Please support this Forum and Neven's Blog

Author Topic: 2017 open thread  (Read 16994 times)

Cid_Yama

  • ASIF Lurker
  • Posts: 79
    • View Profile
    • The Post Peak Oil Historian
Re: 2017 open thread
« Reply #50 on: February 26, 2017, 11:23:58 PM »
5to10, Sounds like Tommowland.  If you haven't seen it, it's worth a watch for those with your mindset.  I'm totally surprised that Disney would address the end of the world so directly.

I give this movie a big thumbs up.

Sort of Technocopia meets the power of positive thinking.  Hope is the greatest of all defense mechanisms.

Not that I ascribe.  But isn't it best to meet the end with hope and go down swinging?  If you can't get to the point of acceptance, it's the next best thing.

5to10

  • ASIF Lurker
  • Posts: 97
    • View Profile
Re: 2017 open thread
« Reply #51 on: February 26, 2017, 11:54:48 PM »
5to10, Sounds like Tommowland.  If you haven't seen it, it's worth a watch for those with your mindset.  I'm totally surprised that Disney would address the end of the world so directly.

I give this movie a big thumbs up.

Sort of Technocopia meets the power of positive thinking.  Hope is the greatest of all defense mechanisms.

Not that I ascribe.  But isn't it best to meet the end with hope and go down swinging?  If you can't get to the point of acceptance, it's the next best thing.

I already accepted it, and then out of accepting it actually understood that you can accept it and still keep swinging even if it looks to be totally in vain. And secondly, though it looks impossible, I cannot rule out the possibility of recovery although all logic and evidence goes against that. For such a monumental thing, I'm willing to swing longer. In fact I think that is the only rational choice. Again it all depends on an individuals beliefs and values.

I will say that I don't think recovery is impossible.. just far, far, so far beyond the realm of probable... However until I KNOW it is impossible, and despite overwhelming evidence that it's impossible.. I still admit that I cannot know for sure if it is... then giving up and not trying is just letting it happen. If there is any chance, we HAVE to try, so we might as well...

Of course I do believe if we were to get through it, we'd be a better species with more compassion and care in regard to the natural world on the other side. Else there's probably no point in saving the world or saving us, I get it.
« Last Edit: February 27, 2017, 12:00:48 AM by 5to10 »

CognitiveBias

  • ASIF Lurker
  • Posts: 83
    • View Profile
Re: 2017 open thread
« Reply #52 on: February 27, 2017, 03:20:58 AM »
I think that by controlling export through fram/garlic press/Bering stretch , enough ice could be saved to prolong the demise of the Arctic.
The problem with this idea along with that of trying to pump seawater to the top of the ice to build it up, is both fail to understand the scale of resources and energy necessary to implement them.

While they are presented as "simple" solutions they do not begin to address the work required.  Blocking the Fram and the channels in the CAA would without question take more resources and energy than every other major civil enterprise ever attempted, combined.

The pump idea would require the placement (and continuing maintenance...) of literally 10's of millions of pumps, which would themselves require the energy to pump thousands of KM3 of sea water across the ice.  To keep that incontext, the City of New York pumps only about 2.0 KM3 of waste water during an entire *year*; we're talking about pumping over five thousand times that. 

In short, I consider even the *discussion* of such a solution utterly nonsensical, and a distraction from much more effective and rational discussions about mitigating the proximate cause of the problem we are faced with.

Totally absurd, maybe...but 1.0 KM3 would add 1 meter thickness to 1/4 the area of everything North of 80N.  Properly located I imaging that volume of extra ice would help stabilize the pack, reducing mobility.  Maybe stop the garlic press or reduce Fram export, who knows.  Further, 5000hp operating 200 days can draw said 1km3 20 vertical ft.  How much distribution could be coerced from gravity, gives an idea of how many pumps would be required...  Sea ice being relatively flat, especially this top-engineered type, lets let a pump flood an area of 200 km^2.  So we need 5000 1HP pumps for this exercise.   

Or maybe the experts can agree that strategically placed 2m enhancements on 50000 km^2 can help.  You are down to 500hp and maybe 250 sites.

Its ridiculous, sure, but not more than an order of magnitude out.

jdallen

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2376
    • View Profile
Re: 2017 open thread
« Reply #53 on: February 27, 2017, 04:38:20 AM »
I think that by controlling export through fram/garlic press/Bering stretch , enough ice could be saved to prolong the demise of the Arctic.
The problem with this idea along with that of trying to pump seawater to the top of the ice to build it up, is both fail to understand the scale of resources and energy necessary to implement them.

While they are presented as "simple" solutions they do not begin to address the work required.  Blocking the Fram and the channels in the CAA would without question take more resources and energy than every other major civil enterprise ever attempted, combined.

The pump idea would require the placement (and continuing maintenance...) of literally 10's of millions of pumps, which would themselves require the energy to pump thousands of KM3 of sea water across the ice.  To keep that incontext, the City of New York pumps only about 2.0 KM3 of waste water during an entire *year*; we're talking about pumping over five thousand times that. 

In short, I consider even the *discussion* of such a solution utterly nonsensical, and a distraction from much more effective and rational discussions about mitigating the proximate cause of the problem we are faced with.

Totally absurd, maybe...but 1.0 KM3 would add 1 meter thickness to 1/4 the area of everything North of 80N.  Properly located I imaging that volume of extra ice would help stabilize the pack, reducing mobility.  Maybe stop the garlic press or reduce Fram export, who knows.  Further, 5000hp operating 200 days can draw said 1km3 20 vertical ft.  How much distribution could be coerced from gravity, gives an idea of how many pumps would be required...  Sea ice being relatively flat, especially this top-engineered type, lets let a pump flood an area of 200 km^2.  So we need 5000 1HP pumps for this exercise.   

Or maybe the experts can agree that strategically placed 2m enhancements on 50000 km^2 can help.  You are down to 500hp and maybe 250 sites.

Its ridiculous, sure, but not more than an order of magnitude out.

...but 1.0 KM3 would add 1 meter thickness to 1/4 the area of everything North of 80N.

Your numbers are off, badly.  1.0KM3 of ice would add 1M thickness to only 1000 square kilometers of sea surface.

I'm going to put it this way... we are wasting our time with these arguments - including the one talking about damming the Fram - unless the folks doing it put up numbers which address the forces involved and resources required to implement the solutions being spoken of.  Without that, you are indulging in wishful thinking of the worst kind, which offers the suggestion that some sort of magical solution will cause the problem to go away.

Regarding the Fram - do you have any idea of the scale of force that would be applied to a 100 KM long barrier to prevent ice flow?  Do you have any idea of what sorts of forces materials would need to be engineered to to resist that force?  What scale of logistical support would be required to emplace that?  How long would the work take?  How would it be carried out in the dead of winter?  In the face of 960HPA cyclonic bombs churning up the straight?

A 1 HP pump flooding an area of 200KM2?!  That can't even keep my basement dry, much less build 1/5th of a KM3 of sea ice.  Let's start with how you design it, along with its power supply, and make it robust enough to operate and efficiently distribute billions of gallons of sea water such that it doesn't just get locked into its own ice cube.  Then, how do you get it there, and in a timely fashion? What do you do when it fails and requires repair? What happens *when* the ice fractures - does the sea water just flow back into the ocean?  I could go on ad nauseum, but blast it, I shouldn't *have* to because of just how immensely foolish these ideas are.

I refuse to accept any argument for these things which doesn't include numbers to address scale, reliability and emplacement of the solution.  If you do, you'd better do a lot better than what's been posted so far.

Nonsense, all of it.
This space for Rent.

Tigertown

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1251
    • View Profile
Re: 2017 open thread
« Reply #54 on: February 27, 2017, 04:59:40 AM »
Nonsense, all of it.

If only one had more wisdom and foresight to see the long-range outcome of what he does than the inventor of the internal combustion engine or of the first coal powered anything. Those people and the observers of their day, no doubt marveled at their accomplishments.

Cid_Yama

  • ASIF Lurker
  • Posts: 79
    • View Profile
    • The Post Peak Oil Historian
Re: 2017 open thread
« Reply #55 on: February 27, 2017, 05:51:27 AM »
The problem with this idea along with that of trying to pump seawater to the top of the ice to build it up, is both fail to understand the scale of resources and energy necessary to implement them.

Regarding the Fram - do you have any idea of the scale of force that would be applied to a 100 KM long barrier to prevent ice flow?  Do you have any idea of what sorts of forces materials would need to be engineered to to resist that force?  ?

I refuse to accept any argument for these things which doesn't include numbers to address scale, reliability and emplacement of the solution.  If you do, you'd better do a lot better than what's been posted so far.

Nonsense, all of it.

If the world is going to end on Tuesday, they want you showing up for work Monday morning.  Simple as that.

The average IQ is 100 regardless of social-economic status.  That is why we are witnessing Idiocracy vs Armageddon.

Maybe we could pump Brawndo onto the ice.  It has electrolytes.


Yes, it is unfortunate that between not being intelligent enough to grasp, not being educated enough to grasp, not wanting to grasp, too indoctrinated to grasp, it leaves only about 2% of the population that understands, and of those only a handful in a position to do anything about it.

So we get what we have.  Tell me, down deep, you didn't know it would eventually come to this.

You thought after high school it would be better, and yes, there were a higher concentration of you in college, which gave you hope.

Then you hit the real world.  Where morons have the right to vote, hold positions of power, have a vested interest in keeping the intelligent ones suppressed, and they outnumber you 50 to 1.  Did you really expect anything different?

       
« Last Edit: February 27, 2017, 05:57:39 AM by Cid_Yama »

jdallen

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2376
    • View Profile
Re: 2017 open thread
« Reply #56 on: February 27, 2017, 05:52:51 AM »
Nonsense, all of it.

If only one had more wisdom and foresight to see the long-range outcome of what he does than the inventor of the internal combustion engine or of the first coal powered anything. Those people and the observers of their day, no doubt marveled at their accomplishments.
There is truth in that, but there is also fallacy; those technologies transformed the world and in fact led to the innovations in science and technology we see now.

The key problem is, has been, and always will be, the failings of people - men and women who put their interests above that of everyone else around them, and ignore science either through malice or stupidity.

The internal combustion engine and coal-fired steam plant did not cause us harm, people did.
This space for Rent.

Tigertown

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1251
    • View Profile
Re: 2017 open thread
« Reply #57 on: February 27, 2017, 06:27:17 AM »
The internal combustion engine and coal-fired steam plant did not cause us harm, people did.
I can't argue with that. The same greed that led to this situation stands in the way of implementing all these technical solutions. Still, if these original inventors were alive today, they might feel a little remorse, just the same.

Peter Ellis

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 515
    • View Profile
Re: 2017 open thread
« Reply #58 on: February 27, 2017, 11:22:13 AM »
Sea ice being relatively flat, especially this top-engineered type, lets let a pump flood an area of 200 km^2. 

Justify that statement. It seems to me that the very first thing that will happen is that the water freezes solid in the pump's pipework and stops it pumping anything.  If you get round that problem, then it freezes as soon as it exits the pump and builds up a small "ice volcano" around the pump itself covering maybe a few tens of square metres if you're lucky. 

If you want to avoid that, kindly provide reasoning for how it will work. Some simple numbers:  If each pump floods a 200 km^2 area, that means each pump thickens ice for a radius of ~8km around the pump. Explain in detail how you you expect a thin layer of running water to flow ~8 km across the surface of the ice in ~-20 degree cold without immediately freezing solid. Write on both sides of the paper.

Christ.

Peter Ellis

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 515
    • View Profile
Re: 2017 open thread
« Reply #59 on: February 27, 2017, 11:23:19 AM »
The same greed that led to this situation stands in the way of implementing all these technical solutions.
No, physics does, and it has the casting vote.

CognitiveBias

  • ASIF Lurker
  • Posts: 83
    • View Profile
Re: 2017 open thread
« Reply #60 on: February 27, 2017, 12:55:46 PM »
Yeah, I started with 1000 km3 and ended with 1km3.... 3 orders of magnitude but who's counting.  If not for that the engineering challenges would be worth the hypothetical conversation.

be cause

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 150
  • Citizenship .. a Lurker gets asylum
    • View Profile
Re: 2017 open thread
« Reply #61 on: February 27, 2017, 01:24:42 PM »
thanks Peter for a little common sense .. perhaps adding anti-freeze might be a solution ? :)
be the cause of only good
and love all beings as you should
and the 'God' of all Creation
will .. through you .. transform all nations :)

gerontocrat

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 274
    • View Profile
Re: 2017 open thread
« Reply #62 on: February 27, 2017, 01:30:29 PM »
If my memory serves me right, the PIOMAS people say that average loss of sea ice volume per year has been just under 300 km3. The energy used to do this is nearly equivalent to the entire energy output of the USA ?

Reversing sea ice decline surely requires taking vast amounts of energy out of the biosphere, not throwing more energy into the system. Switching to renewable energy reduces excess heat build up by reducing build up of atmospheric CO2 ? At least a start, and the technology is proven and can be installed relatively quickly.

I cannot see any way of reducing sea ice decline without reducing atmospheric CO2 concentrations. The geo-engineering proposals I have seen reek of the arrogant assumption that we can control the biosphere and the entire web of life on this planet. Beware the law of unintended  consequences.


dnem

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 109
    • View Profile
Re: 2017 open thread
« Reply #63 on: February 27, 2017, 01:34:26 PM »
This windmill pumping thing is published in the AGU open source journal Earth's Future:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000410/full

There are 14 authors.  I know that all sorts of worthless crap makes it through peer review and into the literature, but still, it strikes me as condescending that some of the sharpies here can dismiss it as if the authors literally never even thought of the issues they are raising.

That said, their description of how they plan to distribute liquid water across the freezing zone for each windmill is pretty thin:
"and many of the issues associated with storing and distributing liquid water during the Arctic winter are similar to the problems associated with supplying drinking water in high-arctic communities in the winter, such as the need for heated/insulated storage tanks and distribution systems (http://sciencenordic.com/arctic-town-has-running-water-just-four-months-year, 5 Oct. 2016)."

Obviously this nutty thing will never get built, but I don't think anyone does him or herself any credit by dismissing and condescending to 14 authors published in a peer-reviewed AGU journal.


be cause

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 150
  • Citizenship .. a Lurker gets asylum
    • View Profile
Re: 2017 open thread
« Reply #64 on: February 27, 2017, 03:43:43 PM »
surely calling nonsense what it is should be welcome on any thread , but especially on an 'open thread' ? If there is a solution to Arctic Ice loss I have not read it here .. no matter how many peers have reviewed whatever . Prayer would more likely result in the desired outcome .. bc
be the cause of only good
and love all beings as you should
and the 'God' of all Creation
will .. through you .. transform all nations :)

Tigertown

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1251
    • View Profile
Re: 2017 open thread
« Reply #65 on: February 27, 2017, 03:47:37 PM »
The same greed that led to this situation stands in the way of implementing all these technical solutions.
No, physics does, and it has the casting vote.

Obviously, anything that someone dreamed up, like dams or pumps or whatever, if these did what  was expected, would only serve as a stopgap. The underlying problems would continue.

dnem

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 109
    • View Profile
Re: 2017 open thread
« Reply #66 on: February 27, 2017, 04:00:31 PM »
Sure it's nonsense. And of course it wouldn't solve humanity's problems even if it could be built.  I just find it disrespectful to suggest that the authors' didn't even consider that gee, pumped water might freeze in the arctic.

Peter Ellis

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 515
    • View Profile
Re: 2017 open thread
« Reply #67 on: February 27, 2017, 04:35:50 PM »
Sure it's nonsense. And of course it wouldn't solve humanity's problems even if it could be built.  I just find it disrespectful to suggest that the authors' didn't even consider that gee, pumped water might freeze in the arctic.
Did you read the same paper I just did?  They explicitly didn't consider distribution, only the steel necessary to make a giant turbine and the buoy required to float it.

DrTskoul

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 766
    • View Profile
Re: 2017 open thread
« Reply #68 on: February 27, 2017, 04:57:10 PM »
My job is scale up and commercialization of novel processes.  You would be surprised how many times in the early development people don't pay attention to some critical showstopper that manifest themselves upon scale up....and how many showstoppers appear not with the main process but with the auxiliary functions, with location, raw materials, and weather.
“You can know the name of a bird in all the languages of the world, but when you're finished, you'll know absolutely nothing whatever about the bird... So let's look at the bird and see what it's doing -- that's what counts.”
― Richard P. Feynman

magnamentis

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 907
    • View Profile
    • Nexpaq Modular ARA iOS Software Mobile Computing Phones Philosophy Ethics Numerology Mikrocirkulation Vaskular Therapie Gesundheit Blut Gesundheit Schmerzen Multipelsklerose Diabetes Immunsystem Fibromyalgie
Re: 2017 open thread
« Reply #69 on: February 27, 2017, 05:08:38 PM »
The internal combustion engine and coal-fired steam plant did not cause us harm, people did.
I can't argue with that. The same greed that led to this situation stands in the way of implementing all these technical solutions. Still, if these original inventors were alive today, they might feel a little remorse, just the same.

hope i can say that right. let's take one "technical solution" as an example and i want to stress here that i'm not against that or anything that means progress (improvement), just want to grow the angle a bit, hope it's welcome :-)

let's take electricity & batteries as that example:

IMO if development continues as is now and nothing totally different and much better will come up VERY SOON
we shall end up in other but by no means less grave problems due to resources needed and several kinds of pollution that comes with the current technology that should replace ICE and other fossil fuel consuming stuff.

batteries are for now a good thing and electric is better and more efficient than burning carbon but it's not a solution, it's only a workaround that has to be followed by even better, even more efficient technologies while
the one and only real solution is on the consumer side and not on the power providing side.

this means, insulation, reduce waste (efficiency to no end) repairing things instead of throwing them away to be replaced.

a very good example would be a smart watch. just imagine, i have watches (great ones at that) that are up to 40 years old, look like new and work like new, and now the want us to throw it away after 1-3 years to be replaced with a similar or identical looking one just with more powerful innards.

best cars are not new ones but still people want a new one for gadgets noone needs and that cause trouble soon while the main driver is to show off to the public.

that's where the "SOLUTIONS" lay. every source of energy and the hardware needed to provide it in usable form to the greater public will destroy this planet in one or another form.

i wrote this because one main reason why things take often such bad turns at the end, is that inventions are "glorified in an early stage" while we should learn from history that there is always a downsides and there is no perpetuum mobile, hence it would be wise to think about ALL the consequences in that early stage and not once the masses depend on or are addicted to certain things. Now would be the time to consider the consequences of all electric driving and battery powered everything, not in 50 or 100 years when they start shooting for rare earth reswources the way they did and do for oil.
http://magnamentis.com
Knowledge, Understanding & Insight Are Among The Best Sources For Personal Freedom & Vitality !

dnem

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 109
    • View Profile
Re: 2017 open thread
« Reply #70 on: February 27, 2017, 05:09:11 PM »
I skimmed it Peter.  This is not really even worth debating as I agree that it's a cockamamie scheme.  But you say "Justify that statement. It seems to me that the very first thing that will happen is that the water freezes solid in the pump's pipework and stops it pumping anything.  If you get round that problem, then it freezes as soon as it exits the pump and builds up a small "ice volcano" around the pump itself covering maybe a few tens of square metres if you're lucky."

As I said above, they offer (and I admit thinly) "and many of the issues associated with storing and distributing liquid water during the Arctic winter are similar to the problems associated with supplying drinking water in high-arctic communities in the winter, such as the need for heated/insulated storage tanks and distribution systems."

It's woefully underdeveloped and maybe it does not meet your definition of "explicit" but they obviously know that you need to store and move liquid water across space to make this work.  They know that a frozen up pump and a small ice volcano ain't going to cut it.  Saying that's what they are proposing is not justified IMO.  I think we can be respectful in our critiques w/o resorting to dismissive hyperbole.

Enough of this now.  No one is building this nonsense nor should they.

Jim Williams

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 373
    • View Profile
Re: 2017 open thread
« Reply #71 on: February 27, 2017, 05:27:15 PM »
that's where the "SOLUTIONS" lay. every source of energy and the hardware needed to provide it in usable form to the greater public will destroy this planet in one or another form.

I have to wonder, solutions to what?  The very fact we are increasing the surface temperature of this planet means that we are causing a local decrease in entropy.  We are capturing more of the Sun's energy as it passes the planet than before.  The problem is that this is probably unsustainable -- and also probably meaningless in Universal terms.  Whether it kills off all carbon lifeforms is beside the point.


magnamentis

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 907
    • View Profile
    • Nexpaq Modular ARA iOS Software Mobile Computing Phones Philosophy Ethics Numerology Mikrocirkulation Vaskular Therapie Gesundheit Blut Gesundheit Schmerzen Multipelsklerose Diabetes Immunsystem Fibromyalgie
Re: 2017 open thread
« Reply #72 on: February 27, 2017, 05:57:53 PM »
that's where the "SOLUTIONS" lay. every source of energy and the hardware needed to provide it in usable form to the greater public will destroy this planet in one or another form.

I have to wonder, solutions to what?  The very fact we are increasing the surface temperature of this planet means that we are causing a local decrease in entropy.  We are capturing more of the Sun's energy as it passes the planet than before.  The problem is that this is probably unsustainable -- and also probably meaningless in Universal terms.  Whether it kills off all carbon lifeforms is beside the point.

solution is meant as to end exploitation of resources and destruction of natural systems in ways that for a relatively short period would provide subjective benefits but ultimately come with a catastrophic price tag.

as to meaningless in universal terms you're right because we are not that important after all that it would matter in the very long run but still we should do our best and replace greed and other lower instincts with ethics and wisdom, meaning less or not, because not even that we really know for sure, so better be prudent than sorry.
http://magnamentis.com
Knowledge, Understanding & Insight Are Among The Best Sources For Personal Freedom & Vitality !

Forest Dweller

  • ASIF Lurker
  • Posts: 6
    • View Profile
Re: 2017 open thread
« Reply #73 on: February 27, 2017, 07:20:14 PM »
"We" discuss problems and solutions from a limited perspective i fear.
"We" overpopulate, pollute, and warm the planet.
"We" think of techno fixes which fall short and bring new dillemas.
"We" discuss the elite etc etc.

Do we really?
No, not those of us who have remained outside of industrial society, and arguably to a lesser degree agrarian society.
And that would be some staggering percentage, like 99.9% of anything that has ever lived on Earth.
Yet "we"can't even see their fine example, we destroy them as well and choose for over complication and denial.
Like knowing you took a wrong turn in the road and are heading off course but imagine finding a hitherto unknown new path that will magically lead to your destination.

It is quit obvious we need to get rid of industrial society, go back where you took the wrong turn.
"But you would have us all be cavemen again and we would not live past 35 years old!"
That would be the usual reply, which is nonsense as is clearly visible in hunter gatherers today still.
One needs not copy their customs, clothing, attire or language, and yes they do grow old too.

What is their nature, what is it they do?
They occupy themselves looking after primary needs and culture.
They don't require exponential destruction and depletion of environment.
Industrial society however can do nothing else, that is it's nature.


magnamentis

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 907
    • View Profile
    • Nexpaq Modular ARA iOS Software Mobile Computing Phones Philosophy Ethics Numerology Mikrocirkulation Vaskular Therapie Gesundheit Blut Gesundheit Schmerzen Multipelsklerose Diabetes Immunsystem Fibromyalgie
Re: 2017 open thread
« Reply #74 on: February 27, 2017, 07:24:26 PM »
"We" discuss problems and solutions from a limited perspective i fear.
"We" overpopulate, pollute, and warm the planet.
"We" think of techno fixes which fall short and bring new dillemas.
"We" discuss the elite etc etc.

Do we really?
No, not those of us who have remained outside of industrial society, and arguably to a lesser degree agrarian society.
And that would be some staggering percentage, like 99.9% of anything that has ever lived on Earth.
Yet "we"can't even see their fine example, we destroy them as well and choose for over complication and denial.
Like knowing you took a wrong turn in the road and are heading off course but imagine finding a hitherto unknown new path that will magically lead to your destination.

It is quit obvious we need to get rid of industrial society, go back where you took the wrong turn.
"But you would have us all be cavemen again and we would not live past 35 years old!"
That would be the usual reply, which is nonsense as is clearly visible in hunter gatherers today still.
One needs not copy their customs, clothing, attire or language, and yes they do grow old too.

What is their nature, what is it they do?
They occupy themselves looking after primary needs and culture.
They don't require exponential destruction and depletion of environment.
Industrial society however can do nothing else, that is it's nature.

well said +1
http://magnamentis.com
Knowledge, Understanding & Insight Are Among The Best Sources For Personal Freedom & Vitality !

CognitiveBias

  • ASIF Lurker
  • Posts: 83
    • View Profile
Re: 2017 open thread
« Reply #75 on: February 27, 2017, 11:56:17 PM »
"We" discuss problems and solutions from a limited perspective i fear.
"We" overpopulate, pollute, and warm the planet.
"We" think of techno fixes which fall short and bring new dillemas.
"We" discuss the elite etc etc.

Do we really?
No, not those of us who have remained outside of industrial society, and arguably to a lesser degree agrarian society.
And that would be some staggering percentage, like 99.9% of anything that has ever lived on Earth.
Yet "we"can't even see their fine example, we destroy them as well and choose for over complication and denial.
Like knowing you took a wrong turn in the road and are heading off course but imagine finding a hitherto unknown new path that will magically lead to your destination.

It is quit obvious we need to get rid of industrial society, go back where you took the wrong turn.
"But you would have us all be cavemen again and we would not live past 35 years old!"
That would be the usual reply, which is nonsense as is clearly visible in hunter gatherers today still.
One needs not copy their customs, clothing, attire or language, and yes they do grow old too.

What is their nature, what is it they do?
They occupy themselves looking after primary needs and culture.
They don't require exponential destruction and depletion of environment.
Industrial society however can do nothing else, that is it's nature.

The primary benefit of hunter/gatherer lifestyle is the de facto limit on density.  We broke from that limit with agriculture, some 6000 years ago.  Further density of human population comes from that industrial society you decry. 

Your touted primitive lifestyle is not in fact a fix for overuse of natural resources.  A good read perhaps is Jared Diamond's Collapse:  How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed.  You will find examples of pre-industrial ecological catastrophes.

Of course we can solve all the problems by limiting humankind to a small percentage of our current population.  Implementation may be a bit tricky.

No.  The future is forward, not backwards, however frightening that may be.

DrTskoul

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 766
    • View Profile
Re: 2017 open thread
« Reply #76 on: February 28, 2017, 12:03:49 AM »
that's where the "SOLUTIONS" lay. every source of energy and the hardware needed to provide it in usable form to the greater public will destroy this planet in one or another form.

I have to wonder, solutions to what?  The very fact we are increasing the surface temperature of this planet means that we are causing a local decrease in entropy.  We are capturing more of the Sun's energy as it passes the planet than before.  The problem is that this is probably unsustainable -- and also probably meaningless in Universal terms.  Whether it kills off all carbon lifeforms is beside the point.

If heat is increasing there is no reduction in entropy. increased heat increased kinetic energy increased disorder
“You can know the name of a bird in all the languages of the world, but when you're finished, you'll know absolutely nothing whatever about the bird... So let's look at the bird and see what it's doing -- that's what counts.”
― Richard P. Feynman

magnamentis

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 907
    • View Profile
    • Nexpaq Modular ARA iOS Software Mobile Computing Phones Philosophy Ethics Numerology Mikrocirkulation Vaskular Therapie Gesundheit Blut Gesundheit Schmerzen Multipelsklerose Diabetes Immunsystem Fibromyalgie
Re: 2017 open thread
« Reply #77 on: February 28, 2017, 12:40:34 AM »
a lot of interesting stuff (views and opinions) here lately, go on like this, every post contains information worth to consider and ponder over, even though the result for now mostly seems like ufff.... no way to get out of this apparently, but who knows :-) always stay positive until the S hits the fan
http://magnamentis.com
Knowledge, Understanding & Insight Are Among The Best Sources For Personal Freedom & Vitality !

5to10

  • ASIF Lurker
  • Posts: 97
    • View Profile
Re: 2017 open thread
« Reply #78 on: February 28, 2017, 01:01:57 AM »
For any chance of salvation, anyone aware who cares to try must make as many individual reporters/editors in newsmedia acutely aware of their position and influence in the current situation.

There is no other place we can start than a news-media paradigm shift, unity in news-media which strives for unity in global consciousness behind a clear purpose.

It is futile to discuss solutions until you figure out the issue of "How do we stop the bullshit machine from deluding and distracting, and instead have it focus on raising awareness and focusing global consciousness?"

The awareness of the individuals, the human beings who COMPOSE the untouchable, inhuman beast that is news-media must be raised now.
« Last Edit: February 28, 2017, 01:22:36 AM by 5to10 »

5to10

  • ASIF Lurker
  • Posts: 97
    • View Profile
Re: 2017 open thread
« Reply #79 on: February 28, 2017, 01:02:50 AM »
That is they must be acutely aware that *any chance of salvation* starts with them as individuals and as such a collective.

"Now that you see the truth clearly, your continued inaction shall be heretofore morally reprehensible within your own mind."

The most likely moral choice for the good (of which I think their numbers are far greater) will be to talk amongst themselves and stop reporting on that which does not matter. Mass non-compliance will lead to heightened global awareness here.

This critically wounds or kills one aspect of the beast (the current state of newsmedia) which is step 1 before any impactful change.
« Last Edit: February 28, 2017, 01:27:52 AM by 5to10 »

Tigertown

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1251
    • View Profile
Re: 2017 open thread
« Reply #80 on: February 28, 2017, 01:28:29 AM »
Do not put your trust in princes; Nor in a son of man, who cannot offer salvation.
                                                                                                       
                                                                                                         King David

5to10

  • ASIF Lurker
  • Posts: 97
    • View Profile
Re: 2017 open thread
« Reply #81 on: February 28, 2017, 01:41:04 AM »
Do not put your trust in princes; Nor in a son of man, who cannot offer salvation.
                                                                                                       
                                                                                                         King David

If you want to bring the bible into it, the position we are in now mirrors much of revelations from a figurative perspective, and salvation from our dire situation will come, followed by 1000 years of peace, so that quote is inapplicable.

I live with devout Christians who take the bible somewhat literally, I had the idea of reading it and seeing if there were figurative parallels to our present situation. I am also openminded and spiritual and accept parts of many religions/ideologies as being rational and perhaps truthful, just deeply figurative. I will accept and promote parts of Christianity which are sensible documentations of truth (Do unto others, for an easy example), and not the bits which are clearly man-made, self-serving (for the writer) literature.

In revelations, preceding armageddon is a thousand year period of peace, after which Satan returns to delude and deceive nations again, which is what appears to precede full on armageddon.

In the present (according to my figurative interpretation), people worship "the beast". they say "How can the beast be challenged? How powerful it is!" which is exactly what people say about government and big media.

Most are deceived. The mark of the beast on the forehead or the hand: The dim light of TV's and computer screens, the cell phones in our hands where we interact with "the beast".

In fact the figurative language of the bible would mirror the idea i have laid out: The aspect of the beast which speaks for it is critically wounded, the prostitute which rides the beast (human indulgence, at its core) burns as the beast looks on in horror and the merchants woe their inability to sell their gold, silver (indulgences) and the like. If the majority of mankind unites now, surely they will realize they must stop seeking such indulgences from "the merchants".

Someone attacks the beast with a sword from their mouth (the written or spoken word) and the beast strikes back but is felled, after which that individual leads humanity into something of a golden era of peace for 1000 years.


I thought of this "make the reporters acutely aware" idea naturally, before looking at revelations today and saw that it would seem to mirror the idea of taking on "the beast" by way of striking at news-media first, all a precursor to this supposed 1000 years of peace.

All of the "1/3rd of the seas die, 1/3rd of the land animals" etc etc. happen prior to the beast being felled, so the current state of the world somewhat mirrors that as well. Figuratively, the story within revelations is quite easily applied to our present state and the recent events preceding it, it was quite uncanny and I was honestly surprised (Other examples off the top of my head include the "horses" of the armies which shoot flame out the front but are also injurious from the rear - tanks and warships, kill with projectiles in front (the obvious) and exhaust emissions in the back [the less obvious but also injurious]. It describes "the beast" as looking like a leopard, with the feet of a bear and the mouth of a lion - a leopards camoflauge is its signature, it's hard to see.. A bears feet are destructive, it levels the earth it treads. A lions roar is unmistakeable, it captures the attention.)

In any event, according to Revelations (And I can't see why self-proclaimed Christians don't get this), this cannot be armageddon because we haven't had a 1000 year period of peace. What Revelations means for the vast majority of them is pain and suffering for their blind indulgence and piety to "the beast".



While I know this is very unscientific by todays standards, let's remember here that the great minds of old were not afraid to, and in fact sought to consider spirituality along with scientific method. By doing so this morning I again was blown away by the stark parallels within an ancient book.
« Last Edit: February 28, 2017, 02:04:58 AM by 5to10 »

Tigertown

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1251
    • View Profile
Re: 2017 open thread
« Reply #82 on: February 28, 2017, 03:30:57 AM »
In the bible, beast are used to represent kingdoms and governments. The number seven always represents completeness or perfection. Therefore six represents something that comes up short or is imperfect. Repeating the six three times for emphasis shows just how imperfect the human political system has been. The book of Daniel which goes into much detail about governments, explains at 2:44 that," In the days of those kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be destroyed. And this kingdom will not be passed on to any other people. It will crush and put an end to all these kingdoms, and it alone will stand forever."
Part of Armageddon involves God "bringing to ruin those ruining the Earth." Rev. 11:18
After this war of Armageddon, the 1000 years begins, not before.

CognitiveBias

  • ASIF Lurker
  • Posts: 83
    • View Profile
Re: 2017 open thread
« Reply #83 on: February 28, 2017, 03:47:14 AM »
Maybe a plague of locusts will blot out the sun...

jdallen

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2376
    • View Profile
Re: 2017 open thread
« Reply #84 on: February 28, 2017, 06:24:55 AM »
<wry look>
Can we at least get back to the *pretense* of a discussion about the Arctic?
This space for Rent.

epiphyte

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 307
    • View Profile
Re: 2017 open thread
« Reply #85 on: February 28, 2017, 06:29:42 AM »
Trying to be brief here...

5to10 - There is no conspiracy here beyond unenlightened self-interest. Which is to say, greed coupled with stupidity coupled with egocentricity and narcissism . The energy oligarchs aren't motivated by the prospect of watching the world burn. They just aren't wired to connect the dots between what they do now and bad things happening in their own future.

If they were born poor they would be the people setting up meth labs in their own apartments, oblivious to the fact that  the inevitable consequences range from bad (they stink up the building and end up in jail), to terminal (they blow-up themselves and everyone around them).

The only way to win with such people is to convince them that they will be getting the better of you if they do what you want them to do. E.g. If you know that they think that the sooner all the ice melts, the more money they can make, and you know (hypothetically) that smashing the ice-cover to fragments in mid-December will actually make it thicker in April, then you push for them to bomb the crap out of the whole arctic in mid-December, on the public justification that it will prevent moslem insurgents from ice-sailing into Alaska under cover of darkness, whilst whispering into their ears that the real purpose is to make it easier to move the drilling rigs in.





Tigertown

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1251
    • View Profile
Re: 2017 open thread
« Reply #86 on: February 28, 2017, 06:31:54 AM »
I just saw a clip where a clown named Tucker Carlson on Fox news put Bill Nye through the ringer. He kept screaming that people who claim humans are responsible for climate change are closed minded and won't listen to the other side. Funny thing is Bill Nye was calm and the Fox guy was all upset and antagonistic. Everytime Bill Nye starting talking, he was interrupted. The words railroaded, buffaloed, and ambushed come to mind.

Ranman99

  • ASIF Lurker
  • Posts: 5
    • View Profile
Re: 2017 open thread
« Reply #87 on: February 28, 2017, 07:12:42 AM »
It won't help but ... if I view the Yin Yang symbol as duality and my sense of existing/being is the edge of the circle. What is outside of the circle is true, infinite and unborn and the context for what is inside to arise in. What is inside is the play.

It does not mean "I" don't do something "I" will always do something ::) Sorry just babbling as usual.

Nothing like immanent crises to bring focus.
Randy Fitton

Gray-Wolf

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 569
    • View Profile
Re: 2017 open thread
« Reply #88 on: February 28, 2017, 10:25:23 AM »
Sometimes , as a child, I'd make something up that scared me. Occasionally I'd then begin to see things around me that appeared to confirm my fears....

The folk who name us 'catastrophists and doomsayers' appear to believe their own rants and search out any small thing that appears to support their claims?

They demand the extreme conclusions are fanciful but stay close to the most conservative conclusion they can find ( generally the IPCC report prior to the new one) and demand all new knowledge wrong because the old reports were right.

What is needed ( IMHO) is the 'slap in the face' that they cannot ignore and allows them to realise how far from the reality they have become. The Arctic is capable of delivering such a 'slap' by showing them an unequivocal 'Ice Free' ocean quickly followed by the climate discord that such extra energy in the system drives ( above and beyond what we have been seeing?).

Sadly some of the WACCy weather is now being melded into some odd 'Axial' imbalance of the PV leading to it being 'off centre' and so causing Polar Plunges across the states. They cite the limited cold plunges in the U.S. this winter V's the cold in Europe and plunges into the Med/Africa as 'proof positive'.....

With long and good data on the impacts of low sea ice hard to ignore why would you ignore it unless it was essential that nothing you say involves AGW?

Again it means the 'Lurkers' have two different reasons for what is happening and are left to chose which to believe.
KOYAANISQATSI

ko.yaa.nis.katsi (from the Hopi language), n. 1. crazy life. 2. life in turmoil. 3. life disintegrating. 4. life out of balance. 5. a state of life that calls for another way of living.
 
VIRESCIT VULNERE VIRTUS

Jim Hunt

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 3031
    • View Profile
    • The Arctic sea ice Great White Con
Re: 2017 open thread
« Reply #89 on: February 28, 2017, 10:59:01 AM »
<wry look>
Can we at least get back to the *pretense* of a discussion about the Arctic?


This is the "Open Thread" though JD!

Snow White's very good friend Alice has been researching the psychology of denialism. Here are some of her preliminary results:

http://AFWetware.org/why-its-so-hard-to-convince-pseudo-skeptics/

You may also be interested to read all about ongoing  "censorship" at Twitter?

https://twitter.com/AF_Wetware/status/836174559816597507
Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one - Albert Einstein

Jim Williams

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 373
    • View Profile
Re: 2017 open thread
« Reply #90 on: February 28, 2017, 01:52:26 PM »
that's where the "SOLUTIONS" lay. every source of energy and the hardware needed to provide it in usable form to the greater public will destroy this planet in one or another form.

I have to wonder, solutions to what?  The very fact we are increasing the surface temperature of this planet means that we are causing a local decrease in entropy.  We are capturing more of the Sun's energy as it passes the planet than before.  The problem is that this is probably unsustainable -- and also probably meaningless in Universal terms.  Whether it kills off all carbon lifeforms is beside the point.

If heat is increasing there is no reduction in entropy. increased heat increased kinetic energy increased disorder

Of course there is no decrease in entropy, but that isn't what I said.  I very specifically said a local decrease in entropy.

dnem

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 109
    • View Profile
Re: 2017 open thread
« Reply #91 on: February 28, 2017, 02:12:38 PM »
5to10 your passion and concern is admirable.  I think your focus on the media has some merit.  While I do not believe the corporate hegemony are all "in on it" and that they all know we are are on path to destruction, they are obviously all united to keep The Machine rolling along, the media included.  The great challenge in front of humanity is figuring out how to unwind the machine without causing catastrophic disruption along the way.  The global economy/fiscal architecture is utterly dependent on growth and, as currently structured, will become highly unstable without it, making a transition to a post-growth world highly fraught.  We need to engineer a soft landing.

Try to imagine this story running on a MSM outlet at Christmas time: "Brothers and sisters, unnecessary holiday shopping was successfully reduced by 8% this season, while national measures of health and wellness continued to increase.  We all look forward to even greater reductions in meaningless consumption in the coming year!"

Yeah, we got some work to do.




6roucho

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 270
  • Finance geek
    • View Profile
Re: 2017 open thread
« Reply #92 on: February 28, 2017, 02:13:08 PM »
Nonsense, all of it.

If only one had more wisdom and foresight to see the long-range outcome of what he does than the inventor of the internal combustion engine or of the first coal powered anything. Those people and the observers of their day, no doubt marveled at their accomplishments.
There is truth in that, but there is also fallacy; those technologies transformed the world and in fact led to the innovations in science and technology we see now.

The key problem is, has been, and always will be, the failings of people - men and women who put their interests above that of everyone else around them, and ignore science either through malice or stupidity.

The internal combustion engine and coal-fired steam plant did not cause us harm, people did.
Specifically, a cultural inability to act wisely. Even when we knew what the risks were, we failed to mitigate those risks, because that involves costs.

At the risk of sounding authoritarian [which I'm not] it's a problem with democracies. A benevolent and sufficiently intelligent dictatorship would be better equipped to handle long-term existential risk.

Democracies will always be at the mercy of the electoral cycle, and the political attention span of humans, whose average IQ is 100, and whose average main nerve terminates in the hip pocket.

dnem

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 109
    • View Profile
Re: 2017 open thread
« Reply #93 on: February 28, 2017, 02:19:16 PM »

...and whose average main nerve terminates in the hip pocket.
[/quote]

Which is why we need to change the zeitgeist to recognizing that true well-being is not defined by material consumption.  Indeed there is a lot of research that shows that life satisfaction and wealth are only correlated until a person meets his or her basic needs and then excess wealth becomes uncorrelated with life satisfaction.

gerontocrat

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 274
    • View Profile
Re: 2017 open thread
« Reply #94 on: February 28, 2017, 02:47:03 PM »
Nonsense, all of it.

If only one had more wisdom and foresight to see the long-range outcome of what he does than the inventor of the internal combustion engine or of the first coal powered anything. Those people and the observers of their day, no doubt marveled at their accomplishments.
There is truth in that, but there is also fallacy; those technologies transformed the world and in fact led to the innovations in science and technology we see now.

The key problem is, has been, and always will be, the failings of people - men and women who put their interests above that of everyone else around them, and ignore science either through malice or stupidity.

The internal combustion engine and coal-fired steam plant did not cause us harm, people did.
Specifically, a cultural inability to act wisely. Even when we knew what the risks were, we failed to mitigate those risks, because that involves costs.

At the risk of sounding authoritarian [which I'm not] it's a problem with democracies. A benevolent and sufficiently intelligent dictatorship would be better equipped to handle long-term existential risk.

Democracies will always be at the mercy of the electoral cycle, and the political attention span of humans, whose average IQ is 100, and whose average main nerve terminates in the hip pocket.

gerontocrat

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 274
    • View Profile
Re: 2017 open thread
« Reply #95 on: February 28, 2017, 02:49:57 PM »
I have lived and worked in many countries either in or exiting from dictatorships.  I failed to find one either intelligent or benevolent.

Forest Dweller

  • ASIF Lurker
  • Posts: 6
    • View Profile
Re: 2017 open thread
« Reply #96 on: February 28, 2017, 04:46:27 PM »
"We" discuss problems and solutions from a limited perspective i fear.
"We" overpopulate, pollute, and warm the planet.
"We" think of techno fixes which fall short and bring new dillemas.
"We" discuss the elite etc etc.

Do we really?
No, not those of us who have remained outside of industrial society, and arguably to a lesser degree agrarian society.
And that would be some staggering percentage, like 99.9% of anything that has ever lived on Earth.
Yet "we"can't even see their fine example, we destroy them as well and choose for over complication and denial.
Like knowing you took a wrong turn in the road and are heading off course but imagine finding a hitherto unknown new path that will magically lead to your destination.

It is quit obvious we need to get rid of industrial society, go back where you took the wrong turn.
"But you would have us all be cavemen again and we would not live past 35 years old!"
That would be the usual reply, which is nonsense as is clearly visible in hunter gatherers today still.
One needs not copy their customs, clothing, attire or language, and yes they do grow old too.

What is their nature, what is it they do?
They occupy themselves looking after primary needs and culture.
They don't require exponential destruction and depletion of environment.
Industrial society however can do nothing else, that is it's nature.

The primary benefit of hunter/gatherer lifestyle is the de facto limit on density.  We broke from that limit with agriculture, some 6000 years ago.  Further density of human population comes from that industrial society you decry. 

Your touted primitive lifestyle is not in fact a fix for overuse of natural resources.  A good read perhaps is Jared Diamond's Collapse:  How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed.  You will find examples of pre-industrial ecological catastrophes.

Of course we can solve all the problems by limiting humankind to a small percentage of our current population.  Implementation may be a bit tricky.

No.  The future is forward, not backwards, however frightening that may be.

Which is why i made the point of:
a:not mistaking hunter-gatherers for extinct, they are not.
b:learning by example and moving forwards by adapting to it, and not copying behaviour literally from the past or present.
c: exploding population in humans directly resulting from industrialization, not vice versa.
 just as 90% of other problems we see. Warming, greenhouse gases for example is measured from a pre-industrial baseline for that reason as well of course.

dnem

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 109
    • View Profile
Re: 2017 open thread
« Reply #97 on: February 28, 2017, 05:59:03 PM »
In addition to considering the media's role in perpetuating the over-consumption economy in the developed world, you also need to realize that ~2 billion of our fellow earthlings live in complete poverty.  For them, the challenge is helping them skip over the consumption economy and move right into a balanced, post-growth and sustainable means of existence.

5to10

  • ASIF Lurker
  • Posts: 97
    • View Profile
Re: 2017 open thread
« Reply #98 on: February 28, 2017, 06:14:24 PM »
In addition to considering the media's role in perpetuating the over-consumption economy in the developed world, you also need to realize that ~2 billion of our fellow earthlings live in complete poverty.  For them, the challenge is helping them skip over the consumption economy and move right into a balanced, post-growth and sustainable means of existence.
THeir poverty is a result of inequity, which again is a result of differences in global consciousness, which are caused by newsmedia.

The main point is, news has to get their shit together

CognitiveBias

  • ASIF Lurker
  • Posts: 83
    • View Profile
Re: 2017 open thread
« Reply #99 on: February 28, 2017, 06:31:03 PM »
...
c: exploding population in humans directly resulting from industrialization, not vice versa.
 just as 90% of other problems we see. Warming, greenhouse gases for example is measured from a pre-industrial baseline for that reason as well of course.

My great-granddad travelled by horse. I travel further because I have a car that has 400 mile range on a tank of gas.  My problems:

1) I'm 400 miles from home and out of gas
2) I don't know my way around in this unfamiliar place
3) I'm hungry


It's the car's fault?  Or as my 13 yr-old would say 'Logic much, brah?'