The defiance of Man(kind)

gozpel

Couch-potato (fortified)
Joined
Jan 3, 2002
Messages
4,412
Location
Australia
We have been around for about 40.000 years now. Before us are our ancestor that lived 500 million years ago. For all that time we and ancestors fought to live in some very unhospitable environments.

But today, we stand in front of many problems that civilization created. I know most of them, but do you?

Please, give me an understanding of the human species as in your view and explain how we will survive.

1:How will we survive the nearest future?
2:How to accommodate all these new people and feed them?
3:Where is science supposed to go?

I could easily put in a 100 more questions there, but I feel these 3 are very good and go hand in hand if you understand the basic meaning.

Just to get an understanding of how you folks feel. :)
 
Please, give me an understanding of the human species as in your view and explain how we will survive.

1:How will we survive the nearest future?
By recognizing human nature for what it is and renouncing the false dogmas of progressivism and democracy. Installing monarchs and technocratic governments everywhere!

2:How to accommodate all these new people and feed them?
There is no such obligation. If it is possible to accomodate, it might be done (or might not), if not then not.

3:Where is science supposed to go?
Developing more and more new ways to extend the abilities and power of humans.
 
1:How will we survive the nearest future?
2:How to accommodate all these new people and feed them?
3:Where is science supposed to go?

1 - What threats do you see on the nearest future that threaten our survival? I see none.

2 - We already produce far more food than needed to feed the whole world. And hunger, on relative terms, is falling fast. And the world is still pretty empty for the most part. And human population won't grow forever, it is expected to peak somewhere between 9-10 billion people.

3 - Forward.
 
We have been around for about 40.000 years now.
I thought it was 150,000...
1:How will we survive the nearest future?
Space!
2:How to accommodate all these new people and feed them?
Space!
3:Where is science supposed to go?
Space!

As you can see, I believe space is our future. Colonization and exploitation of space is inevitable and necessary for the growth of humanity.
 
I thought it was 150,000...

Space!

Space!

Space!

As you can see, I believe space is our future. Colonization and exploitation of space is inevitable and necessary for the growth of humanity.
:goodjob:

Link to video.
 
1. WW2 and cold war has shown in what state we are.

Apart from Russia I can't see any big country on the world map who would prefer working alone and competing for resources vs cooperating and sharing resources.

2. Food is plenty, it is distribution which is uneven.
3. Scientific method will be applied to fields never touched before - physics applied to socialogy, mathemathics to DNA research etc - much more crossover scientists with double PhDs should appear in this century.
 
I think we should allow the 1% to accumulate all the ownership, and then we can scramble and compete for them to share it with us based on how much money we make for them. Just think, eventually we can all be surfs renting the tools of production from the owners, so that they can let us have the minimal returns. And then we can just blame each other for not competing hard enough to please them.

But, if we can crack that problem, I think it's science. We have looming medical costs coming, and we need people to realize that it's cheap cures that are the solution. Instead of re-arranging the deck chairs, we need to start getting off the ship. I know it's hard to find spare time to collect for the research charities, but it's one of the most cost-effective ways cheap cures are available asap.

Ecosystem services are another huge risk. It's very clear that we can withdraw huge abundance by co-opting ecosystems. And it's also clear we can accidentally go too far. We need to deliberately trim away at the ways in which we're inflicting damage. We need to create buffer zones to prevent either runaway extinctions or extinctions of important species. And we need to use innovation to pull more and more food and resources from the ground while causing less and less damage per calorie.

We need to learn how the dictator-crushing of WWII was so successful, and how all the efforts after then have been so less successful. And we need to realize that we have the power and the onus to put ethical obligations on our international corporations. Screw this idea that a propped-up dictatorship has the sole 'right' to rein in the rapacity of our monied entrepreneurs. Allowing our corporations to bribe the oppressors and then profit of our consumerism is just idiotic in the longrun.

At the personal level
: invest time getting more medical R&D funding. Just work to get people to choose a disease of your choice in lieu of a pitcher of beer every once in awhile. We have tremendous reserve capacity here, with the potential ROI we've always had.
: spend some time thinking about the waste stream in your own life. What's the waste generated by your various purchases? Where does the spare heat in your house go? What dictates your travel costs? No one suggests buying less, only buying differently.
: spend some time thinking how to expand and empower International Rights organizations, knowing yeah, there's some give-and-take. Our current system of washing our hands of internal and external exploiters is not sustainable.

Just remember, people make what they're paid to make. You hire people through your consumption, and whether there's 'more' or 'less' in the world depends on what you hire them to do. Efficiencies create spare resources that allow further investment.
 
Back
Top Bottom