MoveOn members across the country, CIGNA reversed course. They took the first step toward resolving Dawn's case — agreeing to pay for the test she needs to determine her treatment plan. By reversing their denials, CIGNA made it clear that they didn't think their decision would stand up to public scrutiny.

But they didn't offer any explanation for all the previous denials. And they didn't guarantee that they'll approve the next step in Dawn's treatment. And for all we know, they're still doing this same thing to thousands of other people whose stories haven't caught national attention.

That's why Dawn is insisting that CIGNA explain the policies that led them to deny her care for so long. And — for herself and all the others who are suffering — she's demanding proof that they're changing those policies so this never happens again.