stuart2004 wrote:
By crisis I assume that you mean the ever looming threat of "Global Warming"? Well I personally have a problem with the idea that human kind thinks it is so powerful that it can simply cause the destruction of an entire planet....especially since there are no clear cut signs that global warming is even happening.....at least not on the scale that people are swearing that it is......If you look at true global weather models you can see that everything that is happening is following a pattern of warming and cooling that has happened for hundreds of thousands of years...One of the biggest proponents of global warming would be Time magizine.....in the magazine they have featured article after article stating the differing causes and ways that we can change our lives....it might surprise you to know that in the sixties Time also featured an article about a new Ice age that was supposed to hit the world by the year 2000.......the phenomenon that would cause this Ice Age....."Global Cooling"Isn't that crazy? What is even more insane is the reason that they gave for this Global cooling were IDENTICAL to the reason that they give for Global Warming........
Also many people come on TV to tell us that Global Warming is such a problem....but have you ever looked at the people who are telling you this??? They drove to those studios in their private Limos and they probably took private jets to get to the cities they are in.....Al Gore is one of the biggest supporters of the Global Warming theory yet did you know that his utilities for last year totaled up to over 30,000 that is about the amount that many people make per year...what gives him the right to tell us about Global Warming?????
One other thing is Heidi Klume (I think I am spelling that right) from the weather channel telling other weather men that they should lose their certification if they disagreed about global warming...yet when questioned about it she went and was terribly busy..somehow unable to respond...isnt that convenient
Even if Time is a large proponent of Global Warming, they are
not the ones behind the theories-- it's actually pretty much a concensus within the scientific community. So much so that even the Bush administration and conservatives that have long been in the pocket of the energy industries have acknowledged Global Warming. What Time Magazine, Heidi Cullen (Heidi Klum is a Victoria's Secret model
) or Al Gore do have
nothing to do with the reality of the situation.
stuart2004 wrote:Well I personally have a problem with the idea that human kind thinks it is so powerful that it can simply cause the destruction of an entire planet....especially since there are no clear cut signs that global warming is even happening.....
This statement is... well... Are you aware what mankind can do with nuclear weapons? Okay, take that as a starting point-- yes, we definitely have the power to destroy the planet. What you have a problem believing really has no relevance in the context of reality.
Now, while global warming clearly isn't like a nuclear holocaust, and don't over simplify my statement to imply that that's what I'm saying ---mankind definitely has the power to accelerate natural functions of the earth which would definitely throw off the equlibrium.
You don't seem to understand that the temperature going even a few degrees above normal has the power to flood vast coastal areas, which happen to be generally the most populated regions in the word, making countries around the equator a lot hotter and drier, accelerating desertification and consequently leading to huge water shortages in equitorial regions.
stuart2004 wrote:
Thamus wrote: The difficulty with the present automobile is that it is mostly a fashion statement rather than a mode of transportation.
Is that terribly wrong? Dint we fight wars so that we can choose what we want and not have to deal with what we are given?
His point was more that the image of a vehicle was trumping the functionality and efficiency, not that we have to become some kind of autocratic utilitarian society.
stuart2004 wrote:
Thamus wrote:
And all this with technologies we had 40 years ago.
The problem seems to be the human ego (something other creatures have survived without for billions of years).
Yes animals have survived without the human ego for thousands of years.....not saying that the human ego is a good thing... but really is it that terribly bad...I bet one trillion dollars that you have at least 5 things in your home that were created simply because of human ego .....I mean really mirrors? clothes? deodorant? I bet you have a really nice pair of shoes............seriously can you tell me what is sooo bad with the human ego.
It's bad when it has destructive consquences-- you really have to stop interpreting everything Thamus is saying like some blanket statement.
Human ego's destructive emphasis on short term gain over long-term consequences is a problem. Profit now, worry about the evironment later. Think about people who smoke-- they think of everything one cigarette at a time, not really worrying about the long term end of lung cancer or whatever, though they know it's very likely... just in the far future.
This is the problematic human ego, not the will to create nice shoes and mirrors.
And really, this would be the same with any animal, most likely, they just don't have the creative power to be so destructive.
stuart2004 wrote:
thamus wrote:
No technologies, no matter how advanced, can overcome the challenges created by the limitations of this self-definition.
The forums we are involved in, I see as an emerging collective intelligence, a shared cortex. Not bound by a single identity, we are learning to solve simple problems at first – before together, we solve for our future.
so you are talking about a HIVE mind?? no individuality?? hmm........ come on what kind of serious crap is this?? I mean thinking together is great but when you talk about things like this is comes across as a Loss of identity ..which is one of the key components to our humanity.............
For a problem that spans a global, or even a national scale, individual efforts don't amount to much. That's the very reason we have government.
A loss of identity? Working together to solve a common problem doesn't mean everyone is thinking the same, it's just focusing your efforts to achieve better results. No one wants to take away individuality.
Seriously, don't go McCarthy on me-- the man isn't suggesting a communist state here.