Interesting article about where our society and civilisation may be headed...
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/printFriendly/0,,1-531-1813695-3055,00.html
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/printFriendly/0,,1-531-1813695-3055,00.html
Waiting for the lights to go out...
- Thread starter sandbender
- Start date
-
Hey Guest, Early bird pricing on the Summer Moot (29th July - 10th August) available until April 6th, we'd love you to come. PLEASE CLICK HERE to early bird price and get more information.
Thanks for the link
no doubt as i and my fat Hungarian wife are moving the goats around the mountains of Turkey, my many heavily armed sons and grandsons will watch the passes and keep us safe in our old age...
no doubt as i and my fat Hungarian wife are moving the goats around the mountains of Turkey, my many heavily armed sons and grandsons will watch the passes and keep us safe in our old age...
The article is promoting one *very* alarmist and biased book. It is unbalanced and deliberately accentuates the perceived flaws in the counter theries without acknowledging those within his own narrow mindset. The guy needs some valium or some hash! Personally I'd try the Valerian
There is if anything *more* invention, more creativity being demonstrated, it's just in different ways from the *big* lightbulb defining moments of popular history. Tiny advances in micro electronics for instance which have huge knock on effects on power consumption....just how small is your mobile phone now then? I don't even need batteries to run mine, it'll do it by dynamo or solar power. And this constant widening of human knowledge and ability is repeated across the entire spectrum of human innovations.
"Humans are animals and as such can't change"....total mince! We exist on every continent of our Earth because we are the most adaptable species on the planet and we can create the necessary equipment to live anywhere. Basic anthropology clearly reports the huge differences in societies world wide....it's one of the great charms of the world
I do agree we need to change the ways we exploit natural resources, but simple economics will eventually do that for us.
Toddy, who is literally waiting for the lights to go out since the Electricity folks are digging up the street right now
There is if anything *more* invention, more creativity being demonstrated, it's just in different ways from the *big* lightbulb defining moments of popular history. Tiny advances in micro electronics for instance which have huge knock on effects on power consumption....just how small is your mobile phone now then? I don't even need batteries to run mine, it'll do it by dynamo or solar power. And this constant widening of human knowledge and ability is repeated across the entire spectrum of human innovations.
"Humans are animals and as such can't change"....total mince! We exist on every continent of our Earth because we are the most adaptable species on the planet and we can create the necessary equipment to live anywhere. Basic anthropology clearly reports the huge differences in societies world wide....it's one of the great charms of the world
I do agree we need to change the ways we exploit natural resources, but simple economics will eventually do that for us.
Toddy, who is literally waiting for the lights to go out since the Electricity folks are digging up the street right now
Yeah I kind of agree, his points on anything but natural resources and war are a bit... far fetched.
We all know that oil will run out eventually, and that our (future generations) way of life will be affected greatly.
The article failed to mention the vast reserves of coal that still exist, fusion reactors development, wave power, solar power and other resources.
Yes the oil will go, but surely we will adapt somehow to survive.
I am more worried about what happens before the changes comes in to full force. Such as political unrest , unemployement, racial tensions, industrial collapse, and eventually a possible breakdown of law and order.
(Oops I am getting a sense of Deja vous, something to do with a hurricane in the Gulf of Mexico)
Dark times ahead indeed...... but would not the writer be better employed using his time to help solve the problem in a more positive way, instead of spreading more doom and gloom..
Right ....back to making my fire pistons and mini stoves now bb
The article failed to mention the vast reserves of coal that still exist, fusion reactors development, wave power, solar power and other resources.
Yes the oil will go, but surely we will adapt somehow to survive.
I am more worried about what happens before the changes comes in to full force. Such as political unrest , unemployement, racial tensions, industrial collapse, and eventually a possible breakdown of law and order.
(Oops I am getting a sense of Deja vous, something to do with a hurricane in the Gulf of Mexico)
Dark times ahead indeed...... but would not the writer be better employed using his time to help solve the problem in a more positive way, instead of spreading more doom and gloom..
Right ....back to making my fire pistons and mini stoves now
bb
I studied the issue for quite a bit and I believe the article. There is a very good article dealing with all the arguments and questions we have here
check out
In one way or another it doesnt matter what we all believe, as earth is taking care of the problem itself and we are able to watch it unfold. From 1999 to now oil prices got up with 350 percent. Today an oil company has to invest the value of one-barrel oil to get 4 barrels back. With the decline of easy available oil and the amount needed for the daily supply for China and America alone, the question is when do we arrive at the point where we have to invest 1 barrel to get 1 barrel back? Who is investing then to get the stuff out?
With companies and production facilities moving to china and exploding oil price market transportation around the world will be too expensive. How long will I, here in Sweden, be able to buy fruits, which are shipped all the way from Spain? The big trouble is that we destroy the ability for each of our nations to be self-sufficient. How could Germany feed its 80 million people? With the industrial revolution the farmers got killed out of business. Today when all the production facilities move to china and our factories are closing what do we do when we cant pay anymore for the goods shipped around the world.
About the human mind I have no illusions. Only see what happened in New Orleans. If hundreds of hooligans trash each other and the inner cities what are they capable of when they start to starve? Humanism will die a very quick death when people have to change their lifestyle or start to starve.
cheers
Abbe
check out
In one way or another it doesnt matter what we all believe, as earth is taking care of the problem itself and we are able to watch it unfold. From 1999 to now oil prices got up with 350 percent. Today an oil company has to invest the value of one-barrel oil to get 4 barrels back. With the decline of easy available oil and the amount needed for the daily supply for China and America alone, the question is when do we arrive at the point where we have to invest 1 barrel to get 1 barrel back? Who is investing then to get the stuff out?
With companies and production facilities moving to china and exploding oil price market transportation around the world will be too expensive. How long will I, here in Sweden, be able to buy fruits, which are shipped all the way from Spain? The big trouble is that we destroy the ability for each of our nations to be self-sufficient. How could Germany feed its 80 million people? With the industrial revolution the farmers got killed out of business. Today when all the production facilities move to china and our factories are closing what do we do when we cant pay anymore for the goods shipped around the world.
About the human mind I have no illusions. Only see what happened in New Orleans. If hundreds of hooligans trash each other and the inner cities what are they capable of when they start to starve? Humanism will die a very quick death when people have to change their lifestyle or start to starve.
cheers
Abbe
I don't think living memory goes back 200 years, so take with a grain of salt how great they have been. Besides, you would get an argument from all of my aunts and uncles and parents and grandparents about just how wonderful the 1930's were, not to mention the next ten year were. Remember, I'm the guy who writes about living in a log house (never called a cabin). To those folks, oranges were something you might have gotten at Christmas, if you had been good.
I don't know about all this innovation stuff. Isn't it enough to have food on the table. Has everyone forgotten Victory gardens?
I am reminded just now of something Gary Cooper said in some television documentary years ago: "Wouldn't it be fun to tear it all down and start all over?"
I don't know about all this innovation stuff. Isn't it enough to have food on the table. Has everyone forgotten Victory gardens?
I am reminded just now of something Gary Cooper said in some television documentary years ago: "Wouldn't it be fun to tear it all down and start all over?"
We have recorded history going back some 6,000+ tears, archeological history even further back 16,000+ years but homo sapiens have existed for more than 150,000+ years what happened then in between ?
Carcajou Garou said:
We have *archaeological history* a great deal longer than that. The thing is that stone tools, and some carefully positioned artwork aside, our world and the artifacts that humans made/make are organic in nature and decay. We can extrapolate human existance and interference (fires, extinctions of species, plants harvested, etc.,) from other records though. Pollen analysis, hearths re-set magnetism of heated earth/rocks, that sort of thing.
There is no gap in the record, it's just that most of the materials have been recycled
In time they will all be. Even our modern plastics and our nuclear waste will eventually be reprocessed in the enormous timespans of our Earth's geological workings. Our lives are so short
Maybe if they were longer we'd care more for what our actions are doing to the climate and atmosphere of our home and the other lives that share it with us.
I like the phrase about not owning the Earth, we just borrow it from our children
Carcajou Garou said:
Haven't you seen the Flintstones?
But seriously, here's a reasonable place to start:
http://www.historyworld.net/wrldhis/PlainTextHistories.asp?historyid=ab12
im kind of studying this at the moment.. its a very interesting topic i think!
i was thinking of starting a discussion but i think people have some very strong views and it could cause arguments so lets keep it civil people
important things to remember
one. with in the next 50 years or so human population will probably expand by half again to 9 billion.
two. it has taken nearly all of the worlds hydrocarbon fule reservs for europe and north america to advance to the modern world we/they live in today.. imagen what it is going to take for china india and other developing countrys to do the same!?
some people are of the view that we have already reached and gone past the carrying capacity of our habitat (earth) and are living on borrowed time and resources (eg stored oil which will not last for ever) we just havent paid for it yet
others think we have yet to reach the carrying capacity and i dont know which i agree with either way things will change at some point who knows how agriculture and economy and civilisation and the other things which make our civilisation will cope, i dont know but i think its wrong for us to pretend big changes arent going to happen and they that they arnt going to happen in the relativly near future or in our life times!
i was shown this recently and found it interesting..
i was thinking of starting a discussion but i think people have some very strong views and it could cause arguments so lets keep it civil people
important things to remember
one. with in the next 50 years or so human population will probably expand by half again to 9 billion.
two. it has taken nearly all of the worlds hydrocarbon fule reservs for europe and north america to advance to the modern world we/they live in today.. imagen what it is going to take for china india and other developing countrys to do the same!?
some people are of the view that we have already reached and gone past the carrying capacity of our habitat (earth) and are living on borrowed time and resources (eg stored oil which will not last for ever) we just havent paid for it yet
others think we have yet to reach the carrying capacity and i dont know which i agree with either way things will change at some point who knows how agriculture and economy and civilisation and the other things which make our civilisation will cope, i dont know but i think its wrong for us to pretend big changes arent going to happen and they that they arnt going to happen in the relativly near future or in our life times!
i was shown this recently and found it interesting..
What I am trying to say, maybe better a second time around is;
from the time homo sapien set foot on this planet till the recorded history the gap is confused. Why did we in approx 6,000 years of recorded history we accomplished the advances that we have, yet in the 150,000 years ( from grave sites in Israel carbon dated at 150,000+) till then was there such slow or absent development. In the preceding 100,000+ years should have there not been equal or larger gains in knowledge and more technical achievement? The improvement in stone chert points and tools that are more modern in comparison with earlier homids tools is small comparing the advancement by the chart of Tomtom that it took man 4,000? years to go from stone to bronze to iron to steel to silicone chip?
What were we doing in the interim? did we start over after some type of catastrophy? disease? The "gap" in real advancement is confusing, why.
P.S. I also loved the Flintstones as a child even yesterday
I am good in the Bush, but please educate me in this.
from the time homo sapien set foot on this planet till the recorded history the gap is confused. Why did we in approx 6,000 years of recorded history we accomplished the advances that we have, yet in the 150,000 years ( from grave sites in Israel carbon dated at 150,000+) till then was there such slow or absent development. In the preceding 100,000+ years should have there not been equal or larger gains in knowledge and more technical achievement? The improvement in stone chert points and tools that are more modern in comparison with earlier homids tools is small comparing the advancement by the chart of Tomtom that it took man 4,000? years to go from stone to bronze to iron to steel to silicone chip?
What were we doing in the interim? did we start over after some type of catastrophy? disease? The "gap" in real advancement is confusing, why.
P.S. I also loved the Flintstones as a child even yesterday
I am good in the Bush, but please educate me in this.
It seems to basically come down to population and the develpment of cultivation. If you grow sufficient crops more children survive, a growing pool of able bodied young adults open up more land for cultivation.....more people, more social interaction, trade, cultural and religious differences and social practices. The ending of the ice age in Europe which left wonderful rich, easily cultivated Loess soils along river valleys, etc., helped to speed up the process (I believe this was true in China/Korea etc., too but it's well out of my area)
It appears that the scene was set and the time was ripe for the human 'expansion' to exploit the resources available. Hand in hand with this went trade, invention and creativity. Humanity thrived.
Cheers,
Toddy
It appears that the scene was set and the time was ripe for the human 'expansion' to exploit the resources available. Hand in hand with this went trade, invention and creativity. Humanity thrived.
Cheers,
Toddy
Not too impressed by the article to be honest - it seems to be a bit heavy on the rhetoric and the opinions of some people, and a bit light on fact and study.
I don't specifically disagree with it, but a lot of it seems to be fairly poorly informed guesswork and obscure references.
The future of the world is a terrifically complex subject, one that could not even begin to be described in a single article or even book. For example, had Hitler not lost his mother at a young age and become slightly unbalanced (Langer, 1972), would there have been someone else to exploit the German political climate of the 1930s? If not, then world history would have been vastly vastly different.
It's extremely easy to get very pessimisstic about the future. So many signs point in unattractive directions. But each direction is only the beginning of a road - it is only possible to prepare for events that are already happening, and dangerous to try otherwise.
In addition, in a world where the majority of power lies in globalised corporate politics, real changes can only occur at that level. And to instigate such changes, they must be approached from the same.
I don't specifically disagree with it, but a lot of it seems to be fairly poorly informed guesswork and obscure references.
The future of the world is a terrifically complex subject, one that could not even begin to be described in a single article or even book. For example, had Hitler not lost his mother at a young age and become slightly unbalanced (Langer, 1972), would there have been someone else to exploit the German political climate of the 1930s? If not, then world history would have been vastly vastly different.
It's extremely easy to get very pessimisstic about the future. So many signs point in unattractive directions. But each direction is only the beginning of a road - it is only possible to prepare for events that are already happening, and dangerous to try otherwise.
In addition, in a world where the majority of power lies in globalised corporate politics, real changes can only occur at that level. And to instigate such changes, they must be approached from the same.
To be honest I found Wolf At The Door to be a better and more informed read backed by a lot of study, the guy that wrote it also states that he is a normal person just like you and I so he has tried to make it as easy to follow as possible. He also updates it with newer findings everynow and again.
It is true that people tend to think of oil whenever fossil fuel depletion is mentioned, but they should also consider things like coal, but with the worlds largest growing economy going through an industrial revolution at the moment and the fact that they are currently burning more and more fossil fuels it is questionable how long they (fossil fuels) will last.
In the end the plain truth is that no one does know how long these fuels will last, however it is a definite that we are depleting them faster than we are finding viable sources of energy to replace them.
Toddy is correct about man being the most adaptable life form to of hit this planet, however when we have been "up the creek" before we have not had the global population that we have now and the major problem that will arise is feeding people with the areas for cultivation that we have.
Carcajou Garou, with reference to your question try reading The Art Of Tracking, The Origin Of Science by Lieberman. It states something similair to what Toddy said, but it has a slightly different turn to it, all the research that must have gone into the book is pretty amazing.
It is true that people tend to think of oil whenever fossil fuel depletion is mentioned, but they should also consider things like coal, but with the worlds largest growing economy going through an industrial revolution at the moment and the fact that they are currently burning more and more fossil fuels it is questionable how long they (fossil fuels) will last.
In the end the plain truth is that no one does know how long these fuels will last, however it is a definite that we are depleting them faster than we are finding viable sources of energy to replace them.
Toddy is correct about man being the most adaptable life form to of hit this planet, however when we have been "up the creek" before we have not had the global population that we have now and the major problem that will arise is feeding people with the areas for cultivation that we have.
Carcajou Garou, with reference to your question try reading The Art Of Tracking, The Origin Of Science by Lieberman. It states something similair to what Toddy said, but it has a slightly different turn to it, all the research that must have gone into the book is pretty amazing.
Thanks Leon-1, I wrote the tittle down and the next time I get to town where there is a library I will look it up. 
probably not relevant? but the difference between humans and other animals is that
animals adapt to their natural environment and humans insist on destroying or changing the natural environment to suit our needs with out a thought for nature or future generations..
animals adapt to their natural environment and humans insist on destroying or changing the natural environment to suit our needs with out a thought for nature or future generations..
running bare said:probably not relevant? but the difference between humans and other animals is that
animals adapt to their natural environment and humans insist on destroying or changing the natural environment to suit our needs with out a thought for nature or future generations..
is that a fact...?
Similar threads
