Was Unabomber right? Will civilization collapse?

Post Reply New Topic

And he KEEPS ON ignoring the fact that I said I wouldn't discuss this with him anymore. How very sad.

Tell you what mate, when you can prove to me that you have actually BOTHERED to look at the VAST wealth of information we have available for free on the internet about TZM's stance on "human nature" and "genetics" with an UNBIASED EYE, and you can come back and discuss this WITHOUT that ignorace and demonstrate that you can take on board information out of your usual frame of reference, THEN we'll talk. I'm sick and tired of having to walk you through this with baby steps, spoonfeeding you. Its not my job to educate you. Its YOURS.

My own take on this one - if it had a strong argument against the existence of 'human nature' as a fundamental force endemic to being of a genetic basis, the conversation wouldn't be going the way it is right now and I would have imagined that you'd lead an argument with your strongest stuff - not throwaway points.

Take a look for yourself, or stop trying to bait me into a further debate. Tell you what, I'll make it easy for you, shall I? Yea, it is clear you need a helping hand here. First off is my OWN dispelling of "human nature":

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2aPcjxAElgM[/youtube]

And the first 40 minutes of this documentary addresses the "human nature" aregument AAAAAAND the "genetics" argument.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Z9WVZddH9w[/youtube]

Have fun, and please try not to respond until you have fully reviewed them both with an UNBIASED EYE.

The first looks like the fifteen minute podcast you posted earlier, however I will watch the second, perhaps re-listen the first, take in on a point by point basis (as objectively as possible) and give you feedback on what's answered, what isn't, and why. It might not be tonight or tomorrow, I have company coming in from out of town as soon as I'm off work, but I'll try and shoot you a reply by Sunday or Monday night at the latest.

Take your time, coz you're gonna need to be objective and not projecting.

Why not. Even if it is a short time. Obviously other people cannot use the same toilet while you are using it.


Do you have toilet in your house or you do you use the public porta-potty every time and hope that you don't queue up for an hour? Your 'basic common sense' doesn't tell you any of these details. Fail.

Exactly. Its a case of basic common sense. No-one who actually has any substantial grey matter in their skulls will get indignant about the right to use that porta-potty if someone else is using it. Just be gracious for goodness sake. Someone's using it. Get over it. Same thing with anything in respect to goods and services.



You've queued for an HOUR to use a porta-potty? Do you live with, or go to festivals for IBS sufferers or something?

But seriously though, why is simple common sense, and actually also common decency not within your lexicon? Is it really that bad to ACCEPT that it is taken instead of pig-headedly demanding it?

And maybe you can try to put that common decency to use right now by refraining from immature and condescending phrases at the end of your sentence in an infantile attempt to claim victory. News flash: There is no winner or loser here. Its just discussion. Get over it, drop the fighting talk, calm down, and relax.

Is it really that much to expect a toilet, a computer, a toaster, a bed ... sitting in 'my' house so that I can use anytime I need instead of queuing with 'common decency'? So good for your utopia.

Yes. The fact that people no common decency exist is more than sufficient to defeat your dream world.

One does not need to be unabomber to realize that societies, cultures and civilizations do not last forever.

ruveyn

You can expect them, no-one's saying you won't have your own damn toilet. Jeez. lol.

And why would you just wanna sleep in one bed in one part of the world when the PLANET is your home where you can live virtually ANYWHERE you wanted to?

Does a hotel room not come with the basic ammenities as standard? Of course they do, and so will all homes in an RBE. In fact you would be the architect of your own home. Come on, use some common sense here. In an RBE, personal property will be considered a BURDEN. No-one is stopping you from owning anything, but use some common sense when it comes to things that you don't use all the damn time.

Do you need the physical appliances themselves, and for everyone else to have their own appliance regardless of whether they use it every day or once a month?

Or

Do you need ACCESS?

Think about it this way. If you have a dvd collection, think about someone you know and see regularly, possibly someone who lives nearby. Do they own the same dvd? what is the point in two friends owning their own copy of the same dvd? What are the odds that they will always independently choose to watch it at the same time? I realised this years ago when living with friends. I realised that there was no point in me buying my own copy of something when the guys already had a copy. If we wanted to watch the film at the same time, guess what? We watched it together! Wow, what a simple world we can live in if we just apply a bit of common sense.



Again, no-one said you would have to queue to use your home, but that's the point, why would you WANT to own something like a home when you can continually travel? Why stagnate yourself in one spot? Sure you may want to stay in one place, which is fine, no-one will stop you, but the point is that ownership is socially and resource-irresponsible. People have said to me:

"What if I want a 50 room mansion?"

To which I reply:

"What if I want a 500 room mansion? What if I want a whole country as my garden?"

You see, at what point do we consider that the line between personal desire, and consideration for others has been crossed, factoring into the equation the fact that we live on a finite planet?



I think the word you were looking for was "much" instead of "good".

I'll never get tired of having to correct this wonderful little word, ok, here we go:

There's no such thing as a "utopia". It refers to a fixed end state of perfection. Thing is my friend, we live in an EMERGENT universe. Meaning that everything is always in transition. Everything from the movements of celestial bodies, to human thoughts and understandings. We live within perpetual flux. If everything is always changing, then how can we achieve a state of perfection thats set in stone? Exactly. So there are no utopias. I can understand you using the word. Its a common phrase that we at TZM receive by those who are merely repeating phrases and concepts that they have heard without actually examining them themselves to assess whether they actually agree or not, or whether the phrase has any weight in reality. So please, some thought?



I'm sorry, this sentence doesn't actually make any sense. I can try and interpret it, but theres 2 ways I can interpret it and they both give opposing statements.

On a side note I can understand your use of the perjorative "dream world" coz you habve felt the need to attack and demean my advocation of an RBE and imply its lack of feasibility. Well taking into consideration that you are of the impression that utopia even exists as even a phrase with any meaning tells me that you're not very educated in this. Either that, or you spend WAY too much time and energy trying to be oppositional towards this idea than you actually do listening to the information and considering it on a mature and intellectual level.

You know what your problem is Adam. Your problem is that you do not accept the technology even if it comes from your own Venus Project. (Don't try to distance yourself from the Venus Project because I'm not buying into your denialism .) I remember when Jacques Fresco was showcasing the (nuclear powered) 4000 mile per hour supersonic train. The controversy was not nuclear power because there was no reactor on board so in that respect all electric trains are nuclear powered. The controversy was that the train ran through a vacuum tube and people were terrified that they would suffocate if the cabin lost pressure. Yeah right, like airplanes don't need pressurized cabins. What it boils down to is that people are terrified of any new technology that they do not understand and until the technology becomes commonplace they will fiercely resist change.

I guess I do not blame you Luddites because I do not like the idea dying every time I step into that nuclear powered teleportation machine .

*falls on the floor laughing* And you know what your problem is? You cling desperately and ignorantly onto erroneous concepts and accusations that have been LOOOONG debunked. But that doesn't stop you beligerently arguing them. This is part of the reason that I'm probably the only person who converses with you on this. And even I'm getting tired of you because you never seem to allow information to sink through that thick skull of yours.

Can you prove to me that the two organisations HAVEN'T split? Good luck. Stop being so condescending. If you mean that I don't accept nuclear power, that phrase you repeat so much that you seem to get your jollies off of, no, I don't accept it. Energy production methods have moved on. And TVP has never been about nuclear power to begin with.

I have REPEATEDLY asked you to prove this, and EVERYTIME you have failed to do so. Denialism? look in the mirror buddy.



Source please?



Again, source please?



Airplanes need pressurised cabins because they travel at high altitudes. Did you not know that?



Yes, in parts. Its called culture lag. Ben MLeish did a presentation on that as well.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CaYjZBydZ0U[/youtube]

Well maybe human beings have to just get over themselves and accept change. We would NEVER have progressed as far as we have without the acceptance of change. Maybe you should do the same. Would certainly be lovely to converse with you without you mechanically parrotting "NUCLEAR POWER! NUCLEAR POWER!". In your last post alone you include the phrase "nuclear power" 4 TIMES. Seriously, you gotta let it go. Nuclear power is a dinosaur. We've had FAR better ways for DECADES.



What the f**k is your OBSSESSION with nuclear power????? And people call ME a broken record!

Here's a handy tip ok? LET IT GO.

Aside from electric cars, there is also the MagLev train. This is an electric train that runs suspended on magnetic rails. There are no wheels or moving parts, so nothing can wear out. In Japan, MagLevs are currently being used and clock over 200 mph on dated technology. Current plans by an organization called ET3 for an intercontinental MagLev system include a train that can travel over 4,000 mph on less than 2% of the power required to fly an airplane the same distance. This is the future of travel.


Conclusion

The Zeitgeist Movement advocates the use of the scientific method for social concerns, not for the monetary profit of corporate business that keeps our society paralyzed in a system where nothing is done if the rich cannot profit from it. We must free ourselves from the economic slavery of the current system before we can evolve to the next level.
©2010-2011 The Zeitgeist Movement, Louisiana. All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Contact Us | Site Map


There you go Adam right from the horses mouth , none of this Venus Project is close enough nonsense because I quoted directly from the Zeitgeist movement. I think it would be fair to say that since a Maglev train only uses 2 percent of the energy required to fly an airplane that it could very well be solar powered. But its top speed of 4000 miles per hour means that it has perfomance of a nuclear powered airplane so this means that it is indeed nuclear in spirit which will probably scare the hell out of most environmentalists.

And rightfully so. The Zeitgeist Movement will inflame the imagination of the nuclear industry to such a high degree that they will not only introduce a nuclear powered airplane to compete with Maglev but to achieve a 4000 mile per hour top speed they will introduce a radical thermonuclear design that explodes hydrogen bomb torpedoes out the rear end. The nuclear industry will argue that their system requires no expensive vacuum tube infrustucture.

We're still the same dumb, violent beasts as before but with spectacular computers, vehicles, planes, tanks, and nuclear missiles to bomb the f**k out of each other. Even if this 4000 MPH plane is constructed, it's the cart before the horse, you see. Perhaps we should socially evolve first before developing new, state-of-the-art technologies. Without social evolution, we're merely treading water.

Yes, you have paraphrased part of Zeitgeist: Addendum. Notice that NOTHING is said about the dreaded "nuclear power" dun dun DUUUUUN that you keep going on and on about.



Why did you copy qand paste from the Zeitgeist Louisiana site? Furthermore, what does this prove on your part? That you can find a website? *gives you a brief applause* well done mate.



I'm, sorry, where exactly on there did ANY of that prove what you are trying to say? Oh, it DOESN'T? Yea, just what I thought.

You know you CAN admit that you cannot prove that TZM and TVP DIDN'T split.

And no, this isn't from "The Zeitgeist Movement" as you call it, it is merely from the website for the Louisiana Chapter. A single chapter is not representative of the movement as a whole.



So it's NOT NUCLEAR POWERED????????????



*Once again, stares incredulously at the screen but has the sense not to bash his head through the wall yet again*

Nuclear in SPIRIT? What BS are you spouting now? Are you not even aware how COMPLETELY different the processes of solar power and nuclear power are? Maybe you are, but you are conveniently brushing under the rug the fact that solar power isn't even contingent upon a fission OR fusion process, and yet, you STILL do whatever you can to claim that it is somehow tied into the processes of nuclear power by claiming a non-sequitor argument: "nuclear in spirit". I can understand you DESPERATELY wanting to cling onto this nuclear power thing, but you're just getting flat out ridiculous now.

Seriously, just drop it.



Yea, they will be scared by a nobody scaremongerer screaming NUCLEAR POWER! from the rooftops when it is CLEAR we are using far more efficient and CLEAN means of generating electricity.



dun dun DUUUUUUUN!!

If that is the case, then why aren't you taking your futile fight to the "evil" nuclear powered airplane manufacturers? Coz you have actually admitted, after REPEATED claims that the maglevs or ANYTHING in an RBE is nuclear powered, now they're not nuclear powered, but NOW, they will incite more drastic measures on the parts of those who are ALREADY using nuclear power.

Come on, drop the charade. You're sounding damn ridiculous.

I'm in agreement with Bloviater here as well. Your CHILDISH appeal-to-fear fallacies are REALLY showing. Are you actually a sci-fi writer for b-movie calibre kids comics by any chance? Coz if not, you REALLY have missed your calling.

The dirty little secret of those maglev trains is that they are inherently nuclear powered because the electricity to operate them comes from nuclear power plants. It is only the vacuum tube maglev train that can operate on solar power because only the vacuum tube can reduce the energy use by 98 percent. But the problem with the vacuum tube is that it involves a major infrustructure expense.

And now you assume that the entire aerospace industry will just roll over and play dead as its market share is stolen by the vacuum tube maglev train? The fact is that both the nuclear and aerospace industry will come up with their answer to the 4000 mph train. The fact is that if a hybrid nuclear powered jet-rocket engine is developed this craft will be able to fly in the near vacuum of hyperspace and take full advantage of all the elimination of friction and drag necessary for maximun fuel savings. The craft will also be Moon flight capable thus having its own built in nuclear waste disposal system while also taking care of our basic transportation needs here on Earth.