Humanity Facing Dire Consequences

page: 2
9
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on May, 18 2013 @ 04:09 PM
link   
reply to post by TheRedneck
 


You missed my entire point of my thread. You're looking at remedies to problems based upon current research, which for the most part, is done by individual countries. Currently there is no world program that gathers all the top scientists and engineers and brings them together to design technology and solve problems and cure diseases that are plaguing mankind.

You mention that current technology can't recycle all materials together. Of course not, but maybe if governments of the world would have come together along time ago and developed a world research facility for humanity, maybe the brightest minds could have developed such a machine. They could have even developed a fusion process that could take all waste matter and change it to pure energy.

The problem with your reasoning is clearly a conservative outlook on government. Government can do good things that can benefit humanity. If you think corporations have our best interest over greed and profit, you're fooling yourself. The statements you made in your response clearly show your conservative way of thinking.

The basis of my thread was that governments around the world could have the capabilities to solve world problems if they would just pool their best resources together. Two heads are better than one, and one idea motivates another and another.

When you have a corporate monopoly on energy, what incentives or motivations do these companies have to put themselves out of business? These companies have invested billions upon billions of dollars in equipment to search for oil. The last thing they want to do is change their entire profit making system.

There are several clean new energy sources being researched today which include, solar, wind, hydrogen, kinetic, biomass, hydro, geothermal, magnetic, just to name a few. Technologies have to be developed and enhanced to improve their usefulness. The more time focused on developing new forms of energy the greater the chance for improved technology.

So since we "don't" have the technology to fix our problems today, lets just throw in the towel and say it can't be done. Civilization will never advance with that kind of attitude.




posted on May, 18 2013 @ 05:39 PM
link   
reply to post by WeRpeons
 

Let me get this straight....


You want to help people.....by telling them they have to be euthanized if they end up in prison to curb overpopulation...

Education reduces violent crimes, not more violence, this is a lesson you learn through your years, young padawan. You will also learn this cycle is continuously spreading to those that have to carry out the punishment and families that they are involved with.


In short, there are always alternative methods to procure the same results, your way of thinking will lead you to be the cancer that you claim to want to change.


A lot of what you write about changing has been instituted in place as a measure of power through control, wealth cannot be perceived without the juxtaposition of destitution, in order to increase the perception of ones wealth, there must be vast amounts of poverty.


So let's look into the root of this problem, is it unsubstantiated greed? or is it the conditioning of our cultures to revere wealth and reliance upon societies acceptances, perhaps a combination of both?


Of course though there's always a reason for a season, since you are on your path towards enlightenment in all things humane, you just might get a chance to figure out the 2 main reasons for all of this occuring in the first place.



posted on May, 18 2013 @ 06:34 PM
link   
reply to post by WeRpeons

Oh, I got the point of your thread; the problem is that your point is an exercise in futility. "What if" does nothing unless someone puts it to the test. How many threads like this will it take to develop a machine that can recycle different materials in one operation? Answer: infinity!

Now, how many people actually researching, innovating, and experimenting does it take to develop such a machine. Answer: unknown.

I'll take unknown over infinity any day.


The problem with your reasoning is clearly a conservative outlook on government. Government can do good things that can benefit humanity. If you think corporations have our best interest over greed and profit, you're fooling yourself. The statements you made in your response clearly show your conservative way of thinking.

So now we are going to inject political philosophy into this discussion?

Name one government that has ever improved anything. Governments exist as a necessary evil. No government invented the laser, or the cell phone, or wifi, or the television. Wanna bring up the internet? DARPA invented it, yes, but as a restricted medium. It took people to make it into what it is now.

Large corporations aren't a bastion of good will, either, but at least they do create something. But really, what they create is the result of individuals. So no, I do not place my faith in governments, and I do not place my faith in corporations either; I place my faith in people, and I would like you to be one of those people who can make a difference.


When you have a corporate monopoly on energy, what incentives or motivations do these companies have to put themselves out of business?

None. But people do have that incentive.


There are several clean new energy sources being researched today which include, solar, wind, hydrogen, kinetic, biomass, hydro, geothermal, magnetic, just to name a few. Technologies have to be developed and enhanced to improve their usefulness. The more time focused on developing new forms of energy the greater the chance for improved technology.
  • Solar energy does not have the ability to provide sufficient power except in isolated low-power applications and is extremely expensive.
  • Wind has proven to be a wonderful source, but cannot handle all the needs of a growing society. Like hydro before it, however, it actually makes a good dent in power requirements.
  • Hydrogen is an energy storage vehicle, not energy production. When someone finds a way to make hydrogen for less energy than it produces, I'll eat those words. Until then, I won't.
  • Kinetic energy creation? Kinetic energy is simply the energy of motion.
  • Biomass energy works, like solar, works well in certain limited applications. The output is too slow to allow for large-scale production.
  • Hydro works great..... how many rivers do we have left that do not already have dams? Precious few.
  • Geothermal works wonderfully in rural settings where there is enough earth mass to produce energy. I actually have plans to use it for climate control in my home and shop.
  • Magnetic energy production? How? Thus far no one has been able to use magnetism alone to produce energy.
  • I'm going to add wave energy since you didn't. Wave energy is, IMO, one of the most promising technologies undergoing development.
It's true that more time spent on research increases the chance of a breakthrough, but why are you trying to get governments, who have a reputation for wasting resources on politician's pet projects, to put in that time? Wouldn't it be better if people put that time in?


So since we "don't" have the technology to fix our problems today, lets just throw in the towel and say it can't be done.

Is that what you think I am saying? I am saying it can be done, but not by letting politicians do it. We need engineers, scientists, experimenters, and critical thinkers. We need people willing to do something other than complain about how the most self-serving entities on the planet should be trusted solely with improving the lives of people they obviously care nothing about.

I'm saying you can do it, but not by trusting others.

TheRedneck



posted on May, 18 2013 @ 09:30 PM
link   


It's true that more time spent on research increases the chance of a breakthrough, but why are you trying to get governments, who have a reputation for wasting resources on politician's pet projects, to put in that time? Wouldn't it be better if people put that time in?
reply to post by TheRedneck
 


Developments in military technology is way beyond what consumers have access to. Why government? Because they have the money to support the industries for research and development. You can't remove self-serving and greed out of government just as much as you can't remove it out of the private sector.

I'm well aware that government isn't the best catalyst to lead anything, but what I am saying, is governments around the world need to put their pet projects aside,. They need to stop their political bickering and saber rattling and start focusing on solving some of these problems that will definitely affect mankind in the not so distant future.

Corporations create things only for profit. People can't force the hand of private corporations, but they can force the hand of government. Is this wishful thinking? Maybe so, but until our backs are against the wall, governments and corporations will unite to save the planet. But unfortunately by that time, it will be too late.

How often do we have accidents that end up killing and maiming people? The next couple of days later we hear the government and media talking how we should have did this, or that, to prevent the accident. We react after the fact instead of planning before the fact. We had an oil crises back in the 70's and here we are in 2013, and we still don't have an energy plan to ween us off of oil. Again, we'll wait until all the oil dries up until we get serious about developing a new source of energy.



Is that what you think I am saying? I am saying it can be done, but not by letting politicians do it. We need engineers, scientists, experimenters, and critical thinkers. We need people willing to do something other than complain about how the most self-serving entities on the planet should be trusted solely with improving the lives of people they obviously care nothing about.


...and how do you propose getting the world's brightest engineers, scientists, experimenters and critical thinkers together to solve these problems? Who is going to have the billions to finance this venture? That's why I propose world governments to incorporate this into a research and development project. Corporations and the general public don't have the connections, clout or financial means to support such a world wide venture. Do we need government officials to coordinate it and manage it? Absolutely not! It should be managed and directed by the brightest people in their field of expertise.



posted on May, 18 2013 @ 10:04 PM
link   
reply to post by WeRpeons

Why government? Because they have the money to support the industries for research and development. You can't remove self-serving and greed out of government just as much as you can't remove it out of the private sector.

I'm sorry, did you just suggest letting a fox guard the henhouse because because they like chickens more than the guard dog?

If it is not possible to remove the greed and self-servitude from government, it follows logically that government is incapable of doing the things you wish done.


I'm well aware that government isn't the best catalyst to lead anything, but what I am saying, is governments around the world need to put their pet projects aside,. They need to stop their political bickering and saber rattling and start focusing on solving some of these problems that will definitely affect mankind in the not so distant future.

That would be a bigger trick than all of your other issues combined!


Corporations create things only for profit. People can't force the hand of private corporations, but they can force the hand of government.

Everyone creates things for profit. That profit may not be in the form of cash; it can be votes to maintain a powerful and profitable position, personal gratification, or self-improvement. But everything is done for a reason.

That is why using governments won't work; there is no profit, no votes, no kickbacks, no prestige, and no reason to make this work.


...and how do you propose getting the world's brightest engineers, scientists, experimenters and critical thinkers together to solve these problems? Who is going to have the billions to finance this venture?

I don't.

I propose doing it oneself. In the case of this thread, why are you incapable of developing a new, clean energy source? You have a mind just as operational as Stephen Hawkins and probably a much more capable body. All that sets him apart from you is his education, which is available to anyone who wants it badly enough.


That's why I propose world governments to incorporate this into a research and development project.

Who in a government have you contacted to make such a proposal? ATS is not a government.


Do we need government officials to coordinate it and manage it? Absolutely not! It should be managed and directed by the brightest people in their field of expertise.

"Senator Someone, I propose a global research initiative to solve all of humanity's problems. It will cost hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars, and no one in the governments supporting it with these dollars will have any connection to it nor any input. I hope I can count on your support."

Well, there's another piece of paper in the landfill...

TheRedneck



posted on May, 23 2013 @ 02:26 AM
link   
Although the science and technology would further develop in the future,but I think nowadays is a exellent times.Some sorts of resource would be exploited up.For example petroleum.Imaging that the people could not afford to the cost of using auto in the next one or two hundred years.





new topics

top topics
 
9
<< 1   >>

log in

join