Puppeteer

Author Topic: Global Warming mini-rant  (Read 27008 times)

Rainbow-Farm

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 64
    • View Profile
Re: Global Warming mini-rant
« Reply #30 on: October 27, 2006, 05:11:15 AM »
G'day, Ray:

I like what you posted (top post). I avoid (on several important topics) proof (mostly bullshit), scientific evidence (distorted bullshit), and political rhetoric (bullshit piled higher and deeper).

Anyone who cannot see that things have changed on this planet and that things are at a critical point is blind, and as you say, and this was on my mind today, it confronts their sense of security. Don't make me give up anythying.

So... this being the arena that it is, what better thing could "we" do than to burn biodiesel (virtually non-polluting, good for the engine), which is the one thing we all share: an interest in Listers, Listeroids, ChangFas, and the like.

I ranted today elsewhere about the fact that diesel engines are being made obsolete, or rather "illegal"... on a pump in NY I saw a notice that 2007 vehicles cannot use the low-sulfur diesel (illegal, it says, and will harm the engine). VW and others will not release 2007 diesel vehicles.

The vegetable oil engine, one of the best solutions to the problems you post about... is being made "illegal"... the vegetable oil engine is the diesel engine.

Weird, eh?

Do not trust the "grid" folks!

Procrustes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 332
    • View Profile
Re: Global Warming mini-rant
« Reply #31 on: October 27, 2006, 06:44:46 PM »
Pro,

Yes you did, you said I was being glib.  That's as much name-calling as saying you're sight-impaired.  Maybe that's a little harsh.  Perhaps myopic or astigmatic would be a better choice of words.  Now, I'll admit there have been times when I HAVE been glib, such as when I said "I do" at the altar (Take my ex-wife PLEASE), but today wasn't one of those times. 

I disagree.  I said, "It's glib IMO to challenge scientists on the grounds that they lack integrity", and in the same breath I said your posts are as a rule measured and thoughtful.  I was characterizing a statement.  Is that not a fair practice in debate?  You said I, not my argument, am "stupid or naive", and I think you know that this is what I complained about.  'Short-sighted' I don't find objectionable.

I bid one unhinged mother-in-law for the ex-wife plus Fawkes.

My point was that it's dangerous to accept an argument from authority (since you mention Occam, I presume you're acquainted with the principles of logic).  I don't have any position one way or the other as regards anthropogenic GW.  I just say "Show me the data."

You do take a position insofar as you don't believe that humankind should address carbon emissions.

Agreed, argument from authority is suspect.

This whole Donnybrook began when  . . . oh, what'shisname  Ray, can't find it now, posted a missive saying, essentially, "show me the beef."  I replied that since he's the one positing that GW is more likely than not man-caused/accelerated, it's not up to the skeptic to disprove GW, it's up to those making the positing the causal relationship to come up with the incontrovertible evidence.  To which he replied, Nay, and a whole bunch of folks came out of the woodwork and piled on.  That's all this is about.

I should not have quoted Ray's post, I have no bones with what you suggested that Ray do.  I'm sorry I piled on.

I can't stand the leap that the pro-anthropogenic GW crowd make, when challenged by the lack of definitive evidence, to the "well, even if there isn't any conclusive evidence, there's so much at stake, we CAN'T just sit back and do nothing."  Which is sort of what you said in your last.  My point is we have to either act rationally based on the evidence, or out of fear of what MIGHT happen.  But whichever you do, just call it what it is. 

Yes, "We just can't sit back and do nothing" is my belief, I don't deny it.  I see that as a rational bet.  Seldom are we able to act on perfect information.

The downside is that we pass unneeded CAFE regulations for better gas mileage and so forth, which I can accept, and perhaps a competitive disadvantage with the third world.  I say 'perhaps' because it's not clear to me that cutting carbon emissions is a loss.  The advantages include sending less money to the middle east.  We might pull back somewhat from a culture of huge personal vehicles, McDonalds clamshells, toys cheaper than their packaging, and disposable everything.  I grant that this last one is deep in Pollyanna County, but a man can dream, can't he?

A case in point:  A good friend and coworker is an avid birder.  The guy has a Ph.D. in molecular chemistry so he's no dummy.  Problem is, he's also so much into his conservation stuff, he sees nothing wrong with admitting to me the little gnatcatcher that was supposed to be go extinct if some coastal hills were built on here in So. Cal. isn't really endangered.  He leads guided tours for the local Audubon society and really knows where his alula's at.  One day we were hiking along through the weeds, flicking ticks off our jeans when he casually mentioned "there's another gnatcatcher."  I remarked that I thought they were supposed to be almost extinct.  He said, "You just have to know when and where to look for them.  They're really quite common."  His position is (and he actually said this) that if the end (halting development along the coast) is achieved through a phony claim, then in the end, that's a good thing.  While I didn't want to see homes built in those hills either, I can't buy into that ethic.  It's intellectually dishonest and makes a whore of the scientific endeavor. 

That sort of thing has caused me to be suspicious of claims of dire consequences.  I have begun asking myself, "OK, so what's the REAL reason you want _____?"  Frequently there is at least a plausible ulterior motive for the claim, but one that would not get much traction if it were plainly stated.

An example is the Kyoto protocol.  Kyoto would prohibit the largest CO2 producer, the US of A, from exceeding some threshold, while exempting the second largest emitter, China, and India as well.   A conspiracy theorist, which I am not, would say Kyoto was/is a scheme to slow the growth of industrialized nations or to transfer wealth from the West to 3rd world nations.  However if it were enacted, it would likely have both those effects.  Can you blame folks for saying, "If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, then . . . ?" 

Quinn

Both good examples.  There are always some with low morals and ulterior motives.  Put that way, I have no doubt that some people pull for GW regulations out of self-interest.

I'm sorry I antagonized you, Quinn.  I hope we can disagree amicably.

SCOTT

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 209
    • View Profile
Re: Global Warming mini-rant
« Reply #32 on: October 27, 2006, 08:16:14 PM »
I just saw an interesting segment on CNBC (a financial network in the US) about climate change and the impact on business.  They cited GE (General Electric)and their "ecoagination" campaign where they focus on energy efficiency and alternative energy, such as solar and wind.  http://ge.ecomagination.com/

The next clip was the CEO of Shell oil saying  "form our perspective the verdict is in, ...when over 90% of the scientists agree that global warming is real...thats enough for us" 

below is their position on the topic

http://www.shell.com/home/Framework?siteId=envandsoc-en&FC2=/envandsoc-en/html/iwgen/key_issues_and_topics/global_environmental_issues/climate_change/zzz_lhn.html&FC3=/envandsoc-en/html/iwgen/key_issues_and_topics/global_environmental_issues/climate_change/our_approach_to_climate_change_12042006.html

Now the cynic may say the above is just PR talk in an effort to placate the public who is concerned about global warming but it is not just public relations BS when major companies invest billions of dollars in programs to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.  The opinions of these  industry leaders matter, they vote with huge check books, and they have a long term outlook. 

I think it is better to err on the side of caution with this issue.

What is the downside of reducing fossil fuel consumption and toxic emissions?

Scott
net metering with a 6/1 in Connecticut
12/1
6/1

Doug

  • Guest
Re: Global Warming mini-rant
« Reply #33 on: October 27, 2006, 08:56:58 PM »
Thank you Scott for being the first person to see and comment on the obvious. You don't need to believe in global warming to see reducing carbon emissions goes hand and hand with a general reduction in all polution and conservation....

I have a happy 2 year old that deserves clean lakes and rivers, good food, a safe stable world and a warm comfortable home for his children. The only way he's going to get it is if we are prepared to make continous small changes in our own consumption habbits on the road to a sustainable future.

Doug

Quinnf

  • Rest in peace
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 645
    • View Profile
Re: Global Warming mini-rant
« Reply #34 on: October 27, 2006, 09:02:26 PM »
Scott,

Scott:  I don't think there is one.  However, how it's implemented could do either A.) nothing, or B.) cause a catastrophe for many people, to cite the extremes.  

Pro:

Damn, but you're reasonable!  Not what I expect these days when emotions seem to run so high on so many topics.  And don't apologize for stating your mind or you'll make me feel bad.  OK, I'm sorry I called you that other word.  I fall into that trap.  Myopic might be a little strong, too.  Astigmatic is more what I meant.  

So now we've explored the "whether we should" question.  There are folks on both sides of that, as well as people like me that sit on the fence and urge caution.  If there is a problem with anthropogenic GW, what's the solution?  What can be done?  And will it be effective?  Does the U.S. just shut down its industry and allow countries like China and India to continue down the path they're on?  If so, that might be gratifying for the many nations that would like to see the U.S. get theirs, but it wouldn't address the problem.  There is no quick or easy fix.  

I haven't heard anyone deny that we have been in a long-term warming mode for thousands of years.  Whatever incremental increase mankind's activities may (or may not) add to that trend, the underlying long-term trend remains.

A show on the Discovery Channel the other night on the subject of volcanism said the last century has statistically had fewer and milder volcanic events than in the past.  Continental margin volcanos spew large amounts of sulfur dioxide, carbon dioxide, water vapor and ash.  The frist three are known greenhouse gasses, and the ash is known to increase the albedo (reflectivity) of the earth's atmosphere.  They asked some interesting questions about the overall effect of volcanism on climate.  

Quinn

« Last Edit: October 27, 2006, 09:20:37 PM by Quinnf »
Ashwamegh 6/1, PowerSolutions 6/1 "Kit" engine, and a Changfa R175a that looks like a Yanmar I once knew

rpg52

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 387
    • View Profile
Re: Global Warming mini-rant
« Reply #35 on: October 28, 2006, 01:16:30 AM »

Thank you all posters.  This thread has evolved (word used purposely) into a discussion of "What Can We Do About It".  I see it as a problem that western (and, increasingly eastern) civilizations have based all their economys on the consumption of ancient hydrocarbons.  It may or may not be causing GW, do we really care?  It is causing lots of other problems.

Figuring out alternatives to petroleum (and I'm not advocating nuclear either, just as un-sustainable), just seems like a good thing to do.  It would seem to me that any reductions in burning oil (or coal) would be in our best interest, for a variety of reasons.

Thanks for all the discussion, I'm still thinking.

Ray
PS Listeroid 6/1, 5 kW ST, Detroit Diesel 3-71, Belsaw sawmill, 12 kW ST head, '71 GMC 3/4 T, '79 GMC 1T, '59 IH T-340

aqmxv

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 271
  • Duty Now for the Future
    • View Profile
Re: Global Warming mini-rant
« Reply #36 on: October 28, 2006, 05:27:27 AM »
I've stayed far, far away from posting in this thread because, frankly, I felt like the bottom of the scrum didn't look like a great place to be.  You see, I actually was a real live environmental scientist for a few years, then went into IT for better money and a somewhat greater feeling of relevance.

Doug and I have something in common - we both have toddlers to whom we very much want to leave the best possible world.

I think moderation and intelligent consumption the only realistic way this can happen.  Whether or not global warming is happening, whether or not peak oil is behind us or in front of us, it's pretty obvious that doing things the way we, as a society, choose to now is wasting stuff that isn't easily replaceable and may have consequences that we can't easily forsee or manage.

As a techno-nerd kind of guy, my response to this kind of excess isn't "let's all live in small huts and subsistence farm without power tools."  Using technology unwisely got us here; using technology wisely is going to get us somewhere better and more sustainable.

There are a few aphorisms I live by.  One is, "Nobody is wrong all the time."  Another is, "Newer isn't necessarily better."  I am attracted to the listeroid for its brutish/elegant simplicity and reasonable efficiency.   I hope to improve the efficiency a little without complicating things.  The long history of the originals and shorter but significant history of the Indian copies likewise suggests that this is something I can work with that will be simple to keep going and will cope with lots of variation in application.

I hope the listeroid will be an efficient way to get a little power out of something that makes heat when I need heat.  If it can burn wastes that otherwise consume resources in disposal, so much the better.

Is global warming happening?  Don't much care - I can't afford seaside property anyway.  I'll be careful to locate some place higher than 30 feet above MSL for storm surge if not rising seas.  Is it happening faster because of the dumb way humans have chosen to do things recently?  Possibly.  Either way, we're doing things stupidly and should change. 

If "global warming" is the prod that gets the sheeple to move toward sustainability, fine.  It's clear that the apparent absurdity of commuting alone to work in a two-ton semi-offroad vehicle over the best maintained roads in the world doesn't seem to change many peoples' behavior.  Whether or not people start living intelligently, the future is obviously not going to be a straight-line projection of 1945-1965, and that is going to be a very rude shock to a lot of Americans, at minimum.

If, by paying attention and preparing now I can make the world better for my son, fine.  If not, hopefully I'll at least do all that can be done to make sure he can sustain a decent standard of life for himself and his family when that day comes regardless of the stupidity of the rest of the USA and humanity in general.  One thing is clear:  being able to decide on your terms when you want to buy fuel or electricity from a supplier is already an economic benefit.  If you can close the sustainability loop locally, so much the better.
6/1 Metro IDI for home trigen

biobill

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 408
  • 'riods make good houseguests if fed right
    • View Profile
Re: Global Warming mini-rant
« Reply #37 on: October 28, 2006, 04:41:55 PM »
   Recently went to see "An Inconvienient Truth". Quite good I thought - lots of facts and figures and graphs. But what got me was the conversations afterwards in the lobby. The "concerned environmentalists" were discussing how to put pressure on "them" to clean up their acts and how awful it was that "they" lacked the social concience to do that. "The Governments got to do something!" they whined. Probably close to 150 people socializing, maybe 3 or 4 might actually be willing to change their lifestyle. And this among the supposed concerned. Had trouble finding my diesel Rabbit P/U among the SUV's with the No Windmills bumperstickers when I left.
  My point is not to argue the validity of GW or to be judgemental about lifestyles but to suggest that whats coming is coming. Human nature being what it is, there won't be a consensus for voluntary change that involves personal sacrifice. Most people will stop doing comfortable things when they have to, for financial or availability reasons. (or PERSONAL health reasons) Foresight, on a large scale, is nonexistant these days. So I don't believe there's any way that we will avoid the coming energy shortages or climatic changes, but I do think that we'll get through it OK. The members of this forum that is, the rest of the world is screwed.
   the kid wants the computer, good thing - I'd go on for hours
                                   Bill
Off grid since 1990
6/1 Metro DI living in basement, cogen
6/1 Metro IDI running barn & biodiesel processer
VW 1.6 diesels all over the place
Isuzu Boxtruck, Ford Backhoe, all running on biodiesel
Needs diesel lawnmower & chainsaw

MikeyT

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 68
    • View Profile
Re: Global Warming mini-rant
« Reply #38 on: October 28, 2006, 05:54:49 PM »
    Human nature being what it is, there won't be a consensus for voluntary change that involves personal sacrifice. Most people will stop doing comfortable things when they have to, for financial or availability reasons. (or PERSONAL health reasons) Foresight, on a large scale, is nonexistant these days.
                                   Bill

A good read that discusses this type of behavior/response is "Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed", by Jared Diamond.

Geno

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 295
    • View Profile
Re: Global Warming mini-rant
« Reply #39 on: October 28, 2006, 06:37:54 PM »
   Recently went to see "An Inconvienient Truth". Quite good I thought - lots of facts and figures and graphs. But what got me was the conversations afterwards in the lobby. The "concerned environmentalists" were discussing how to put pressure on "them" to clean up their acts and how awful it was that "they" lacked the social concience to do that. "The Governments got to do something!" they whined. Probably close to 150 people socializing, maybe 3 or 4 might actually be willing to change their lifestyle. And this among the supposed concerned. Had trouble finding my diesel Rabbit P/U among the SUV's with the No Windmills bumperstickers when I left.

I've broken down "environmentalists" into about 5 different sub categories. The ones you are talking about are the worst, complete hypocrites. I call them “urban environmentalists" Big cars, big houses that are cool in the summer and warm in the winter. They give 40 bucks a year to some environmental organization, slap a "save the rainforest" bumper sticker on their suv and call themselves "environmentalists" I seldom bring this concept up because “there are none so blind as those who will not see”
Thanks, Geno

GuyFawkes

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1184
    • View Profile
    • stuff
Re: Global Warming mini-rant
« Reply #40 on: October 28, 2006, 06:45:16 PM »
mole rats

anthropologists are up in arms about them, until their discovery it was a truism that insect colonies would happily sacrifice one for the good of the many, whereas mammals would not, until the discovered mole rats, if a snake gets into the burrow and attacks a mole rat, the other will simply wall it off and leave it to its fate.

human society is such that wide variations over short distances aren't tolerated, if you have electric when your neighbours don't you better also have perimeter fences and armed guards who like shooting to kill.

clearly we in europe for example will tolerate the usa going back to the stone age, but mexico and canada won't be happy about it.
they are closer

I think it is inevitable that we will arrive at a situation where one day the taps stop flowing, because society won't cope with every tap having a 1/8th inch restrictor unless there is a war and everything else is going to hell in a handcart too.

"tragedy of the commons" and "game theory"

google em
--
Original Lister CS 6/1 Start-o-matic 2.5 Kw (radiator conversion)
3Kw 130 VDC Dynamo to be added. (compressor + hyd pump)
Original Lister D, megasquirt multifuel project, compressor and truck alternator.
Current status - project / standby, Fuel, good old pump diesel.

Doug

  • Guest
Re: Global Warming mini-rant
« Reply #41 on: October 29, 2006, 12:34:19 AM »
Energy consumption is directly proportional to energy cost and as cost goes up people will cut back. Here in North America we treat energy like its right, like its oxygen because its been so cheap for so long or rather apeared cheap for so long.

Once the prices rise to point where people start to think about and budget for transportation your going to see lifestyle changes, not a gun play in the dark....

The second world war and decades of quiet research in Sweden and Finland have shown you can run an ecconomy and keep everyone fed and warm even with severe petro shortages. Producer gas trucks, Peat fire power plants ect...

What a lot of people on this side of pond won't like is the only fair way to limmit waste is to ration and tax.
This sounds like the command ecconomy, socialism with everyone getting an equal share no matter how fair they think that is... 

And I'm not green, but I can take you places around this town that look like they've been nuked by industrial polution. Bleached white sand and scorched black rocks where nothing will grow, not a legacy I want to leave my son with.

Doug

binnie

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 219
    • View Profile
Re: Global Warming mini-rant
« Reply #42 on: October 29, 2006, 02:52:53 AM »
Doug,
I'm not sure but from memory I think you are in Sudbury (Sp?) Ont. I can remember as a kid, in the late 40's early 50's taking the steam train west from Toronto and waking up in the morning in Sudbury looking out to a landscape that resembled my idea of the Moon....not a tree, no blade of  grass, just waste land as far as the eye could see. To a kid it was a shock. I have never forgot it.
Today with polution requirements in place and polution laws that smack a bite, things have changed a little. I am amazed at the resiliency of nature given a chance. I am sure that Inco had a large hand in the recovery issues, and so they should. They profited hansomely from years of abuse to the environment.
There are other places in Cda. that are still left barren and nothing done to clean up the place because most people don't see the ruin and ravage that extraction of raw resourses has caused without restrictive laws in place. Uranium city for one.
I am not normally an advocate of government interferance in the private sector, but today we are experiencing a lack of morals & principals by big corporations to the extent that the bottom line is justified by the ethic that what ever you can get away with is justifyable. We are doomed to hit the wall with profit motive being the only guiding principle.
I am afraid that this is one of my major reasons for getting a listeroid, and moving toward a cogen set up independently. I have lost faith in the government to be able to do anything but promote the interests of big buisiness that inturn funds their individual campaigns to get them elected, and demands their allegence in directing all policy. Our vote counts for nothing....and we will be lied to, manipulated, subject to spin doctors, to get them elected...then forgotten, as the monied men demand their adjenda for funding their campaigns. Democracy is experiencing it's demise. We need to get prepared for the onslaught of globalization and the consequences that such a lack of principals, morals, and ethics brings on. It won't be pretty.   binnie



Listeroid 12/2 Jkson with 10kw head, for backup now on diesel. Future interests: WVO, bio,  Cogen - Heat exchangers - solar.

rpg52

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 387
    • View Profile
Re: Global Warming mini-rant
« Reply #43 on: October 29, 2006, 10:23:21 PM »
Your cheerful mood seems to have spread to my state of mind too.

The major concern I have in my native state of California is the effect of cheap oil on land use.  The increase in population in my lifetime (from ~10 million to 33 million people) has resulted in sprawling subdivisions, covering some of the best farmlands in the state.  The weather is still pretty nice, toxic materials aren't too bad (with the possible exception of residual mercury left from a century of gold mining) and some agricultural chemicals. 

The spread of subdivisions (certainly not exclusive to California, we're just among the best bad examples) has resulted in millions of homes that are impossible to survive in without a car.  Schools, groceries, work, the only way to get around is by automobile.  So, what happens as fuel costs rise?  The costs of serving the more isolated homes has been, and will continue to increase.  This should drive down the current ridiculous house prices, but, at some point the cost of getting to and fro will become so excessive as to make commuting impossible.  I can only surmise a contraction of the economy will result, with other unknown effects affecting everyone, both locally, nationally and internationally.  What does it mean when the cost of transporting stuff from China, food from everywhere increases?  Western economies are based on moving stuff and people around. 

I must admit, I have been thinking about this for decades, the only conclusion I have come to is that it is impossible to foretell.  I'd like to think that those with military power won't just invade and abscond with other nation's resources, but recent history seems to support that scenario.  On the other hand, an aversion to wholesale genocide on the part of the US electorate seems to be inhibiting our more base desires.  At some point, it seems likely the rest of the world will refuse to continue financing the US debt, and we will have to start surviving on current income.  To be honest, I really don't understand why it has been allowed to continue for so long.  One conclusion I reached recently is that an excess of money is actually toxic - and leads to behavior that is incompatible with our long term survival.  Not having enough to eat isn't likely to be good either, but at least the problems caused by starvation are easy to recognize and familiar.

Please forgive this ramble, kind of a brain dump of stuff that seems impossible to mention in polite company.  As Mikey T mentioned above, "Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed", by Jared Diamond, provides some thought-provoking text.  Collapsing societies are much more complex than you might imagine.  The current situation is exceptional in that the ties between the six billion occupants of planet Earth are more close than has ever occurred before.  What that means is beyond my ability to comprehend though.
Ray
PS Listeroid 6/1, 5 kW ST, Detroit Diesel 3-71, Belsaw sawmill, 12 kW ST head, '71 GMC 3/4 T, '79 GMC 1T, '59 IH T-340

GuyFawkes

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1184
    • View Profile
    • stuff
Re: Global Warming mini-rant
« Reply #44 on: October 29, 2006, 11:58:33 PM »
There is an old engineering truism, that if you think you have measured something precisely, your measuring stick is not accurate enough.

Specifically this means measuring say the block height of a CS, if you measure it ten times ten days in a row and get the same answer you aren't accurate, because you KNOW the temperature was not constant, thermal coefficients of expansion etc.

If you take records made ten years ago, they aren't as accurate as those that can be made today, so even in theoretically identical situations you will get different answers, and different answers = statistics, and from statistics you get trends.

You can watch a caterpillar all you like, you won't predict the chrysalis, and you certainly won't predict the butterfly.

An incredibly complex and computationally intensive computer modelling of the caterpillar will just give you an incredibly detailed and authoritative sounding answer that is completely and utterly wrong.

==========================================

Most of this forum are old enough to know the only thing you can rely on is change, everything changes, sometimes it is gradual like the caterpillar growing day by day, sometimes it is rapid but still kinda possible to follow after you accept a change has taken place, such as weaving the chrysalis, sometimes it is apparently instant and totally stunning, like the butterfly or moth emerging.

Climate will change, ultimately our sun will use up all its fuel, and either grow or shrink, or both one after the other.

Sooner or later Earth with become uninhabitable for homo sapiens, assuming evolution stops with us, which is a totally baseless assumption, unless you have some compulsion to believe we were made perfect in the image of god.

The iron atoms that carry oxygen around our bloodstream and that comprise our listers and listeroids were made in dying stars, very few of the actual atoms that comprised my body when I was born are still with me. I can no longer fit under my primary school cap, and one day not too far away I will be feeding worms myself, change is like rust, it never sleeps, whether you see it or not.

Landscapes are going to change, climate is going to change, cities and countries and cultures and religions are going to continue to rise and fall.

Humans are nothing, just yet another method that DNA uses to make more DNA.

DNA is quite happy to use plants or cockroaches.

Look at DNA and you will see that there have already been near extinctions in human history.

Almost all native europeans can trace their DNA back 45000 years to one of seven females, after all, a CHANGE of only 1% of our DNA was enough to make me a human and "cheetah" (from Tarzan) a chimp, but change begets change.

Look around you, open your eyes and LOOK.

=======================

Looked?

We (EU and USA etc) use something called a "fiat economy", not the car maker, it means money that has legal status as a result of an executive, administrative or monarchy decision, or fiat.

China experimented with fiat economies 1000 years ago, and ran into all the same problems we have today.

Electronic stock trading and the creation of corporations as legal individuals just complicate matters, doesn't make em go away.

If you want to look for political parallels between 1930s germany (and of course many other societies entering a time of rapid change) and current day britain or usa you don't have to look far or deep, you yanks know bush just signed into law the power for himself to declare martial law on US soil don't you? fox new did report that didn't it?
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h109-5122 You want section 1076
(there is a WHOLE lot of other good stuff hidden in that bill too, like 1221, and 3123, and others, Bush signed this into law Oct 17th.....  10.5 billion bucks for a new aircraft carrier, a couple of billion bucks worth of ammunition for the army ONLY)

Democracies don't last any better than monarchies or totalitarian dictatorships. Especially phoney democracies we have where your vote literally doesn't count, only the vote of big business counts. Fine, my vote don't count, then you're getting as near to fuck all as I can manage from me in taxation, burn baby burn.

The following is a photo from 40 years ago, a generation after WW2, which remember was allegedly fought to free the world from opression, american troops with fixed bayonets on american soil.



If anyone thinks this change is going to result in brown a cracked lawns, or oceanfront property in southern georgia, or just bitching at the cost of filling a tank with fuel, then you need to take a look at history, especially recent history.

Hurricane katrine only caused 500,000 refugees, what are you going to do with 20,000,000 from florida whose entire assets and wealth are underwater if sea levels rise 20 feet? Let them battle it out with the 5,000,000 flooded out from potomac area and 5,000,000 flooded out from san fran?

Back in 1945 you only had 140,000,000 people in the usa, you could probably absorb 30 to 50 million retreating from rising seas, now you have 300 million, youre past peak oil, southern borders are groaning, lots of good arable land concreted over, and a population that thinks one refrigerator and maybe one A/C unit and a ford fairlane is below the poverty level.

==========================

Exactly what is coming?

Who knows.

What I do know is the only thing you can do is like the story of the sound man and camera man in africa filming lions, this lion starts to take an interest in them and sidles over nearer, after a bit it dawns on the sound man and camera man they are lunch, so they drop their equipment and start running, and the lion starts off after them.

after a few yards the sound man stops, takes off his mickey mouse boots and puts on a pair of running shoes, the camera man jeers at him, "you'll never outrun a lion in them"

the sound man replies, "I don't have to, I only have to outrun you"

==================================

If you have or are making plans that tie you to a specific geographical location, you need to make new plans.

If you are a pre katrina big easy resident with limited means, those plans better take that into account and have your feet pounding the pavement northwards a week before the levees break.

If you can't tell a week in advance when the levees are gonna break then get the fuck out of dodge while the getting is still good.... the day before katrina hit nobody would have swapped new orleans for sao paolo voluntarily, the week after they'd be fuck it, I don't even have a mud and corrugated iron hut, so I don't even have anywhere to put a pot to cook in.

In nature, being spooked easily is rarely a fatal characteristic.
« Last Edit: October 30, 2006, 12:02:30 AM by GuyFawkes »
--
Original Lister CS 6/1 Start-o-matic 2.5 Kw (radiator conversion)
3Kw 130 VDC Dynamo to be added. (compressor + hyd pump)
Original Lister D, megasquirt multifuel project, compressor and truck alternator.
Current status - project / standby, Fuel, good old pump diesel.