posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 05:34 PM
Global warming. Presented as scary and dangerous stuff. For which of course, we are to blame. More specifically, it's a result of gasses which are by
products of many of our creations. "Bad human! You've defied nature and f'ed up again!" As if such a thing were possible...
Maybe things are a little different. Maybe a bit more logical... I posit...
I'm wondering if just maybe, HEAT may be why the planet is heating up... as opposed to certain gases produced by machines and other things;
particularly those which consume petroleum products. The human population and that of other, related, large mammals (cows) has grown exponentially in
the last... 10,000 years? For the most part due to two factors: simple procreation and increased life span. Human (mammals, etc) have but a few by
products: salt water of various compositions, poop, sound, and... (drum roll please...) HEAT! Humans also have a new found hobby. They create things
which simulate life. There are two processes which make these creations possible: burning stuff and electricity. These processes have an essential
characteristic in common... they produce HEAT. You may have noticed in recent history, that creations of this nature have drenched the world. I'm
sure you've seen the pictures of earth at night taken from orbit. That's a LOT of lights, all of which are producing heat. Not to mention every
other electrical device, combustion engines, etc...
So, take all the devices, etc. that we make, the animals we breed for food, pets, and whatever, and our own world population and you get heat being
generated at ridiculously unprecedented (so we think) levels. So which is more likely to be the cause of global warming: green house gases or HEAT?
Seems kinda silly to me that I even have to ask the question.
So what? Well, yes, I happen to have more to say about this... first of all, we are not destroying the planet. Altering it, yes, but not destroying
it. In fact we are nothing more than part of an on going cycle of heating and cooling which earth would go through regardless of our existence. Life
is (among other things) a counter weight to this process. ...Here comes the crazy #... at the frequency range we have been in, we are interpreted by
our minds to be as we are - kinda like hairless monkeys. Heat producing life forms to be sure. What we have come to believe were ice ages, are the
cold end of the heat/cool cycle. As the earth cools, more and more heat producing life emerges and slowly reverses the process. It is believed that
such life form changes occur through the process of evolution. I'll concede that possibly, early on, evolution may have driven the heat/cool cycle,
but tedium quickly gave way to a more efficient form of life. One that was reactive to changes in temperature/frequency. I say this not speaking of
individuals, but at least on the scale of species wide average, if not life as a whole. Humans (and all life I suspect) as a species, present
differently at higher (and lower i suspect) frequencies. As the frequency of humanity increases with global warming, a critical frequency begins to be
reached; first by those humans with the highest personal base frequencies. Now, why would such a limit exist? Why don't we just keep getting warmer
with no real change exept for eventual boiling points and the like? Well in order to preserve life and not reach boiling points would be one reason
life would do this. Furthermore, we are quite simply, part of the life cycle of earth as a whole - by definition. Heat producing life, the source of
the warming, self corrects. We begin to transform as we hit this critical frequency. Understand this is not an overnight process. While individuals
can transform over a lifetime, it's a very gradual process. What do we transform into? Cold-blooded life forms. Life alters itself to absorb heat
rather than produce it. Eventually (over thousands or millions of years), with the reduction of heat production, equilibrium is reached, cont'd: