jb-hb
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
alright – apologies – the Climate Meltdown people are, a lot of them er… “honest” and unpaid but I get your drift – apologies if that came off as getting too much mileage out of it.
boscohorowitz, I salute you.
And also thanks for claiming peak oilers are on your side.
There was a time the Normans invaded the Byzantine Empire – many of them, the same ones who had invaded England. …and came up against a Varangian guard composed of English fighters who had been at Hastings.
It felt just a little bit like that
“As for the rest of that Jensen dude: I agree with his diagnosis of the patient, but his Rx is just adding more damage to a dying system.”
The problem is that the conclusions follow intrinsically from the presumptions.
If you start from, and think on a continual basis that everyone and everything are rotten, essentially…. if you internalize key phrases, it will definitely have a deep adverse effect INDEPENDENT of the presumed bad stuff.
It will have an adverse effect individually, psychologically and it will have an adverse effect societally, civilizationally. I don’t accept the presumption that everyone can agree with Jensen’s starting points and then say “no matter” and be unaffected.
Those presumptions are deeply psychologically damaging.
“However, there is also a strong correlation (that I perceive as fading) between deniers of climate change and deniers of Peak Oil. And there is also a strong correlation between (honest) supporters of climate change and supporters of Peak Oil.”
Funny you should mention that, and it’s no coincidence.
I do not doubt at all that you’ve come across people proclaiming both Peak Oil and Climate Meltdown
This relates to the demise/implosion of LATOC. We had a lot of great posters with different sub-interests and discussions ranging freely on all types of issues. It was a really great community.
Then, in a short period of time, there was a very large influx of new people. “Coincidentally,” ALL of them were pushing a combination of the Wokeist NeoMarxist ideology in combination with the Climate Meltdown Jensenite creed.
The first place I ever heard, as a repeated catchphrase, “Tear it all down” was at LATOC with these newcomers. I’d guess maybe starting around 2010? A bit earlier?
When I heard “Tear it all down” associated with other stuff in 2020, the shared NeoMarxist roots were extremely obvious.
It’s no coincidence. Wokeists/NeoMarxists have done hits on everything from the D&D comunity to grandma’s knitting circle forum. The comic book industry, the gaming community, whatever. In retrospect, it plays out EXACTLY like stories I came across in other communities 2016-present.
They ran exactly the Alinsky Rules playbook, pretending to BE the crowd while selectively targeting forum members and driving them off one by one. They’d organize and plan on Facebook before dogpiling onto the forum like flying monkeys.
The fact that you previously saw a greater, but receding coincidence between Peak Oiler and Climate Meltdowner is no coincidence at all.
I can tell you that prior to this, WE, the Peak Oil Community, were concerned and interested in all the Climate Things, but we definitely did NOT overlap with the Climate Meltdown Jensenites
So yeah, I am SURE you have come across “Peak Oilers” saying We Are The Crowd and agreeing with All The Things
boscohorowitz
sure, he might have meant our civlization is the bestest most highly moral one by:
“This ‘civilisation’ is predicated on continuation of practices known to eventually cause the complete annihilation of most life forms, including humans of course, on the only planet known to support life.”
I literally quoted him and that literally is what the video is about.
But seriously, boscohorowitz: try and stay on target, ok? I can only do so many tangential recursive logic loops in a day. Preferably none, unless it’s for a joke and then I am all flathead home erectur for it.
Maybe I can simplify and reduce a lot of sparring and walls of text to a somewhat simpler question for Afewknowthetruth
Are you familiar with the writings/thoughts of Robert Jensen? His favorite saying is that “we need to tear it all down”
He maintains that agricultural practice causes all the ills of humanity. Agriculture leads to civilization, which HE maintains is the cause of child abuse, rape, racism, murder, incest, war, etc. etc
He therefore reasons that the only proper existence for humanity is as neolithic peoples practicing neither agriculture nor animal husbandry.
He advocates that we need to, right now, start tearing down all the roads, bridges, power plants, hydroelectric dams, everything. We need to “tear it all down.”
He thinks about 8 billion people need to die ASAP and if he could take a time machine back to retroactively kill them such that those 8 billion never get to have a life in the first place, he’d be happy with that too.
He says we are headed for a Climate Meltdown.
He says civilization is evil
He says humanity is evil for causing extinctions (at least, whenever it practices agriculture)
Afewknowthetruth, please tell me what, if anything, Jensen is wrong about?
If you take his presumptions as a given, how do you not arrive at his conclusions? I ask because it seems like you are starting from the same presumptions and at times possibly arriving at the same conclusions. I’ve been trying to determine what exactly your conclusions are and, if different, how did you get there. Because Jensen’s “solutions” seem to follow automatically and logically from his presumptions.
Me – “Do I accurately interpret that you simply take anything that happens to allow a positive population growth rate as bad?”
boscohorowitz – “Speaking on behalf of AFKTT (just to piss him off;) ), I say, No, you do not interpret him correctly.”
I said a functioning medical system is a value add for a civilization. He quoted that saying our civilization is maximum evil, and then
“everything we consider good is actually bad in the long term.”
Followed by a video explaining the evils of population growth.
It isn’t like we’re in an Apostolic church, he just spoke in tongues, and needs an interpreter for us to know what he said.
If he wants to say that the rest of his post is completely out of context with the quote of me that he started off with, he can of course say it.
It goes further. This ‘civilisation’ is predicated on continuation of practices known to eventually cause the complete annihilation of most life forms, including humans of course, on the only planet known to support life.
as far as what you’re implying, YOU FIRST.
Unless you just want OTHERS to believe this to their detriment.
A properly functioning medical system is of value to practitioners within the institutionalised industrial medical system and for financial speculators in the short term.
Thanks for posting a video I watched 18 years ago that says nothing about the value of medical systems in a civilization.
The video you posted about concerns % growth rates.
Do I accurately interpret that you simply take anything that happens to allow a positive population growth rate as bad?
If properly run medicine saves lives, allows for population growth, is therefore bad, doesn’t it follow that medical malpractice that does the opposite is good? Making the not-vax good?
Are you for good medical practices, which will facilitate population growth? Or bad medical practices that inhibit or stop population growth? Are you both for and against both good and bad medical practice?
Instead of saying you are refuting one point, then responding with something you consider to be irrefutable that concerns something else, please just state your case honestly and openly and have it out.
@D Benton Smith- interesting
Back on the old defunct LATOC, there was a forum member (maybe it was Old Horseman IIRC) who was VERY insistent that a government created pandemic would be used to cause lockdowns, loss of civil liberties, mass injections. He was also writing a dramatization/novel in installments of how that could work out.
That goes back to around 2005. I should have paid more attention. I thought the pandemic angle was one of the wackier, less-interesting subjects in the Doom-Sphere. I gave it a cursory glance and wrote it off. Derr. If I’d paid attention, I would have been able to take note of where he was getting his info; what caused a quivering of the antennae 18+ years in advance? Dunno.
I’ve always had a hard time believing it comes down to complexity.
Certainly I came across the concept back when I came across Peak Oil and from there the general Doom-O-Sphere a little bit after Katrina. Or really, with that first episode of Connections with James Burke. Complexity surely enters into it somewhere.
Thinking of Noirette’s post about the medical establishment:
Let it all rot.. and it does, as complex systems that are not maintained by keen ppl working precisely defined slots in a matrix break down quickly.
…which sums up why we are in the shit right now in all aspects of civilization, I don’t know that I jump straight to blaming complexity. Surely a properly functioning medical system is a value ADD for civilization.
Maybe we could say at a certain level of complexity, the complex system is mistaken by humans living within it as being reality. A plant that forgets that dirt exists doesn’t do too well either.
boscohorowitz, I just wanted to mention, your constant admonishment about the ego, projection, take the log out of your own eye first, etc sure is annoying. …and that I HAVE returned to pondering it throughout the week when I read a post of yours like that. Week after week gosh darn you.
I get the sneaking suspicion that there’s some sort of slippery slope SOMEWHERE in there that ends with an Amazon production of Lord of the Rings where a female orc schools Galadriel on how she MUST understand orcs and can never understand them, and from her perspective, the Elves are evil.
Nevertheless, unlike the-injection-which-does-not-vaccinate (T.I.W.D.N.V.), when I ponder the point you are making and alternate between annoyed and not-annoyed, the burning sensation indicates something is working. Or that I need penicillin. Or both.
Just 2 simple requests today regarding Planetary Meltdown
Please explain how a planetary temperature chart is irrelevant to Planetary Meltdown
Please explain how ocean surface temperature is irrelevant to discussion of ocean surface temperature.
…or stop waving a hand and saying “Irrelevant, nothing to do with! (N.T.D.W.)”
How all this freakish talk about boiling water relates to the concept of correlation between temps of mutually bound materials, is bizarre, and feels a bit like straw-clutching to me.
Howdy boscohorowitz
How the surface temperature of the ocean couldn’t be relevant to the discussion of ocean surface temperature, I won’t understand unless it is explained to me in further detail.
If it is argued that say, 3-10 degrees increase in ocean surface temperature leads to a Planetary Meltdown, and the rejoinder is that it has been at BOILING TEMPERATURE and there has been copious life on earth before and afterwards, how is this NOT relevant, in-context discussion, please?
Sea surface temperatures are also useful in assessing the rate of increase in Planetary Meltdown.
In our Earth’s history, sustained sea surface temperatures at the Equator were, for awhile, at boiling temperature. (naturally not actually boiling because salt)
Do you expect sea surface temperatures to go PAST that point with Planetary Meltdown?
Because life on earth survived sea surface boiling temperatures.
In my teens, I played a role-playing game called Paranoia. Everyone lives in a giant arcology controlled by a buggy paranoid super-computer whose mindset is stuck in the cold war.
There were a variety of factions to interact with and become members of. The Communist faction was hilarious because, in the game, there were no actual Communists. Every single member was a stooge planted by The Computer to monitor the Communists.
How do we classify our civilization now? Fully-leveraged? Saturatedly-leveraged?
I always hated being told, in my corporate job, that we were going to leverage something. It typically meant we were going to start using something necessary – such as basic Customer Care functions – for something at cross-purposes with customer and shareholder interests. Ok… will you rename our department and then build a new Cust Care dept so that basic necessary thing can still continue? And then can I transfer to it? No? ok
In ’08, I worked in something called Dedicated Business Care. I had a specific group of business customers I would get to know and assist. Our brilliant director decided to “leverage the client relationship” by converting us into salespeople.
She imposed a monthly quota for sales which would involve getting every line into a new 2 year contract. She thought it was brilliant. Genius. Lock em in for 2 years by leveraging the trusted relationships.
So of course it being 08-09, these businesses were calling me with suppressed terror in their voices trying to place lines in standby (my company cleverly eliminated standby as an option – we GOT them!!! No escape! Yessss!) or deactivate lines.
The WORST thing would be to have a bunch of 2 year contracts on all those lines, because we wouldn’t let them do any kind of standby and would charge them ETF’s if they cancel. So their choice was have a bunch of unused phones for laid off employees charging full price monthly OR massive termination fees.
Uh… these were all small privately owned businesses. No more than 100 lines. Are they going to:
A. Lay down and die for their wireless service provider.
B. Wait until they can’t pay the huge bill, port out any lines they need to a different carrier, and then never ever pay the termination fees or past bills?So we lose the customer and placed them in an adversarial position – they’re not even going to pay the monthly bills to someone trying to destroy them let alone the ETF’s.
Who wins? Nobody. Customer’s credit score trashed. Company loses a customer. Never makes back the money on the 2yr contract discounted equipment. And yet all the efforts of our entire department swung around to, by any means necessary, using our relationship as leverage, create this situation as much as possible.
Considering she was misusing her position, department, company, and employees…. All just a nut to crack open.
@Afewknowthetruth – again – I am decidedly NOT better nor smarter than you. And we’re fellow denizens of the doom-o-sphere. I’d rather have a seat next to you and buy you a beer than 99.9% of the normies out there who want to either not-vaccinate me or have me be homeless. I’ll bet others who disagree on the issue feel the same. Who exactly is going to slap the We Live sunglasses on who isn’t clear yet. I appreciate you WHILE giving you hell on the subject. Just wanted to say.
I wrote a long-winded thing somewhat like Dr D’s (his is better) about the web of lies/corruption and then deleted it without posting earlier this week – partly because the Climate Barfight was taking up so much space already (largely my fault) and partly because I kept realizing it was a simple concept that somehow, in the process, expands to fill massive space no matter how many times a redraft or total rewrite is attempted.
But sometimes sleeping on it can help a bit. One more try:
Flat-Headed Homo Erectus wanders the savannah. I find stuff and I take it.
Homo Erectus lacks the top half of a skull necessary to manage anything, therefore he cannot ever own anything. You don’t come home from work and smash all the dishes in your kitchen to demonstrate you have attained Full Spectrum Dominance, because it’s YOURS. For Homo Erectus, it does not compute. He cannot tend a flock, plant and harvest a crop, practice a trade or business, maintain a car or house. More than simple mental computation capacity, ownership does not compute.
Both from how the elites are behaving and the whacko wokeist religion the plebes have been adopting, one way to see the overall trend would be a rebellion against the top half of the skull, against human consciousness. A demand that things be much much simpler.
I don’t WANT to manage things, respect others, accept compromise and give-and-take, let people do their own thing, ANY of that. This is too maddeningly complex. I don’t WANT to understand existence as a hyper complex civilizational pyramid of interweaving specialties, production chains, and supply chains, not to mention the complex social underpinning. Let me see the universe as being filled of STUFF which I TAKE. Make it a matter of Access to Resources, as if EVERYTHING in civilization were a base raw material. Stuff is just THERE.
Homo Erectus wandering the ACTUAL savannah is fine. All the same environmental factors that affect wolves or sharks will affect him. I wander and take stuff. Sometimes it turns out there isn’t stuff after all. ok.
Homo Erectus existing in Civilization is weird. Civilization as savannah. Homo Erectus finds a nut and cracks it open, takes the meat. He did not plant the tree. He found stuff. But in CIVILIZATION the nut you crack open to extract meat is OTHER PEOPLE within civilization. Even so, if there’s just a few of them, they CAN live as if they simply live in a world of stuff. Civilization can write it off as ullage, wastage, whatever. An accounting detail.
Homo Erectus attaining full spectrum dominance, imposing his way of life systematically within civilization is the equivalent of, normal Homo Erectus, converting every single animal, rock, tree, pond, etc into more Homo Erectus. The paradigm of the system becomes that only Homo Erectus works. Going around BEING successful Homo Erectus propagates it through the system, everything becomes it.
And the system, civilization, in which he tries to function as if it is a savannah, works on ownership, which he can’t stand. Can’t own a damn thing therefore cannot manage a damn thing or vice versa.
The Normans invaded England opportunistically and were, well, kinda assholes, sure. But they didn’t try to make it so that the only thing that works in life is being an invading horse riding french speaking knight. And even if they were foreign conquerors, the stuff was still THEIRS and they managed it. Someone who couldn’t understand that England was theirs after conquering it would have made it a desert.
and it’s too long again.
I note the graphs you keep posting have almost nothing whatsoever to do with current conditions on Earth
Temperature is irrelevant to Planet Meltdown. Gotcha.
I will ignore every bit of nonsense you contaminate TAE with
Taking Planet Meltdown as a given, I posed a moral dilemma, and a logical dilemma.
You clearly need to learn the difference between facts and beliefs.
Then what do you disavow?
1. The Climate Religion says that CO2 DOES NOT itself cause the catastrophic heat thingy
2. The Climate Religion says that CO2 causes a LITTLE warming, enough to Tip The Fragile Balance and HOLY TRIGGER the totally completely non human factors that WOULD cause the warming catastrophe
3. The Climate Religion says it is TEMPERATURE, not the mere presence of CO2, the chemical, that causes the runaway feedback loop.
4. 40 interglacial periods show many, MANY temperature spikes going WELL ABOVE the temperatures that The Climate Religionists say trigger a runaway feedback loop causing a heat catastrophe
5. If CO2 constitutes the “different conditions” from before, but CO2 is only significant in the relatively minor temperature change it causes that then triggers the NON HUMAN feedback loops to start, then why does the same temperature AND HIGHER, over and over, NOT cause The Holy And Blessed Feedback Loop?
Are you BOTH a Science Denier AND a Climate Science Apostate/Heretic? Do you DENY any of the central tenets of your belief that I have mentioned above?
That is why Planetary Meltdown deniers, such as jb-hb. must avoid becoming informed about reality (or even thinking about reality) at all costs if they are to maintain their illogical stance on the matter
My argument was ENTIRELY constructed of YOUR OWN Planetary Meltdown beliefs! I conceded EVERY SINGLE POINT.
What do you disavow, then? Specifically?
Because if you’re saying I am not acknowledging reality, and I am citing Planetary Meltdown beliefs as the foundation of my argument, you are saying there is something within Planetary Meltdown that does NOT match reality.
Thus, when I became aware that so-called vaccines -commercially available at record speed- were based on Messenger-RNA, the Science I have studied over the past more-than-six-decades (and that is chemistry, physics biology, biochemistry, anatomy, anthropology, geology, geochemistry etc.) immediately set off alarm bells and informed me that the so-called vaccines were not vaccines at all but were cell biology modifiers of a potentially dangerous, even deadly, nature.
are you PURPOSELY missing the point?
The pro-injection-which-does-not-vaccinate person will use the SAME EXACT CIRCULAR THINKING YOU USE FOR THE HOLY CLIMATE SCIENCE to not listen to you.
That is the whole POINT of the thing you are responding to with a big whiff, zip, strike, fumble, etc.
I am factually right about this super important thing > I am completely morally in the right.
I am completely morally in the right > I don’t need to consider any arguments from immoral people who are wrong
Covid19 is causing Maximum Harm. We have to Take Action. When you voice doubts, you block the prevention of maximum harm. Expressing your THOUGHTS about the injection which does not vaccinate is essentially an attempt to block the prevention of virtual genocide.
Duh. The pro injection person won’t say they are For The Science and You are for Actual Science. That’s what YOU say. To them. While they remain in the boldface italicized thought loop above.
The MORE you say what they believe is The Science, while you know actual real Science, the more wrong you are! The more EVIL you are! The more you prove these things to them!
And your claims to Science and Morality for the CLIMATE DEBATE are different …how?
Again, are you PURPOSELY missing the point? You APPROVE of their methods, just not the specific thing their methods are used to defend?
Science I have studied over the past more-than-six-decades (and that is chemistry, physics biology, biochemistry, anatomy, anthropology, geology, geochemistry etc.)
climbing the road sign to Cleveland and announcing yourself as having arrived in Cleveland.
All the more reason, with all that great scientific list, that you could answer questions and resolve contradictions that you don’t. Or even define specifically what you believe or at least what you don’t. But if you get specific, you could get tied down defending a specific thing.
you have at least confirmed you DO specifically believe in:
Planetary Meltdown
The Sixth Great Extinction EventThat is why Planetary Meltdown deniers, such as jb-hb…
In a very painfully obvious fashion, you avoid my summary of your Plantery Meltdown beliefs.
You very pointedly avoid admitting you agree with any of the points AND pointedly avoid disavowing any of them. Your silence is deafening
At least you declared Planetary Meltdown is your belief. That’s something.
You purposely evaded understanding the vax analogy because you KNOW that in saying why the pro injection person doesn’t own you as subhuman property, to do with as they wish, to prevent maximum harm, you would be explaining why these can’t be true for YOUR belief either.
Planetary Meltdown surely qualifies as a case of stupendous Harm, yes? Or do you disavow? Planetary Meltdown is NOT massive Harm?
bok bok bok
Afewknowthetruth – I include the “science denier” and “it is a religion” stuff for 2 reasons
1. A very significant component or your belief appears to be circular and moralistic:
The Science tells me I am unquestionably right.
The Science says horrible, awful, catastrophic things will happen If We Do Not Act.; We Need To Take Action All Of Us Together.
People who disbelieve The Climate Truth naturally will not Take Action. They will only get in the way of Taking Action.
Why should I entertain ANY arguments, questions, etc from someone whose actions are DEFINED AS preventing us from Taking Action, which we Must Do in order to Avoid Intolerable Massive Catastrophe? Them speaking ANYTHING AT ALL against The Science is an evil action – they’re essentially blocking the stopping of genocide aren’t they?
I am factually right about this super important thing > I am completely morally in the right.
I am completely morally in the right > I don’t need to consider any arguments from immoral people who are wrong
Anytime I’ve seen you “discuss” The Climate Science, it’s if there’s some inarguable Something Else that REALLY matters. Unspoken and therefore unquestionable.
NATURALLY I therefore point at it every time. It is, after all, what we’re really arguing about while you’d like me to pretend we aren’t, so that you can argue about it to the exclusion of all else and “win.”
But if maximum “harm” will be “triggered” by Human generated CO2 (hmm…. where else do we encounter Harm and Triggering?) unless we Take Action and Climate Science Deniers stand in the way of the ONLY thing that could prevent maximum harm….
…explain how it does NOT follow that this makes me your subhuman property. It should be easy for you to explain, shouldn’t it?
What measures CAN’T you decide, just like masks, EVEN IF IT HELPS ONLY A LITTLE BIT or perhaps MIGHT HELP. If there is a CHANCE of avoiding MAXIMUM HARM and there is an absolute imperative that We Must Take Action AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, you’ve already decided ANY objection I may raise is factually incorrect evil action that should be stopped? Like, even the IDEA that conversation would be possible is evil, since implicit in conversation is that one or the other might have a point? And the opposite side gaining ANY points takes us closer to Armageddon, by preventing Necessary Action?
You already expressed that I, as a Climate Science Denier am ultimate evil. You’ve already expressed total scorn for any thinking processes I may have. So how am I NOT your subhuman property to do with as you will, and even if any of my objections that my interests may be harmed by Taking Action turn out to be RIGHT, that would only be right and good, considering how evil and scummy I am???
(like when a Vax-Denier says hey, this thing could cripple or kill me. Well hey, that would be all to the good for a vax denier to get injured, serves them right – take the shot you anti vaxxer)
How should I NOT be subject to your Climate related whims, if you become convinced it will at least “Help” or “Might Help”?
And the more things you think of that I would object to, the more immoral and unthinking that would establish me as being, wouldn’t it? You think of 3 Climate Things and I argue with them. You think of 100 Climate Things and I deny 100 Climate Things. Aren’t I proven way, way worse now, purely as a function of the number of Vital Actions you thought of for us To Take?
2. You refrain from defending your belief with reason and science
I figure if I keep saying it is religious and unscientific, you’ll engage with IDEAS. I figure your pride in the reason and science that brought you to your belief would kick in. That you’d have enough pride to ENGAGE.
Proclaiming that you are better, changing the subject, making accusations, declaring you are the winner…
These are the argument-version of soiling your armor and fleeing the field of battle.
You would have to ENGAGE IDEAS to win. I am taunting you to get you to stop running away. Bok bok bok chicken. Like that.
SAYING you are winning while running away is the same as climbing to the top of the road sign that says “Cleveland 100 miles” and saying you have successfully reached Cleveland. Expressing the idea of winning a battle while not engaging in battle is not winning a battle.
Finally, let me make a clear and sincere statement here:
I am not better than you. I am not smarter than you. Sincerely, I mean that.
So how am I doing what I doing? What paradigm IS in play? Because the more we interact, the worse Climate Change looks. Not because I declare it, but because of all the questions and contradictions that go unanswered. When the “answers” evade, the suggestion is that one doth protest too much, got nothing under the hood after all, etc.
And again:
1. The Climate Religion says that CO2 DOES NOT itself cause the catastrophic heat thingy
2. The Climate Religion says that CO2 causes a LITTLE warming, enough to Tip The Fragile Balance and HOLY TRIGGER the totally completely non human factors that WOULD cause the warming catastrophe
3. The Climate Religion says it is TEMPERATURE, not the mere presence of CO2, the chemical, that causes the runaway feedback loop.
4. 40 interglacial periods show many, MANY temperature spikes going WELL ABOVE the temperatures that The Climate Religionists say trigger a runaway feedback loop causing a heat catastrophe
5. If CO2 constitutes the “different conditions” from before, but CO2 is only significant in the relatively minor temperature change it causes that then triggers the NON HUMAN feedback loops to start, then why does the same temperature AND HIGHER, over and over, NOT cause The Holy And Blessed Feedback Loop?
Are you BOTH a Science Denier AND a Climate Science Apostate/Heretic? Do you DENY any of the central tenets of your belief that I have mentioned above?
Afewknowthetruth, dude. The ONLY arguments you’ve brought to the table are ad hominem, asserting that nothing was said when it was, and ignoring what was said.
You still haven’t been able to answer questions nor explain contradictions.
I keep saying RELIGION and SCIENCE DENIER because I am prompting you to support your belief in some other way than religious, but in several weeks of prompting with varied reasoned arguments, you still argue like a Christian arguing religion – exclusively.
Declaring yourself the victor – factually or morally – while failing to intellectually engage actual IDEAS is the argumentative equivalent of soiling your armor and fleeing the battlefield.
You cannot win an argument by yelling you are better and winning any more than you can get to Cleveland by climbing the road sign that says “Cleveland 110 miles”
And if you don’t like ad hominems, why do you alternate between pointing fingers at others for it and using it yourself? (if it is on purpose humorous trolling, then I appreciate it) Do you recall calling me worse than Hitler a few weeks ago? How scientific was that as a support of your religious The Holy Climate Change beliefs?
1. CO2 causes warming. SOME.
2. There’s a bunch of human-generated CO2
3. The climate is teetering on a Knife Edge of Balance (K.E.o.B.)
4. Human Generated CO2 will cause JUST enough temperature change to tip the Earth’s climate enough to trigger NON HUMAN causes of The Holy Climate Change™ (funny how the Neo-Marxist concept of all powerful Triggering enters into The Science)
5. The TRIGGERED NON HUMAN climate change thingies will cause a RUNAWAY FEEDBACK LOOP that will cause a catastrophic, apocalyptical, super horrible, awful, unimaginably bad, super super duper bad heat thingy. You can’t even imagine. Our obligation is to NOT imagine or consider, but only froth at the mouth in incoherent rage if it comes up.
6. Per the Climate Science RELIGION, it is not the Human Generated CO2 that causes the (froths at mouth, trashes room, accuses everyone of infinite evil, calms down… ) …that causes the Heat Apocalypse. No. The human generate CO2 only tips the SUPER FRAGILE, PRECARIOUS BALANCE, which then Triggers (the Holy Triggering is Unquestionable) massive NON HUMAN things that cause the catastrophic climate change.
7. But interglacial and glacial periods have alternated about FORTY TIMES. Many of those times go TEN DEGREES above our current temperatures
8. The Climate Science Religion says that just a FEW degrees higher will trigger the NON HUMAN generated things that cause the catastrophe.
9. Ergo, if Montgomery Burns built a machine that sucked all the CO2 out of the air and oceans of Earth, but then built a gigantic parabolic reflective dish in space, then aimed that dish at earth, such that the Earth’s ambient temperature went up the SAME EXACT NUMBER OF DEGREES that the ClimateReligionists predict CO2 will raise it, this would STILL precipitate the same NON HUMAN feedback loops causing catastrophe
10. There is nothing particular to the CHEMICAL CO2 that is inherently catastrophic, evil, unclean. According to the Holy Climate Change Religion, it is the TEMPERATURE CHANGE that Human Generated CO2 could cause that would Holy-Trigger catastrophe. NOT the chemical CO2. The TEMPERATURE CHANGE.
11. Yet we can clearly see in temperature graphs of Glacial and Inter-Glacial periods, BROUGHT TO US BY SCIENCE, REAL ACTUAL SCIENCE, that temperatures have gone HIGHER THAN what the Climate Religionists say will Trigger the Non Human Climate Change factors that cause the Holy Climate Change Catastrophe.
12. WHY didn’t the runaway catastrophe happen the other 40 times? It’s The Settled Science™, after all.
13. The Different Conditions are human-produced CO2, which, as a CENTRAL TENET of The Holy Climate Change states, raises temperature a few degrees which then triggers NON HUMAN Holy Climate Change™ factors which then cause Holy Climate Change Catastrophe
14. But the TEMPERATURES that the Holy Different Conditions™ cause, which is the ACTUAL thing The Holy Climate Change™ says causes The Holy Climate Change Catastrophe™ HAVE BEEN REACHED MANY TIMES, resulting in… resulting in… GLACIATION
GLACIATION. Every time.
Please explain
1. CO2 causes warming. SOME.
2. There’s a bunch of human-generated CO2
3. The climate is teetering on a Knife Edge of Balance (K.E.o.B.)
4. Human Generated CO2 will cause JUST enough temperature change to tip the Earth’s climate enough to trigger NON HUMAN causes of The Holy Climate Change™ (funny how the Neo-Marxist concept of all powerful Triggering enters into The Science)
5. The TRIGGERED NON HUMAN climate change thingies will cause a RUNAWAY FEEDBACK LOOP that will cause a catastrophic, apocalyptical, super horrible, awful, unimaginably bad, super super duper bad heat thingy. You can’t even imagine. Our obligation is to NOT imagine or consider, but only froth at the mouth in incoherent rage if it comes up.
6. Per the Climate Science RELIGION, it is not the Human Generated CO2 that causes the (froths at mouth, trashes room, accuses everyone of infinite evil, calms down… ) …that causes the Heat Apocalypse. No. The human generate CO2 only tips the SUPER FRAGILE, PRECARIOUS BALANCE, which then Triggers (the Holy Triggering is Unquestionable) massive NON HUMAN things that cause the catastrophic climate change.
7. But interglacial and glacial periods have alternated about FORTY TIMES. Many of those times go TEN DEGREES above our current temperatures
8. The Climate Science Religion says that just a FEW degrees higher will trigger the NON HUMAN generated things that cause the catastrophe.
9. Ergo, if Montgomery Burns built a machine that sucked all the CO2 out of the air and oceans of Earth, but then built a gigantic parabolic reflective dish in space, then aimed that dish at earth, such that the Earth’s ambient temperature went up the SAME EXACT NUMBER OF DEGREES that the ClimateReligionists predict CO2 will raise it, this would STILL precipitate the same NON HUMAN feedback loops causing catastrophe
10. There is nothing particular to the CHEMICAL CO2 that is inherently catastrophic, evil, unclean. According to the Holy Climate Change Religion, it is the TEMPERATURE CHANGE that Human Generated CO2 could cause that would Holy-Trigger catastrophe. NOT the chemical CO2. The TEMPERATURE CHANGE.
11. Yet we can clearly see in temperature graphs of Glacial and Inter-Glacial periods, BROUGHT TO US BY SCIENCE, REAL ACTUAL SCIENCE, that temperatures have gone HIGHER THAN what the Climate Religionists say will Trigger the Non Human Climate Change factors that cause the Holy Climate Change Catastrophe.
12. WHY didn’t the runaway catastrophe happen the other 40 times? It’s The Settled Science™, after all.
13. The Different Conditions are human-produced CO2, which, as a CENTRAL TENET of The Holy Climate Change states, raises temperature a few degrees which then triggers NON HUMAN Holy Climate Change™ factors which then cause Holy Climate Change Catastrophe
14. But the TEMPERATURES that the Holy Different Conditions™ cause, which is the ACTUAL thing The Holy Climate Change™ says causes The Holy Climate Change Catastrophe™ HAVE BEEN REACHED MANY TIMES, resulting in… resulting in… GLACIATION
GLACIATION. Every time.
Please explain
Pfizer knew the drug would cause heart attacks?
Uh… we knew that the moment they were forced to admit that they put symptom-suppressing drugs in the children’s version of the injection which does not vaccinate.
SYMPTOM suppressing drugs – no, no, we don’t stop the DAMAGE, we just stop little Timmy from collapsing too close to the injection center.
Afewknowthetruth. Science Denier
The weakness of your FAITH BASED RELIGOUS BELIEF is evident in your continually WEAK responses to ANY questions. Any.
“Are you just another climate zealot who…”
Projection isn’t just a river in Egypt.
You never answered my questions – just for instance
Is it the same impenetrable forcefield that protects Martha’s Vineyard from both Climate Change™ and Dreamers™? …or is it two different impenetrable forcefields?
Epstien’s Island is clearly at sea level. Is it the same impenetrable forcefield that protects it from both The Holy Climate Change™ AND and prosecutions for various horrible obscene crimes? Or is it two totally different force-fields?
What are they powered by? I am guessing massive piles of printed and/or laundered money?
If you cite limited resources of some kind, let me point out that they keep buying more and more sea level oceanfront property, so they seem to be able to expand their force-field use quite a bit.
Do you think the force-fields ought to be used differently? Or is the way the Holy Climate Science™ Believers are using them the best possible way? Mansions and the estates they sit within are most-important?
Your only answer was to compliment yourself, vaguely, on your “great understanding” which others do not – according to you -have. A typical TOTALLY AND COMPLETELY RELIGIOUS ASSERTION.
Science Denier
I’m still experimenting to see which questions you WILL answer (so far, none)
I had a few questions about the force-fields protecting the mansions and estates of The Holy Climate Science™ Believers
The impenetrable force-field around Martha’s Vineyard that blocks Climate Change™, is it the same one that blocks Dreamers™? Or are there two different impenetrable force-fields in play here?
Epstien’s island is at sea-level. Is it the same impenetrable force-field that blocks Climate Change™ and prosecutions for various horrible obscene crimes? Or is it two different force-fields?
What are they powered by? I am guessing massive piles of printed and/or laundered money?
Since it’s basically making electronic 1’s and 0’s, why aren’t they using these force-fields on all those island nations that are tragically, horrifically all sinking into the ocean? Why don’t the Holy Climate Science™ Believers share their protective technology?
If you cite limited resources of some kind, let me point out that they keep buying more and more sea level oceanfront property, so they seem to be able to expand their force-field use quite a bit.
Do you think the force-fields ought to be used differently? Or is the way the Holy Climate Science™ Believers using them the best possible way? Mansions and the estates they sit within are most-important?
If he, a non-scientist, can understand it so clearly, why can others -such as jb-hb- not understand it at all?
Galileo tells us it is a Heliocentric solar system. But even all those non-scientists can understand that the Sun orbits the Earth. How come Galileo can’t understand when all these non-scientists understand? Sheesh. Scientists are dumb. They don’t understand things.
Afewknowthetruth: Science Denier
Afewknowthetruth, Science Denier, let me help you count the peaks in temperature over the short 800,000 year time frame I most recently gave you. This doesn’t even account for all alternating glacial/interglacial periods.
I count 33. THIRTY-THREE times that YOU SAW that there has been a massive temperature spike, followed by temperatures plummeting into a new glaciation period. Right there in front of your eyes. Your eyes see it and your brain does not engage with it.
YOUR religious faith states that massive temperature changes cause a runaway reaction that turns the Earth into Venus. What did your brain tell you about the 33 temperature peaks your eyes saw?
YOUR religion even says that CO2 itself does not cause global warming per se but merely causes enough of a slight nudge to get OTHER irreversable unstoppable reactions going (methane release, etc)
So, looking at the 33 times that YOUR RELIGION says that this has already happened, what is it, would you say, that nevertheless, caused a plunge in temperature right after? Didn’t all that methane and other nasty stuff get released those other 33 times?
This time is different and special. Because god told you to. And because you sneered. You said “different conditions” …regarding a cyclical pattern of the same conditions over and over. Determined by something called Science. You Science Denier.
I have no idea why you keep posting graphs relating to conditions that no longer apply on this planet
1.) You decide that “conditions” means CO2
2.) You decide, without checking, what CO2 “conditions” are
3.) You simply sneer, wave a hand airily, and say, regarding Science, “I declare that this does not apply,” you Science Denier
You have godlike certainty that you know all the conditions that need to be known. Because your god told you. Because THIS IS YOUR RELIGION.
CO2, eh?
The overall impression I get from all these covid-measures they STILL try to force on everything is of the late Roman empire.
By Late Antiquity, when Rome was about to fall, all sorts of bizarre policies were put in place to try to halt the collapse — oddly, like the “just freeze everything” directive 10-289 that goes out in Atlas Shrugged
For example, people in the same profession were not allowed to leave it. (that part is JUST like Atlas Shrugged) Additionally, you had to marry people in the same profession. A baker had to marry a baker. A tailor had to marry a tailor, and so on. THAT’LL keep society from collapsing…
Invasions of barbarians worked so well because they instantly wiped out ALL of the many, MANY awful and irrational (and probably often mean-spirited) things making life unbearable and/or unlivable.
There were no spontaneous returns to the Empire by the conquered inhabitants. For some mysterious reason, they were not eager to return. It took external conquest by Justinian with one of the greatest generals ever in history to bring any provinces back.
A constant complaint in the late Roman Empire was “The Manpower Shortage.” The obvious and cheap solution would have been to make everyone the militia ala Greek city-states of a previous period. But they didn’t dare and it is obvious why. The empire would have fallen quicker, not slower.
A lot of those Visigoth, Vandal, Ostrogoth etc hordes were a core of barbarians, but mostly people from WITHIN the empire trying to escape the old system, attaching themselves to an alternative system from outside the system. Sort of John Brown’s hoped-for strategy with Harper’s Ferry writ large. Only it worked. Give those same people weapons, training, and an established hierarchy… the empire would have evaporated.
I have, of course, like a lot of others, increasingly felt that the masks are solely to deny, shut down, stop individuality, human expression, natural inter-relation and society. Part of a “just freeze everything” policy.
I too have TRIED to discuss masks with people. For god’s sake, you can walk up to a cold window or mirror, breathe out on it through a mask and see all that water vapor coming through the mask just fine.
VP – thanks for the story yesterday about preventing a screwup. Isn’t that always the way, that the jerks seem to get fixated on making something go horribly wrong and reserve their biggest grudge-holding for people who prevent it?
hahaha @ D Benton Smith from your kind words yesterday about my job search, IF I am hired, it will be for an unimportant job, which being corporate, they will constantly try to stop me from doing, but which I will find a way to do anyway.
I am reminded of the ol schlocky Dragonlance™ trilogy. Near the end of the first book, a mostly sociopathic character says, about an immanent continent-wide war, that “woah, this is going to affect Important People.” …but their eyes tear up “inexplicably” as they say it. And another character, knowing the war will affect all of that person’s closest friends, says “Yes, Tas, IMPORTANT people.”
Those customers – decent, horrible, angry, confused, even-keeled, apoplectic, stupid, smart, whatever – will be important to ME anyway. They’re SOMEONE’S friend, daughter, husband, brother, roommate, wife, husband, etc.
and for Afewknowthetruth, Science Denier,
does it look like it is going to get significantly warmer or colder in the near future?
Again, when Nascar, beer-case a week lawn-mowers are out-sciencing you at every turn, aren’t you ashamed of yourself yet? Is this what you dreamed of, going to school?
Funny how there is constant The Global Warming™ flooding in islands and stuff, but never ever where rich The Global Warming™ concerned Democrats are always buying more and more shorefront property.
In Martha’s Vinyard, Jeckyl Island, Florida, various luxurious Caribbean and South Pacific islands, California, basically anywhere there is expensive low-lying coastline. Even Elensky has used some of his millions to make sure he has coastline property in Florida. One can now envision a time in the future when ALL low-lying coastline will be occupied by the mansion properties of the Global Warming™ Believers. I’m sure there will be a reasonable explanation of why owning all the beachfront property is for our good, stops racism, fights covid, ends misogyny or something. And the frustrated sensation you’ll feel when you discover the public beach is closed for “safety” just means it’s working.
It must work the same as undocumented immigrants, who also, it turns out, cannot show up in Martha’s Vineyard, just like The Global Warming™ cannot show up at Martha’s Vineyard.
Don’t you see??? Potter’s not selling, he’s BUYING!!!!
I’m probably that guy still looking for a job. No job because I would not take the injection which does not vaccinate (TIWDNV) Over 100 applications sent out now. Indeed.com shows how many applied after you apply. Some are in the thousands. Sometimes for a single open position.
I’ve had a few texts and emails reaching out to me for further interviews only to reply and get no response. But they’re buried deep in hundreds to thousands of applicants.
I would need a rubber stamp with TVASF for that job Germ mentioned. When my arm got tired of stamping, I’d switch hands.
I’ve been reading some retrospectives (although it is all still happening) of the pro-injection-that-does-not-vaccinate takes on the not-a-vax mandates. A lot of them seem steeped in the general wokeist/neomarxist viewpoint. They therefore see everything as RESOURCES, with the dominant factor being ACCESS TO them. Therefore when a person who doesn’t not-vaccinate loses their job, they explain/describe it as that person losing access to a resource. As if it were the same as receiving welfare or a gift.
They totally fail to understand that if I was making x amount of dollars, I HAD TO BE delivering value IN EXCESS OF that dollar amount. ie I am the resource that society, including wokeists, lost access to when I was fired.
That they can only conceive a job as sort of a natural resource, just sitting there to be taken or not, says quite a lot about them. Homo erectus wandering the Serengeti. I wander around. I find stuff and take it. The simplest, most primitive understanding of the world around them. One that negates all of society- even the give and take quid pro quo ingroup action of a basic tribe let alone a civilization. So primitive, it goes backwards over the threshold of humanity. Back to being more socially primitive than velociraptors, meerkats, or wolves.
The “un-notvaxxed get into car accidents more” story? Could it be that the not-vaxxed are getting sick way more than the un-not-vaxxed, leading to them driving to their jobs less?
The southwest airlines story was interesting. I am seeing many comments from different sources in different places saying pilots calling into a call center to get scheduled to do flights were waiting on hold for 20+ hours. And so the crews are sitting AVAILABLE TO FLY in pilot lounges, waiting rooms, hotel rooms, etc waiting to be assigned to flights.
And here I sit, a call center warhorse, used to all kinds of weird awful technical and interpersonal problems, used to hacking through the bureaucracy to get my people from A to B by all available means, used to crushingly high call volume, sitting on my hands with over 100 applications and no takers. I checked the Southwest site. They aren’t even hiring for that position.
Interacting with a large corporation can ruin your day, your week, your month, your year. Having someone working with you who knows the 10 different ways your account can be blown up – yes, despite the simple thing you “only” wanted to do today – and cares, and can even undo it if someone else already did it to you, and cares enough to check and notice it happened to you before you do is priceless. It will save you tens of hours of your life. The company never measures this sort of thing, so it is unaware and unappreciative, but a bunch of people, doing the right thing constantly, keep entropy at bay.
The basis of civilization isn’t agriculture. There’s plenty of groups that have practice agriculture and never developed civilization. The basis of civilization is bureaucracy.
This is because the Sumerians, the Egyptians, all those starter-civilizations, had sophisticated irrigation systems, which arose FROM the bureaucracy. No bureaucracy, no big irrigation systems, no civilization. You can have agriculture all day long with no writing, no libraries or librarians. The Mongols destroyed the irrigation systems in Iraq when they came through. Population levels only recovered in recent MODERN times with the petroleum fueled green revolution agriculture. They destroyed the irrigation system, yes, but massacred the bureaucracy that made it run as well.
You look at societies we can find that were in transition – the Incas, Mycenean Greece. We find records being kept either solely or primarily for bureaucratic purposes. FIRST the bureaucracy, THEN, very soon on the heels of that, its record-keeping. From THERE it spreads out into religious texts, the setting down of tales from the oral tradition, everything else.
As bureaucracy is the root of all civilization, the – sorry to be so hokey – HONOR held by that bureaucracy determines the level of civilization. Management, concerned with political maneuvering, cut off from reality, makes demands at least 50% of the time that only have to do with their own position and progress within the bureaucracy. The other 50% of the time, they are guessing.
That’s too harsh. I’ve been in skip-level meetings where I tell a VP what’s REALLY happening, and if it is something horrifying, horror DOES often register on their faces. Within a week or two, I tend to see some initiative that appears to be related to that conversation. But then the middle-managers IMPLEMENT it and it goes to shit. It’s nothing to the VP to do something addressing real reality occasionally. Addressing real reality won’t hurt his/her position in the slightest. But for the middle managers, it’s a dagger aimed at their heart. A plan to address reality is breathing air that could have otherwise been breathed by whatever would have helped the middle manager’s game-play inside the system.
Hear about that giant cylindrical aquarium that burst in a German hotel recently? There was a MANDATE to turn down ALL thermostats. As a result of the Ukraine situation. The aquarium held tropical fish. So the aquarium was heated, but they lowered the temperature of the room it was in. Late at night, when it got cold, it burst, causing a horrific amount of damage and of course killing a lot of expensive fish.
I’ll bet SOMEONE thought about the effect of lowering the temperature. (or someone who WOULD have was already fired for not not-vaxxing.) Yet the thermostat setting of the hotel was obediently lowered.
The root of civilization is bureaucracy. It functions to the degree that it operates with, weird as it is to say, a knightly honor. You cannot believe, unless you have lived it yourself, the intelligence and decency with which I have seen lowest-level functionaries execute their jobs in the face of maltreatment by the very people that need them, psychotic bosses, irrational and evil policies, processes, and systems. There are people out there right now keeping the most mundane, necessary things going – on the lowest pay, with little to no thanks, or negative thanks, with unimaginable endurance. They KNOW the right thing NEEDS to be done, regardless of whatever else might be coming at them from all angles.
The degree to which they stop is the degree to which everything will stop. The aquarium, the Southwest airline debacle, the firing of the most thoughtful and principled people for not not-vaxxing, these are all extremely bad signs. Degrading the lower levels of bureaucracy is at least as bad for civilization as farming out the raising of children away from mothers to $18/hr daycare workers. At least as bad.
Either the social contract was broken, and someone that could have spoken did not, or the person that would have was already gone for not not-vaxxing. So the giant aquarium shattered.
I wander around. I notice stuff. I take it.
Black hats/white hats/grey hats? What’s a White Hat?
A White Hat is someone who feels OWNERSHIP. An aristocrat “owns” a country, a fiefdom, a steel trust, whatever. By virtue of owning it, they MANAGE it. A low-level bureaucrat feels a sense of ownership of their organization, their society, the people they are supposed to help, so they engage with a broader awareness of management. If they are virtuous.
The black-hats have no ownership. No management, no stewardship. They see it as having access to resources and taking them. There is, apparently, no higher level of understanding of things controlled than as if they were raw “resources” Stuff is just THERE. And I take it.
And while they fantasize that they are depriving enemies of “resources,” it’s themselves they deprive. Which they can do for as long as they can tell themselves they are winning. Until they can’t. I remember seeing on a clusterfucknation comment years ago, someone proposing a pharmaceutical should be invented for sociopathic whackos with a winning-deficiency. You take it and feel like you are winning, so the rest of us can run society along semi-rational lines. I remember a post on zerohedge mathematically, in excruciating detail how, if we had just ASKED the banksters how much money they wanted and just GAVE it to them directly, how much destruction would have been avoided in the 08 fiasco.
White Hat just means ownership. Once you own a thing, you find yourself – magically – intelligently managing and defending that thing. If you are a flat-headed Homo Erectus wandering around finding and taking things, you can never own anything.
I felt that I owned my company, my organization, my customers, my stockholders. I felt that I held them in the palm of my hand, to the extent of my position and responsibilities. I owned my world and was therefore a part of it. And that was the travesty, I suppose. I felt they were mine, but they never felt I was theirs.
Because the Masters of the Universe, geniuses that they are, operate on an strategy that would be recognizable to yeast in a bottle of sugar water.
ps. Dr D talked awhile back about Covid already being out before the official narrative says. Escaped in the US and brought to China?
Anyone remember? I distinctly remember an article over a year ago about how they found Covid19 in blood donations from October 2019.
Additionally, did you start by calculating the total combatant countries’ populations involved in WW1 vs WW2?
Was the practice, by the USSR, of throwing their people in foolishly as cannon fodder, a modern development, a result of progress? Or an ancient, even prehistoric practice? And it cost tens of millions.
Was the decision by the major Axis combatants – Germany and Japan – to fight well past the time it was clear they were defeated, a result of progress, or could we see similar things happening in the Ancient world and presume that they happened prehistorically as well? The Cimbri and Teutones choosing destruction upon defeat, for example?
By comparison, WW1 Germany laid down its king, admitted defeat, at an appropriate time.
On a per capita basis, was WW2 really more destructive? After factoring out non progress elements recognizable as going back to ancient times?
I for one would consider dropping the atomic bombs on Japan to be immoral, but you’re probably aware of the arguments that it saved lives. Maybe the US would not have invaded Japan, but the USSR would have. A Battle of Berlin occurring over the entire Japanese island chain. The atomic bomb would epitomize progress in destructive capacity while arguments have certainly been fielded that its real world application saved lives.
(and I want to stress here, I’m more playing devil’s advocate than anything – Return of the Krell Machine is closer to my own opinion on the matter – I’m mainly saying, by playing devil’s advocate, it isn’t so simple.)
The Mongols killed 80 million with weapons systems from prehistoric times. Bows, axes, swords, spears. For single-entity perpetrators of destruction, they still hold the record.
Afewknowthetruth, you are arguing on the basis that ALL of WW2 was fought as mechanized combined arms warfare, which we know to not be true.
Go ahead and construct an argument proving it, though.
“What has characterised human ‘progress’ has been the increased capacity for destruction”
That is perhaps disputable. I’ll play devil’s advocate here for a sec
Primitive peoples had and have wars, torture, human sacrifice, genocide, murder, destruction, slavery, and creepy uncles. Their advantage, I suppose, was that PER SQUARE ACRE, there was less evil/destruction? But is that a meaningful unit of measurement?
You look at a city like New York and you see IMMENSE tolerance, compassion, fairness, peacefulness, and plenty, far more on a per CAPITA basis than than ever before achieved.
I remember we had an influx of new people at the ol defunct LATOC forum who began incessantly arguing that civilization – or literally simply the practice of agriculture – was the cause of every human evil. Since agriculture leads to specialization and then writing, they seemed to suppose that so long as nobody wrote it down, nothing bad happened — and if someone showed up who COULD write and documented it, then it was only because those people who could write showed up.
capacity for destruction, sure, but for instance, with the use of mechanized combined arms warfare in WW2, greater victories were won in less time with far less casualties for both sides than in the battles of WW1.
To conclude playing Devil’s Advocate, there’s been an increased capacity for EVERYTHING.
A really interesting essay about increased capacity – for destruction amongst other things, one of my favorite things on the internet:
The Return of the Krell Machine – Nanotechnology, the Singularity, and the Empty Planet Syndrome:
