Still confused about climate change...

Post Reply New Topic

Strongly disagree, domination over the environment appears to be linked with other forms of domination. One form of domination rationalizing another. I'm not saying all domination is bad (I believe in proletarian domination), but a specific form of domination that is domination in minority interest; which pretty much describes the state in a nutshell-- it rationalizes harm to the environment.

That's an interesting perspective. What makes you say, in particular, that "domination over the environment is linked to other forms of domination"?

Also, could you maybe provide an example of a stateless society that hasn't harmed the environment, or something similar?

Quickest way to find out what kind of personality someone has is to ask them to write a mini essay describing what they would do if they were in charge of the earth.

What does your essay tell us about you?

It sums me up well. I wish for all the people to be confined to certain zones and let the plants and animals have the rest. That sounds like how I handle things. I believe in just letting wildlife and plants go without humans interfering. I don't follow traditions such as have as many kids as possible and I believe happiness is a state of mind. Someone can be just as happy thinking, writing, studying or reading a book as they can be out in the world making a million dollars and doing all these things that pollute the earth and make all these other species suffer population decline.
And can you convince yourself you are truly free living like that? You bet you can! It's state of mind.

I like to roam myself but if it is me roaming or thousands of species dying...which matters more? Thousands of species are on the brink of being whiped out right now and it's all because humans are everywhere on this planet. That is the only reason at the moment.

My proposition is if people are engineered to find happiness in certain things, and not crave other things...why is it not ethical? Isn't it okay to engineer them like that? What if it saved thousands of species and, perhaps, an entire ecosystem? What is your idea of ethics? The way things are going now with an idea of freedom cloaking greed, selfishness, destruction of the planet and life on it or engineering people during conception to be happy with less? To be happy in a simpler way? To prize thinking over anything else?

Think about it this way for a moment. We all know the issues: problems with pollution, loss of natural habitat, depletion of resources.

We also know how humans are psychologically and our genes contribute to this. We know it would be cruel to round up all the humans, herding them into zones and telling them all they must live like that and be happy that way and just accept. Many humans suffer tremendous psychological pain and angst from such a situation and would never accept it. BUT what if we did it this way; what if we started in the science labs, working on the genome, finding the group of genes that are responsible for certain traits and tamper with them so those traits are either enhanced or degraded? After it's perfected, it is introduced into the population via embryos so once this new generation is born, their genetic predisposition is radically different from those who came before. They are intellectual, ethical, kind, loving, caring, calm...and the list goes on and on. They don't mind getting along with each other and staying in one place. They feel this sense of community and unity so when someone suggests this idea of zones of habitation, it is accepted without any wars or violence. It's much kinder to do it this way. What do you think?

Before you get too judgmental about this scenario...think for another moment where we are headed now on this path. We will lose countless species on earth. The world will be mostly monocultures and concrete because that is how humans live and humans have a genetic predisposition to sprawl everywhere so this concrete and mono culture will be widespread, covering most of the continents. So is this zoning scenario really that horrible? Is it so bad to bio engineer certain traits out or is it out destiny to live this way until we become extinct ourselves while all these others species become extinct all at once. It's just a matter on what you think is right and what you think is wrong . We are all marching toward extinction anyway. It can happen billions of years from now or now, but eventually life in the universe will not exist.

I mean you can talk cutting emissions until your face is Smurf but it's not going to address the other problems that we face one of the biggest ones is sprawl and this has already pushed thousands of species to the brink of extinction so if you think it is simple as cutting CO2 perhaps you are oversimplifying?

I remember reading about citizens of collectivized villages in revolutionary Spain, rejecting materialism.


The Spanish Civil War: Revolution and Counterrevolution [page 68-69]

Anarchist societies had a green tendency before formal green anarchist theory even developed.

We can also look at some indigenous, who were around before the state moved in.

Nobody thinks the whole environment will be magically fixed if we cut CO2 emissions. And for what it is worth, hunting and deforestation are bigger issues for wildlife than human sprawl. If you want to save biodiversity then advocate for sustainable forestry, sturdy furniture, and recycled paper.

Your "solution" relies on several technological jumps that will probably not happen until it is too late to do anything (assuming it is even possible, which I highly doubt). We'd be better off providing family planning and healthcare in the developing world, as well as just making small adjustments to our lives in order to live more sustainably.

If science designates a task as top priority, it will happen much sooner. So far, it is government getting in the way.

Deforestation isn't a matter of wood being used for furniture. It happens for all kinds of reasons. It is part of the human "sprawl" mentality. Look at U2 guitarist, The Edge . He just got a permit to build five brand new mansions in a part of Malibu that was off limits but he used his money and his influence to secure a permit after years of delay. This is an example of the sprawling I am talking about. There is no reason for him to do that except pure greed and to sprawl into another space that should be left to other species.

In response to the false claim that 97% of climate scientists do not endorse global warming.
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/ ... -consensus
The fact is that the scientific consensus in favor of global warming is overwhelming.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific ... ate_change
Yes, that is wiki. However note that they provide links to primary sources to each scientific organizations claims.
This next site (from Scientific American) takes on all the junk science from the global warming denier?s cult.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/artic ... -nonsense/
Of course some may site the fraudulent Oregon petition.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/OISM-Pe ... roject.htm
Of course some may site the fraudulent ?climategate? nonsense. To say that we found a neat trick is like saying we found a neat trick to do this calculus problem in fewer steps.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/Climate ... hacked.htm
http://www.factcheck.org/2009/12/climategate/
As for other ?news? sources
http://thedailyshow.cc.com/video-playli ... 080/lkmdal
start above at 2;20
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K88cAq1Lw3o
I will stick with NASA
http://climate.nasa.gov/
The Royal Society,
?It is certain that increased greenhouse gas emissions from the burning of fossil fuels and from land use change lead to a warming of climate, and it is very likely that these green house gases are the dominant cause of the global warming that has been taking place over the last 50 years.?
From
https://royalsociety.org/policy/climate-change/
etc, etc ad infinitum?..

Last edited by wittgenstein on 26 Sep 2014, 7:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Habitat loss due to deforestation to use the wood harvested is a bigger issue than habitat loss so that humans can live there. Obviously both are issues, but industrial deforestations affects more species. This isn't just anecdotal stuff I'm concerned about, this is from the IUCN.

You are right that governments currently forbid the type of experimentation you are requesting. However, there is a lot that scientists can and are doing, such as looking for the genetic causes of personality attributes. They're not really getting anywhere, the more they investigate the more nuance they find. Personality isn't determined solely by genetics, and when genetics plays a role, it's often quite complex.

We also don't have the technology to write a whole genome every time a child is conceived.

There has long been peace, or at least a standoff, between the ice giants and hades.

It was thought the ice giants were defeated, but they were only set back a few thousand years.

The Rainbow Bridge, the link between the two, moist with sunlight, is being shaken by both forces.

We must defend the world tree. It may be the final battle, better to be among the chosen slain, than to die a nameless death.

Between Valhalla and nothing, what do you chose?

It comes! Over the last hundred years a rise of 0.81 F. and by 2020, 1 F. more is projected. Then almost a degree per decade.

Stop everything now, it still runs for hundreds of years. Crops will fail, floods, storms not before seen, and only wit and glory will lead to survival. Form up the Shield Wall, face the battle.

Only those who adapt to change can survive.

I don't want the polar bears to go extinct because the ice caps are melting! The other night I saw a PSA from WWF about a mother polar bear and her cub who had to swim for miles just to find food, and the cub died and the mother nearly starved. Of course it will be bad for humans too if the ice caps melt. I think anyone who believes the climate really isn't changing needs to pull their head out of the proverbial sand and wake up, but I don't know what we can really do except going back to living like the pioneers. And making birth control a law.

We are expected to add 5 billion more people to the planet by 2100, so we are going double up on human pollution.

7.3 billion people presently
http://www.worldometers.info/world-population/

"12.3 billion by 2100, the researchers said"
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/ ... story.html

Ugh, actually people with extremely high IQ's are more anxious on average and less happy. It's really not 'normal' to have extremely high IQ's.

And yes, I speak from life experience, on that one too.

Standard IQ tests measure crystalized intelligence moreover than fluid intelligence.

The greatest challenge of my life, was knowing less, as far as crystalized knowledge goes, and to explore fluid intelligence of being free RIGHT NOW.

I think the battle really is to lose intelligence not gain it, per crystalized intelligence, and really most folks in our western countries see intelligence as crystalized intelligence rather than fluid intelligence.

But fluid intelligence is more often relegated to visually thinking humans over verbal thinking humans. Particularly when there is an imbalance, per example of lesions of the right hemisphere of the brain that are yes, associated with non-verbal learning disorder and Asperger's syndrome, as previously diagnosed in the US, and seen in scientific studies as such.

Humans are created by evolution every now and now to adapt to change and survive, really nothing more or less.

The greatest problem for human unhappiness in life is actually instant gratification and the lack of real environmental challenge in REAL LIFE for adaptive change.

HUMANS ARE evolved for intermittent gratification and happiness is in the looking forward not the reward.

And the greatest looking forward is when one strives for the best now possible; simply as now is the reality that exists; and yes, now can be imaginary or real.

The greatest real challenge is the full flesh and blood experience that does most definitely revolve around challenge; whether that challenge is a material one per the Sun revolving around the challenge of a black hole, or a human foraging and or hunting for food.

The problem really is humans can't touch the 'products' they are hunting overall. In other words, they often don't see the product of their constructive efforts to live, when pursuing them in a flesh and blood way.

A source of great unhappiness is not being REAL.

I don't know much more common sense would be necessary to understand that, but to Truly live is a flesh and blood existence away from illusions of culture, like books.

Now don't get me wrong I like books, but they are nothing compared to fully using the brain, through 360 degrees of dance, where the whole brain lights up; not just one narrow area of thinking.

Yes, we know a lot these days.

But truly like Socrates said, we know nothing too. I understand that more fully when I dance FREE, WITH no instruction from anyone else but my instinct and Mother Nature true aka GOD.

I know dance, but it is far from crystalized knowledge; it is fluid intelligence on the move. That is unless someone else is giving the lessons and one answers to any judge except Mother Nature TRUE aka GOD.

Yes, the Apple of knowledge and instant gratification truly can be a poisonous one for human beings. One need look no further than a third of school age children who are pre-diabetic now and record numbers of folks on pain killers and antidepressants to see the effect of culture; yes, the poisonous apple part, and crystalized knowledge.

I'd rather be free and all natural; ain't 'kNOw' doctor sticking their finger up my genetics. This is the worst possible human scenario in my experienced opinion. We TRULY live for challenge, not for having it made and cushy by someone else. AND HELL NO it doesn't have to have anything to do with money or the collection of materialistic goods.

Humans truly thrive when they are both challenged and share the fruits of their constructive productivity that they can touch and feel and yes SHARE TOO, for the whole dam species to survive. No, not a selfish gene; a gene that is shared for survival, as is, of course, without the poisonous apple.

The ultimate truth though is in the Godzilla movie:

?The error in man is thinking nature is in our control and not the other way around.? Godzilla (2014)

And it's obvious everywhere one looks.

One third of pre-diabetic children means fewer children over all produced by them as Diabetes reduces the ability for folks to reproduce.

People on painkillers don't reproduce as much.

People on anti-depressants don't reproduce as much.

People satiated by Pornography don't reproduce as much.

Yes, as an example for the point above, science shows that in Japan younger folks no longer even care to have sex with the opposite sex and are adopting dogs as a cultural way of having families instead, even strolling them in baby carriages all dressed up.

Men are adopting feminine ways of grooming themselves in South Korea, and losing interest in women too.

And that's just a drop in the bucket of how Mother Nature deals with disobedient humans. There is a whole Novel I could 'wRite' now that not many people could read no matter how interesting I make it, as a culture based on the dopamine producing impact of instant gratification gives many people the ?attention span of a gnat?, as they are looking for the next big 'hit' of something new.

Hell yes, frigging mother nature aka GOD is STILL FRIGGING IN CONTROL and 'she' is as AWESOME as ever.

DO NOT PAY ATTENTION TO HER AND THE RESULT IS SIMPLE: HUMAN SUFFERING.

MOTHER NATURE AKA GOD WILL HAVE HER WAY.

GODZILLA did his job and got the hell out of HELL. And that was an awesome movie. What one really has to understand to appreciate the movie is GODZILLA IS TRULY AN ANALOGY FOR GOD aka Mother Nature TRUE. He gets the job done for survival and MOVES ON. He doesn't linger around or pay attention to the games of fools.

My cat feels the same way about human culture. But I keep him locked in the patio, so he will not injure himself by TRULY LIVING in the wild. So yes, I am the devil too. He doesn't know he has feline leukemia, but should he really care. I can't ask him that, but if he could he would tell ME please GOD, please let me go outside, just one more time; really I don't care if I live or die; I just want to live FREE.

SO YES, IN MY LIFE I play the role of GOD and Devil for my cat. But by GOD, it is just a role. GOD is outside, inside, above and so below per Mother Nature True. And yes I finally find GOD as Mother Nature and now I Live the dream of my disabled CAT FREE ONCE AGAIN, A child of Mother Nature True.

Aghogday -

It's easier to feel out of place in a society when you are at odds with majority rules. This could be why you feel unhappy - not necessarily because your IQ is high. It's this realization that you can see what others cannot. Your heart aches because they seem so doomed and yet so powerless to change. This is the crux of your sadness. If you knew people could access their sense of thoughtfulness and restraint you would feel better about life. Instead, you look around and you see them marching on the same path which is a hopeless one full of chaos all because of this insatiable greed they have, this neediness to keep consuming forever and ever and to keep multiplying and to keep sprawling regardless of the consequences and to welcome destruction and doom because it is in a book like the Bible. I can't see eye to eye with people who are in this thinking zone thus I am sad. They won't listen to me and I must listen to them because they are all around and they are controlling the world. This is how the majority thinks.