What is Your Problem, Human Beings?

reply to post by kwakakev


I know no system is perfect ,this is no different I am certain that some PTB would come to the light if they knew there was a welcome for them somewhere ,we help junkies and and serial abusers and stray cats why not lost desperate PTB we need them to tell us stuff and they need a place to fall sounds like a win win to me

This Christmas Season Help a forgotten Illuminati!

reply to post by eMachine

"What would you have chosen to do with your life if you didn't have to worry about money?"

Past cultures did not have money, they had community, they still performed and learnt many things. Some of these things have been lost and faded in time. There are many relationships in this world. Listen to yourself and your community. Money has been important to help build the world we have today, to share resources and capabilities so we can follow our aspirations. Maybe one day money will gradually fade away when we have found an equilibrium where every need can be meet. At the moment we need it.

I have thought about a future of many possibilities. The one I like the most is where all ideas can contribute. The strength from so much peer review will greatly outperform what any one imagination can achieve.

reply to post by Amaterasu

Starred and fllagged!
You message, my good friend, is what people need and should hear especially this time of the year.
Peace to you and yours.

reply to post by Amaterasu


Here's what all that stuff requires. One single thing we could do to move to an idyllic sort of world that provides for our needs.

Ready for it?

Bated breath?

Edfe of your seats?

Abandon technological civilization.

Our current way of living depends exclusively on finite, ever-dwindling resources. As we advance our technologies, the need for those resources grows even larger, while we discover new needs for even more scant resources. The whole time we are filling the world up with little humans, who will also need to take a part of these finite resources.

As a result of this competition, we suffer wars, stresses, diseases, pollution, you name it, it all traces back here.

The only way out is to quit cold turkey. Technology can definitely improve human welfare, but it unfortunately provides diminishing returns. That is, there comes a point where technological advancement causes more harm to the species than it gives benefit. Technology for how to neatly separate flesh from bone was a massive benefit to us - technology that makes the plastic for milk jugs slightly more flexible, not so much.

Bottom line is, we're an animal. True, we're an animal that has managed to expand its habitat and lifespan quite a bit, but we're still one of the many critters on this planet. There's more than enough earth out there to give us food, shelter, and room for growth.

We just can't do this while shackled to our modern technological state and creature comforts.

Originally posted by TheWalkingFox
Our current way of living depends exclusively on finite, ever-dwindling resources. As we advance our technologies, the need for those resources grows even larger, while we discover new needs for even more scant resources. The whole time we are filling the world up with little humans, who will also need to take a part of these finite resources.

We are living on borrowed resources. At one point in time we lived off of what the Sun [SOL] provided, one day of sunlight provided one day of energy etc. One year of sunlight to grow food for us and our livestock etc. We were balanced with nature pretty much. We now have been tapping into an ancient FINITE sun reserves in the form of ancient sun energy stored in fossil fuels [Several million years worth of stored sun energy] We have based for the most part our entire civilization on that finite stored reserves.

Technology isn't a bad thing. We have just reached a certain level of advancement with it and plateaued IMO. We have become addicted to the cheaper more destructive forms of energy used and the life styles which demands more fresh water, fresh air not just to breath but to run our polluting gas guzzling internal combustion engines. Our cleaner power plants are destructive to aquatic life in the form of dams which prevent their migratory and spawning routes etc.

Technology isn't an answer in and of itself. Combine our more efficient cleaner technologies with a higher awareness of our place on Earth and we could sustain an even larger population comfortably without such a giant environmental footprint.

It's a choice. Remove greed and for profit and focus more on our true needs and not on what we want, that would be a great start. IMHO of course.

reply to post by Amaterasu


Spectacular presentation. Count me in.

I manage even with brain damage. I'm a little goofy but I'm conscious.

Every point you made in the OP is right on! Nice goin!

I'm already there. ------------------------------------>

My specialties and talents to the cause. Are we going to have a weekly meeting? Who's gonna chair? Not me, that's not my bag. I'm more into field work. I like to get my hands dirty.

We can do it...together.

Starblossom

P.S. I'm not a fanatic.

P.S.S. I'm not schitzo.

P.S.S. I am optimistic.

As for technological acceptance or rejection I see this as a cultural issue, both can coexist and both contribute to the diversity and understanding of life. The idea of a meeting does sound good, might help, not sure how?

Originally posted by SLAYER69
We are living on borrowed resources. At one point in time we lived off of what the Sun [SOL] provided, one day of sunlight provided one day of energy etc. One year of sunlight to grow food for us and our livestock etc. We were balanced with nature pretty much. We now have been tapping into an ancient FINITE sun reserves in the form of ancient sun energy stored in fossil fuels [Several million years worth of stored sun energy] We have based for the most part our entire civilization on that finite stored reserves.

And we're going to use up those resources eventually. And be assured, we're going to milk it to the last drop before we put serious thought into alternatives. It's just how we think; why should I work harder to do something, when I already have an easier way of doing it right now? And no, we're not going to have some sort of mystical age-of-Aquarius pyramid power opening of the evolutionary third eye when the devas come to teach us how to eat gold and not be douchebags, or whatever. This is what we're stuck with. We're going to hump the easy route until it's no longer there, then we're going to look of the next-easiest.

When we use up our current finite resources, it's going to be a literal hell on earth for several decades.

Technology isn't a bad thing. We have just reached a certain level of advancement with it and plateaued IMO. We have become addicted to the cheaper more destructive forms of energy used and the life styles which demands more fresh water, fresh air not just to breath but to run our polluting gas guzzling internal combustion engines. Our cleaner power plants are destructive to aquatic life in the form of dams which prevent their migratory and spawning routes etc.

Basically there's little we can do to sustain our current mode of lifestyle without shooting our species in the foot. The results of our lifestyle are pretty clear, but again, it's much easier to go with the flow than to alter course. The best course, in the interests of self-preservation, would just to be to halt what we're doing. Humans, in one variety or another, have existed just fine for about a million years without luxury sedans, cell phones, and mutant cows. And we'll probably still exist when these things no longer do. Our interest then, is to divorce ourselves from the current trajectory in the homes that future generations of our species don't have it so hard when hit the inevitable Luddite point.

Did I mention we're terrible at planning ahead in long terms? Our minds are configured to use long-term memory to assess the short-term future. You can draw on your lifetime of experience to judge your actions in the next five minutes, but using that lifetime of memories to plan ahead even a week is quite difficult for most of the population.

Technology isn't an answer in and of itself. Combine our more efficient cleaner technologies with a higher awareness of our place on Earth and we could sustain an even larger population comfortably without such a giant environmental footprint.

Our population is currently around seven billion. There is no technological answer that can meet the needs of that many people. This whole "green revolution?" It's nice, but on a global scale, it's garbage. There are just too many of us to make an actual impact with our inventions. We've been "fighting world hunger" since the end of world war 2. All that's happened is that population has exploded, making more hungry people.

Now, I'm not one of those wacky bastards that suggests a culling be in order or some stuff like that. However, population growth is the #1 problem facing us. This needs to be acknowledged. Disease? Hunger? Pollution? Resource wars? These are not individual problems, these are symptoms of a population that is bursting at the seams.

There is no patch. Driving hydrogen cars and recycling your beer cans isn't going to help, in the long run.

It's a choice. Remove greed and for profit and focus more on our true needs and not on what we want, that would be a great start. IMHO of course.

edit on 24-12-2010 by SLAYER69 because: (no reason given)

Remove greed and profit, and then what's the motive? Remember what I said about human mentality always taking the easiest route? We seek out minimal efforts that give maximum rewards, for ourselves as individuals. We're inherently greedy - most animals are. If people see no profit to be made, then their attitude becomes, "Why should I care?" This attitude is also seen if the profit is generational or indirect.

I stand by my case - we can either ditch our mode of civilization, or we can screw it into the ground. Either way it is going to go away. A voluntary surrender would end the best for us.

Originally posted by Amaterasu
Here your variety of Being construction sits with a window of opportunity open, where you, as a whole, have the chance to make it so that you may pursue the things in life that feed your bliss and not your fear, and actually END poverty – a thing that you falsely venerate as somehow spiritually beneficial (not seeing that it is to the bliss of Consciousness We must strive) – and make excuses that address the things you see as affecting tomorrow to avoid looking at, and then committing to, the logical goal.

Do you have interactive communications throughout the planet? You do. You can construct a central website where issues can be solved locally and upward via communication amongst those who care. Do you have the means to transport [anything] to anywhere on the planet if you had to – or wanted to? You do. This means that materials can be available for any problems that need solving. Do you have the technology to build machines (robots) to do what you do not want to do? You do. This means that ALL of you can be relieved of any toil you wish to unburden yourselves of. Do you desire to solve problems over profit if profit means nothing? You do. This means that in an emergent communications community, you will do what you can locally to choose the best solution over the most profitable, and activate upwards to globally if required. Do you grasp an organic existence as optimal? You do. This means that best solutions will always favor the planet and her ecosystem. Do you have energy from the Universe that surrounds you to run it all? You do.

This last you may doubt, but some of you have supported keeping this secret – and many of you have given oath to this secrecy, not seeing that when you give oath to an oath-breaker, your oath is meaningless. So though you see things, your silence is kept.

Meanwhile, there are those who conspire to kill off as many of all of you as possible. Things are not well with Corexit still sprayed in the gulf. Your planet has had many oil leaks it has handled in its past, and this hasty move to spray something you, as a whole, don’t understand, should suggest that it was in the works a while.

Do you have the spirit to take over your planet and make it a place that is blissful and without poverty before they succeed in reforming their slave population?

One might surely hope so.

reply to post by MrsBlonde


Yes, MrsB,

I know what my position is. It is to save people and to convince people that Jesus is true. Two things which might be different.

It is quite difficult.

The simple answer is we do not have the power to effect such change because we lack the unity in understanding and will to do so. Until that changes all we can do is keep educating and spreading the light and make the best of things as they are while we do. What did that old bumper sticker say; "Teach Peace"

reply to post by Amaterasu


My problem is this:

Not enough people are helping our brotherhood.

People are starving and we don't care.

GET OFF YOUR SMUG ARSE AND HELP FEED THE STARVING!

I am trying to shock people into caring.

Originally posted by TheWalkingFox
reply to post by Amaterasu

 

Here's what all that stuff requires. One single thing we could do to move to an idyllic sort of world that provides for our needs.

Ready for it?

Bated breath?

Edfe of your seats?

Abandon technological civilization.

Good luck with that. What we need is a concerted effort to apply all technology in peaceful and ecologically sound ways. Without technology, there is no way the city dwellers will access food. Without technology, aid and assistance will diminish. I think the technological genie is out of the bottle and we now need to address how we approach that tech.

Our current way of living depends exclusively on finite, ever-dwindling resources. As we advance our technologies, the need for those resources grows even larger, while we discover new needs for even more scant resources. The whole time we are filling the world up with little humans, who will also need to take a part of these finite resources.

What resources do you see as dwindling? The only ones crucial to our structure involve the production of energy - and with free energy, we WILL have no issues. You do know that we have transmuted lead into gold, right? It was found quite practical to do so, except that the energy involved made the gold cost millions of dollars an ounce. With free energy, we can create the basics we need.

As a result of this competition, we suffer wars, stresses, diseases, pollution, you name it, it all traces back here.

Say WHAT!?! As a result of efforts to delude us do we go to war. It has nothing to do with "competition," and everything to do with making money providing for both sides. Stresses are a function of a monetary system, which always creates poverty and elite. Diseases nearly all have techologically developed cures - virtually all of which are hidden (they have many cures for cancer...) so as to pump profits in the pharmaceutical and medical fields - sick people go to the doctor and buy "medicine." All pollution is related to the cost of keeping it clean. Too expensive to properly dispose of waste, or choose methods that don't pollute. With profit and cost no longer issues, we will do the right thing.

The only way out is to quit cold turkey.

Like I said... If we did that, several billion in the cities worldwide will die of starvation. We will lose so much ground that most who are not living in poverty now will be living the same way those who now live in poverty do. Really, your solution is nearly as ugly as the "elite" of today, killing us off with wars they create, chemicals they created to "take care of" and oil leak they created, and other hideous acts.

Technology can definitely improve human welfare, but it unfortunately provides diminishing returns. That is, there comes a point where technological advancement causes more harm to the species than it gives benefit. Technology for how to neatly separate flesh from bone was a massive benefit to us - technology that makes the plastic for milk jugs slightly more flexible, not so much.

If we commit to peaceful use of the tech that presently exists, taking ethics and its three Laws as our rule, technology will be a boon. Without money and those who start wars to make money, you will find that the Humans on this planet are very good. You seem to be confusing the evils of the lizard hearted as representing Humaity - they blame their evil ways and money system on Humans so that we think there is no hope.

Bottom line is, we're an animal. True, we're an animal that has managed to expand its habitat and lifespan quite a bit, but we're still one of the many critters on this planet. There's more than enough earth out there to give us food, shelter, and room for growth.

Bottom line is, we're Conscious entities able to choose our behaviors. In fact, we are different that the rest on tis planet because we were genetically manipulated by Beings who came to this planet hundreds of thousands of years ago. And, bottom line, we are loving in nature, and seek a higher aspiration, being thwarted by the system of money we have in place.

We just can't do this while shackled to our modern technological state and creature comforts.

Certainly we can.

Originally posted by Amaterasu
Good luck with that. What we need is a concerted effort to apply all technology in peaceful and ecologically sound ways. Without technology, there is no way the city dwellers will access food. Without technology, aid and assistance will diminish. I think the technological genie is out of the bottle and we now need to address how we approach that tech.

You're missing my point; the cities are going to starve anyway. We've passed the point where we gain diminishing returns from technological advancements. The resources to support these technologies are rapidly being depleted, and the whole enterprise is going to crash. When it does, a lot of people are going to die.

The alternative to crash-and-burn is weaning ourselves. It's still not going to be happy times. But given the inevitable if we don't?

What resources do you see as dwindling? The only ones crucial to our structure involve the production of energy - and with free energy, we WILL have no issues. You do know that we have transmuted lead into gold, right? It was found quite practical to do so, except that the energy involved made the gold cost millions of dollars an ounce. With free energy, we can create the basics we need.

Free energy? And where do we get free energy? Even the who most "free" energy sources - the sun and the earth's own heat - require apparatus and infrastructure to tap into and distribute. Producing all this will take more energy than can be collected from either source in the time it takes to produce them. That solar panel you might have on your roof? The glass, the photosensitive cells, the wiring, the connection to the grid, the frame, the tools used to install it, the truck that brought it to your house, the person driving the truck, the home he lives in... All of this takes a LOT of energy, in addition to raw materials.

Say WHAT!?! As a result of efforts to delude us do we go to war. It has nothing to do with "competition," and everything to do with making money providing for both sides. Stresses are a function of a monetary system, which always creates poverty and elite.

Societies without money, that live in communal-minded villages with no structured leadership ALSO go to war against other villages similarly structured, and kill and die in these wars. Nobody in these societies is "poor" or "rich" - but they fight over who controls what territory, and the resources of food, water, and building materials within that territory. Our nearest relatives also go to war frequently, and if you're going to tell me chimpanzees have monetary systems and complex political structures...

Diseases nearly all have techologically developed cures - virtually all of which are hidden (they have many cures for cancer...) so as to pump profits in the pharmaceutical and medical fields - sick people go to the doctor and buy "medicine."

Most human diseases are the result of the development of animal husbandry, with a secondary category caused by human abutment against wilderness. The first category includes such things as smallpox, influenza, and syphilis, while the latter includes such things as HIV, ebola, rabies, and leprosy.

I have no idea if there are cures for cancer or not. But I do wonder how prevalent cancer was prior to the industrial revolution. When we catch fish with tumors, we freak out, but when Aunt Middy has a massive thing growing out of her breasts, we just treat it as something that happens. That's weird, don't you think?

All pollution is related to the cost of keeping it clean. Too expensive to properly dispose of waste, or choose methods that don't pollute. With profit and cost no longer issues, we will do the right thing.

"With profit and cost no longer issues?" Friend, I think you and I are talking about very different universes.

Like I said... If we did that, several billion in the cities worldwide will die of starvation. We will lose so much ground that most who are not living in poverty now will be living the same way those who now live in poverty do. Really, your solution is nearly as ugly as the "elite" of today, killing us off with wars they create, chemicals they created to "take care of" and oil leak they created, and other hideous acts.

I hate to tell you, but at no point will our existence ever be "Star Trek," with absolute piece, global equality and prosperity, all thinks to pseudoscience gobbledygook and the timely intervention of benevolent aliens.

Reality is ugly. Reality is a bloody, muddy, screaming place full of both living and dying.

Reality is that we are just another variety of animal crawling around on the surface of the earth, and that we're subject to the same perils, limits, and dangers as all other animals. Our technology has enabled us to expand our population to incredible heights, but the sad fact is, that population is pretty much unsustainable. Even if we had some of your magical free energy and had some sort of fantasy awakening where we go all kumbuya, we will still overpopulate.

I never claimed my solution was pretty. I just think it's superior to the alternative we face.

If we commit to peaceful use of the tech that presently exists, taking ethics and its three Laws as our rule, technology will be a boon. Without money and those who start wars to make money, you will find that the Humans on this planet are very good. You seem to be confusing the evils of the lizard hearted as representing Humaity - they blame their evil ways and money system on Humans so that we think there is no hope.

No, actually I'm taking ecology into account.

Any habitat can comfortably support a maximum n amount of a species. The value of n is determined by the environment and species in question; n is higher for squirrels in a forest than it is for bears in the same forest, while n is lower for horses in a desert than it would be for horses on a prairie.

In an ideal situation, the population of a given species is actually lower than the value of n. Unless the species' numbers are so low that extinction is a possibility, there is absolutely no harm to them from having less-than-maximum comfortable population.

When n is exceeded though, things go a little haywire for that species. Once a species exceeds n, it's going to strip that habitat of the things that sustain it - too many foxes will over-hunt the prey in the meadow, or too many rabbits will turn the meadow into a pretty barren place. The larger the population, the higher the likelihood of epidemics of disease striking - more frequent contact leads to more opportunities for the diseases to spread. In many species, there is also violent competition for mates and territory, and that will only be worsened by exceeding the maximum sustainable population.

With humans, our technology has given us the ability to alter the value of n. However what it has not done, and never will do, is give us the ability to ignore and avoid the consequences of exceeding n. One could argue that this is simply a biological law - overpopulation leads to conditions that cause population crashes.

And since out technology is finite, all it's really managed to do is help us set ourselves up for bigger, harder crashes when it reaches its limit of manipulating the value of n.

Bottom line is, we're Conscious entities able to choose our behaviors. In fact, we are different that the rest on tis planet because we were genetically manipulated by Beings who came to this planet hundreds of thousands of years ago. And, bottom line, we are loving in nature, and seek a higher aspiration, being thwarted by the system of money we have in place.

Oh for crying out loud.

Regardless of whether you think we're the magical spawn of Zeus, or the genetic hybrids of fantastic space aliens, or whether you think we're just a very strange-looking variation on rabbits, we remain an organism living on a limited world, subject to the ecological rules of that world. We can be as caring and loving, or ads greedy and cruel as we wish, but this does not change the obvious fact that there is a point in our population where the food runs out, where the territory can't expand, and where disease is inevitable. And we will crash, just as whitetailed deer do in the eastern states, just as rabbits do in Great Britain, just as oak seedlings do every time acorns drop.

We just can't do this while shackled to our modern technological state and creature comforts.

Certainly we can.

edit on 12/28/2010 by Amaterasu because: TYPO!

next time you make a call on your cell phone or watch your TV or play on your game console, remember that someone in Africa probably died so you could have that little geegaw. Those devices can't be manufactured without a metal called coltan (columbite–tantalite), the mining of which is a major source of the warfare in the Congo.

Originally posted by TheWalkingFox

Originally posted by Amaterasu
Good luck with that. What we need is a concerted effort to apply all technology in peaceful and ecologically sound ways. Without technology, there is no way the city dwellers will access food. Without technology, aid and assistance will diminish. I think the technological genie is out of the bottle and we now need to address how we approach that tech.

You're missing my point; the cities are going to starve anyway. We've passed the point where we gain diminishing returns from technological advancements. The resources to support these technologies are rapidly being depleted, and the whole enterprise is going to crash. When it does, a lot of people are going to die.

What resources might those be? Energy resources? I think that's all we are told we're running out of.

The alternative to crash-and-burn is weaning ourselves. It's still not going to be happy times. But given the inevitable if we don't?

Or extracting the Dark Energy into usable form - which we CAN do.

What resources do you see as dwindling? The only ones crucial to our structure involve the production of energy - and with free energy, we WILL have no issues. You do know that we have transmuted lead into gold, right? It was found quite practical to do so, except that the energy involved made the gold cost millions of dollars an ounce. With free energy, we can create the basics we need.

Free energy? And where do we get free energy? Even the who most "free" energy sources - the sun and the earth's own heat - require apparatus and infrastructure to tap into and distribute. Producing all this will take more energy than can be collected from either source in the time it takes to produce them. That solar panel you might have on your roof? The glass, the photosensitive cells, the wiring, the connection to the grid, the frame, the tools used to install it, the truck that brought it to your house, the person driving the truck, the home he lives in... All of this takes a LOT of energy, in addition to raw materials.

By extracting it from the plenum - the "vacuum" around us - which has been shown to be seething with energy such that the universe is not only expanding, it is accelerating in its expansion.

Say WHAT!?! As a result of efforts to delude us do we go to war. It has nothing to do with "competition," and everything to do with making money providing for both sides. Stresses are a function of a monetary system, which always creates poverty and elite.

Societies without money, that live in communal-minded villages with no structured leadership ALSO go to war against other villages similarly structured, and kill and die in these wars. Nobody in these societies is "poor" or "rich" - but they fight over who controls what territory, and the resources of food, water, and building materials within that territory. Our nearest relatives also go to war frequently, and if you're going to tell me chimpanzees have monetary systems and complex political structures...

First, this is a planetary solution. Second, all such societies have been in energy scarcity, with no robots to do work no one wants to do, and an Interweb for communication and coordination. Chimps don't use these things either.

Diseases nearly all have techologically developed cures - virtually all of which are hidden (they have many cures for cancer...) so as to pump profits in the pharmaceutical and medical fields - sick people go to the doctor and buy "medicine."

Most human diseases are the result of the development of animal husbandry, with a secondary category caused by human abutment against wilderness. The first category includes such things as smallpox, influenza, and syphilis, while the latter includes such things as HIV, ebola, rabies, and leprosy.

I have no idea if there are cures for cancer or not. But I do wonder how prevalent cancer was prior to the industrial revolution. When we catch fish with tumors, we freak out, but when Aunt Middy has a massive thing growing out of her breasts, we just treat it as something that happens. That's weird, don't you think?

Actually, the rapid upswing in cancer came about in the late 1940's, after the explosion in the upper atmosphere of the Trinity device, a nuclear test. Because They didn't want nuclear testing banned, They blamed the lung and skin cancers caused by contact and the breathing in of radioactive particles on the only things they could come up with that went on skin and breathed into lungs: The sun and tobacco (in over 50 years of tests with pure, organic tobacco not one test has shown any connection to cancer...).

All pollution is related to the cost of keeping it clean. Too expensive to properly dispose of waste, or choose methods that don't pollute. With profit and cost no longer issues, we will do the right thing.

"With profit and cost no longer issues?" Friend, I think you and I are talking about very different universes.

No... Just different awarenesses of what's available but mostly hidden in this universe. You believe we're stuck with entropic sources of energy, while I know we are embedded in a sea of energy that, if we had public extraction methods would eliminate money - money being merely an accounting of energy expended. With an infinite amount of energy available, we would have effectively infinite money, and infinite money has no social application.

Like I said... If we did that, several billion in the cities worldwide will die of starvation. We will lose so much ground that most who are not living in poverty now will be living the same way those who now live in poverty do. Really, your solution is nearly as ugly as the "elite" of today, killing us off with wars they create, chemicals they created to "take care of" and oil leak they created, and other hideous acts.

I hate to tell you, but at no point will our existence ever be "Star Trek," with absolute piece, global equality and prosperity, all thinks to pseudoscience gobbledygook and the timely intervention of benevolent aliens.

You can tell me all you want. I have information about Dark Energy (called Zero Point Energy, Vacuum Energy, Plenum Energy, Orgone, and other names) and its extraction. If you are so willful to remain ignorant of this to the point of calling it "pseudoscience gobbledygook" and throwing in aliens (which I never suggest are required), then enjoy that. I still know you have limited knowledge and perspective.

Reality is ugly. Reality is a bloody, muddy, screaming place full of both living and dying.

But it does not have to be with conscious effort put forth. And I offer suggestions on how to accomplish that. If you're stuck in that perspective, I...well, I guess I pity you.

Reality is that we are just another variety of animal crawling around on the surface of the earth, and that we're subject to the same perils, limits, and dangers as all other animals. Our technology has enabled us to expand our population to incredible heights, but the sad fact is, that population is pretty much unsustainable. Even if we had some of your magical free energy and had some sort of fantasy awakening where we go all kumbuya, we will still overpopulate.

The population IS sustainable. Because of a profit motive, bad distribution takes place - with waste of phenomenal proportions in some places and hunger in others - but there is enough food produced on this planet right now to feed each of us three times over.

And really, I wholly disagree with your assessment of Humanity. Though we have the elements of structure beneath - matter, molecules, cells, parts - what we, as a whole, are is far beyond that of any other "variety of animal crawling around on the surface of the earth," and represent a higher development of Consciousness.

If you want to cling to such a sad view, be my guest.

(And nothing "magical" about extracting energy from the plenum.)

I never claimed my solution was pretty. I just think it's superior to the alternative we face.

Well... I claim my solution is both pretty AND superior to what we have, as well as to your solution.

If we commit to peaceful use of the tech that presently exists, taking ethics and its three Laws as our rule, technology will be a boon. Without money and those who start wars to make money, you will find that the Humans on this planet are very good. You seem to be confusing the evils of the lizard hearted as representing Humaity - they blame their evil ways and money system on Humans so that we think there is no hope.

No, actually I'm taking ecology into account.

Any habitat can comfortably support a maximum n amount of a species. The value of n is determined by the environment and species in question; n is higher for squirrels in a forest than it is for bears in the same forest, while n is lower for horses in a desert than it would be for horses on a prairie.

In an ideal situation, the population of a given species is actually lower than the value of n. Unless the species' numbers are so low that extinction is a possibility, there is absolutely no harm to them from having less-than-maximum comfortable population.

When n is exceeded though, things go a little haywire for that species. Once a species exceeds n, it's going to strip that habitat of the things that sustain it - too many foxes will over-hunt the prey in the meadow, or too many rabbits will turn the meadow into a pretty barren place. The larger the population, the higher the likelihood of epidemics of disease striking - more frequent contact leads to more opportunities for the diseases to spread. In many species, there is also violent competition for mates and territory, and that will only be worsened by exceeding the maximum sustainable population.

With humans, our technology has given us the ability to alter the value of n. However what it has not done, and never will do, is give us the ability to ignore and avoid the consequences of exceeding n. One could argue that this is simply a biological law - overpopulation leads to conditions that cause population crashes.

And since out technology is finite, all it's really managed to do is help us set ourselves up for bigger, harder crashes when it reaches its limit of manipulating the value of n.

"n" is highly dependent on the energy to support the population. The universe has an infinite quantity of it for us to use. What do we do with the math?

Bottom line is, we're Conscious entities able to choose our behaviors. In fact, we are different that the rest on tis planet because we were genetically manipulated by Beings who came to this planet hundreds of thousands of years ago. And, bottom line, we are loving in nature, and seek a higher aspiration, being thwarted by the system of money we have in place.

Oh for crying out loud.

Regardless of whether you think we're the magical spawn of Zeus, or the genetic hybrids of fantastic space aliens, or whether you think we're just a very strange-looking variation on rabbits, we remain an organism living on a limited world, subject to the ecological rules of that world. We can be as caring and loving, or ads greedy and cruel as we wish, but this does not change the obvious fact that there is a point in our population where the food runs out, where the territory can't expand, and where disease is inevitable. And we will crash, just as whitetailed deer do in the eastern states, just as rabbits do in Great Britain, just as oak seedlings do every time acorns drop.

And regardless of whether you grasp the implications of plenum energy or not, it still exists, and will highly influence the equations. Regardless of whether you see Humans as Higher Consciousness or not, we are still different.

We just can't do this while shackled to our modern technological state and creature comforts.

Certainly we can.

edit on 12/28/2010 by Amaterasu because: TYPO!

next time you make a call on your cell phone or watch your TV or play on your game console, remember that someone in Africa probably died so you could have that little geegaw. Those devices can't be manufactured without a metal called coltan (columbite–tantalite), the mining of which is a major source of the warfare in the Congo.

And they wouldn't die if we had the plenum extraction method, and robots to do the "dirty" work. Also, with plenum energy, we can transmute elements (we did the "lead to gold" transmutation in the 1970's - had we created an ounce it would have cost a million dollars in energy). I bet we can create coltan.

reply to post by Amaterasu


It does look like these energy devices are coming to light. The Italian university releasing it's cold fusion look like it is branching into a new field of physics pesn.com... . Water powered cars are also becoming more popular www.project.nsearch.com... . I am sure there are heaps of other energy devices like the ones you have talked about.

I have recently seen one of the zeitgeist movies "Moving Forward" which talks about a resource based economy and an end to money. It has been one of the first explanations of how we could be free of money that appeared feasible due to the emergence of technology. There is still a huge barrier between the capitalist / communist ideologies for a system to be implemented. I fully agree that the conflicts of interest introduced by money has made many very bad decisions. The imbalances and lack of foundation and integrity in the economy are leading to some fundamental shifts as the unsustainable ends. I can still see some people trying to exert their control over others and holding onto concepts of ownership, even in a system without money. The systems of trade is one that has been part of humanity for a long time and will take a long time if it is to be phased out. If I had the technology and energy to make my own farm out in the middle of the desert, underwater or out in space then I could easily throw away my money.

Originally posted by kwakakev
reply to post by Amaterasu

 

It does look like these energy devices are coming to light. The Italian university releasing it's cold fusion look like it is branching into a new field of physics pesn.com... . Water powered cars are also becoming more popular www.project.nsearch.com... . I am sure there are heaps of other energy devices like the ones you have talked about.

I have recently seen one of the zeitgeist movies "Moving Forward" which talks about a resource based economy and an end to money. It has been one of the first explanations of how we could be free of money that appeared feasible due to the emergence of technology. There is still a huge barrier between the capitalist / communist ideologies for a system to be implemented. I fully agree that the conflicts of interest introduced by money has made many very bad decisions. The imbalances and lack of foundation and integrity in the economy are leading to some fundamental shifts as the unsustainable ends. I can still see some people trying to exert their control over others and holding onto concepts of ownership, even in a system without money. The systems of trade is one that has been part of humanity for a long time and will take a long time if it is to be phased out. If I had the technology and energy to make my own farm out in the middle of the desert, underwater or out in space then I could easily throw away my money.

I have been well aware of the Zeitgeist movement for a while now. I think they're on the right track - but that "economy" will become meaningless if an effectively infinite source of energy is available to all - which it is in that we are embedded in it. It is everywhere. Any source of energy one has to pay for creates poverty in the end. If we didn't have to pay for energy, there would be nothing we have to pay for. No shells, no barter, no coin, no bills, no electronic funds, no plastic...

A good place to start in understanding this is my thread called The End of Entropy: A Look at Our Entropic World and the Evidence Supporting How We Can Change This, posted here:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Thanks for your input.