Starvation or Old Age?

[sobek]

Edited October 31, 2016 by sobek

[Weta43]

Thanks,

One last thought then I'll leave it alone :-)

Leaving aside our beliefs about the proportion of scientists that do or don't believe global warming is man made. and lets say the scientists were split 50/50.

 

In the 17th century Blaise Pascal said that it is in one's own best interest to behave as if God exists, since the possibility of eternal punishment in hell outweighs any advantage in believing otherwise.

In other words...

If there is a God, then acting as if there is not might gain you a degree more pleasure during your life, but will cost you an eternity if damnation in the afterlife.

If there is no god, then acting as if there is one can only cost some limited amount of 'extra' pleasure during your lifetime.

Weighing the possible benefits against the possible costs, the correct course of action in the face of the uncertainty is to act as if there is a God.

Now my assumption is that if there were a God, they would be more interested in what was in the person's heart than their actions (isn't that the message of the new testaments?), but the argument is interesting.

 

If global warming is a caused by burning fossil fuels, then continuing to do so at the rate we are will give us another generation or two of prosperity, but condemn every generation that follows us to conditions that may lead to the end of our way of life.

If global warming is not caused by human actions, and we act as if it is and reduce the consumption of hydrocarbons, the worst that can happen is that our ecoomies (assuming that adopting the new technologies doesn't in itself provide an economic stimulus) - that already produce more food and goods than we need (it's just not distributed efficiently) - will slow for a couple of decades while er realise our 'breather' has had no effect.

 

?

 

edit - went away and worked then posted - missed your post...

[Rangi]

Or there is the seatbelt analogy, the chances of having a crash are very small, but the consequences of having a crash while not wearing a seatbelt are disastrous.

[lazduc]

Bare this in mind.....Occam's razor.

 

Lazduc

[wavn]

Planned is the New World Order with a central government, central police, central militair, one currency and last but certainly not least one religion.

This NWO must grow out of the current chaos (order out of chaos / ordo ab chao): because of this, the current (created) financial and militairy chaos is better understandable.

What the most important factor is for this NWO may be the "one religion", which will be imposed on us and which is that of mdam Blavatsky and Alice Bailey (Luciferian).

Knowing all this: the old "fundamentalistic" Christian belief of the Bible (which is the most worse thing for this people) may not be that bad after all.......

Edited October 31, 2016 by wavn

[Rangi]

It's not a conspiracy, all those things come from greed. I would love to see someone try to impose religion on anyone, it has never worked before.

[shagrat]

While we're at it, you might want to tell people in developing countries to stop having 10 children of their own, because population growth and receding poverty/growing wealth intensify the issue.

 

The pickle is, we don't have the moral authority.

You don't need to do that. Nature will solve it the hard way over time...

 

Famines, violent conflicts over remaining water sources, food etc. will quickly reduce populations in the disputed areas, which are likely the poorer regions on the planet.

 

That is the whole point of the news.

 

We simply don't have a "second planet" by 2030, so as soon as increasing demand crosses diminishing production/resources people die... If we could perfectly distribute the available resources, that is.

Realistic is that the conflicts over the remaining resources will start much earlier...

 

What TomOnSteam suggested, may delay the problem, but to solve it, unfortunately, it would take much more.

:(

 

Two planets meet. First: "How are you?"

Second: "Not well, I've got the Homo Sapiens."

First: "Don't worry, had the same, recently. That won't last long."

Edited October 31, 2016 by shagrat

[The Black Swan]

I really appreciate your respectfulness and professionalism, I think we agree on a lot of points here. I definitely do not trust the mainstream media at all!

 

 

As far as where I get my info I've kind of accumulated it over a long period of time from different sources and so I don't remember all the details.

 

 

The billionaires are the people I'm talking about, they are trying to manipulate the public opinion to fit their agenda. The cigarette company is a great example, so is Monsanto, the drug company's, bill gates common core. Ect.

 

 

I don't deny at all that the climate changes over time, just that its all man made. There are a lot of examples of "facts" that are portrayed as generally accepted but have been disproven. For example it is said that the layers in the ice caps are years, but when they retrieved a crashed plane from WWII they had to go through thousands of layers to get to it.

 

 

I found your personal experience interesting also!

 

Couldn't agree more! I read once that big volcanos like Krakatoa put more toxins into the ozone layer/atmosphere than all of what mankind has done in history. And that wasn't the only volcano that did that. And yet.... emissions are made the priority by many. I'm all for efficiency, but I'm also for realistic figures.

[Rangi]

 

Two planets meet. First: "How are you?"

Second: "Not well, I've got the Homo Sapiens."

First: "Don't worry, had the same, recently. That won't last long."

 

 

Lol

 

as long as we are just the clap, not a cancer.....

[kolga]

Thanks,

One last thought then I'll leave it alone :-)

Leaving aside our beliefs about the proportion of scientists that do or don't believe global warming is man made. and lets say the scientists were split 50/50.

 

In the 17th century Blaise Pascal said that it is in one's own best interest to behave as if God exists, since the possibility of eternal punishment in hell outweighs any advantage in believing otherwise.

In other words...

If there is a God, then acting as if there is not might gain you a degree more pleasure during your life, but will cost you an eternity if damnation in the afterlife.

If there is no god, then acting as if there is one can only cost some limited amount of 'extra' pleasure during your lifetime.

Weighing the possible benefits against the possible costs, the correct course of action in the face of the uncertainty is to act as if there is a God.

Now my assumption is that if there were a God, they would be more interested in what was in the person's heart than their actions (isn't that the message of the new testaments?), but the argument is interesting.

 

If global warming is a caused by burning fossil fuels, then continuing to do so at the rate we are will give us another generation or two of prosperity, but condemn every generation that follows us to conditions that may lead to the end of our way of life.

If global warming is not caused by human actions, and we act as if it is and reduce the consumption of hydrocarbons, the worst that can happen is that our ecoomies (assuming that adopting the new technologies doesn't in itself provide an economic stimulus) - that already produce more food and goods than we need (it's just not distributed efficiently) - will slow for a couple of decades while er realise our 'breather' has had no effect.

 

?

 

edit - went away and worked then posted - missed your post...

 

I believe we are agreeing on the goal, just not the means.

I believe that the climate change hoax is for gaining control of us, and you believe it's not, but we both believe in a cleaner world.

 

 

Obviously due to my faith I have a different world view, which includes the earth will never be destroyed with water again and the final collapse (world government, then His return) so human extinction in the context of global warming doesn't fly. Anyways I have enjoyed this discussion immensely and hope and pray that in the end truth prevails!

 

 

Safe landings!

[kolga]

Planned is the New World Order with a central government, central police, central militair, one currency and last but certainly not least one religion.

This NWO must grow out of the current chaos (order out of chaos / ordo ab chao): because of this, the current (created) financial and militairy chaos is better understandable.

What the most important factor is for this NWO may be the "one religion", which will be imposed on us and which is that of mdam Blavatsky and Alice Bailey (Luciferian).

Knowing all this: the old "fundamentalistic" Christian belief of the Bible (which is the most worse thing for this people) may not be that bad after all.......

 

Couldn't agree more! I read once that big volcanos like Krakatoa put more toxins into the ozone layer/atmosphere than all of what mankind has done in history. And that wasn't the only volcano that did that. And yet.... emissions are made the priority by many. I'm all for efficiency, but I'm also for realistic figures.

 

Cyber high five!

[shagrat]

I believe that the climate change hoax is for gaining control of us, and you believe it's not, but we both believe in a cleaner world.

 

Hmm, the point of the original post is not so much about "global warming" or "climate change", but the usage of the ressources produced by nature.

 

This little vid gives a better explanation, than what I can do.

 

 

It's pointing out the math of the ressources vs. consumption by humanity.

 

The equation is pretty logical: when the ressources to feed the world population drop below the required amount to feed the population, the population will decrease with the diminishing ressources.

 

The pretty good researched numbers point to the 2030ies as a point where energy production/availability will be lower than energy required to produce/transport the required food on this planet (assuming we would distribute the available food where needed).:helpsmilie:

 

So before this happens, humanity will realize that water, food, energy is what is required to survive and try to secure enough of the diminishing ressources.

 

As far as history tells us, it is unlikely hundreds of millions of people will simply accept their fate and starve/die of thirst. More likely they will use violent force to gain access to the remaining ressources.

 

I personally think it is wishful thinking to solve the underlying problems in some 12-14 years... Even if we develop clean/safe energy not relying on fossile fuels or a rare uranium izotope, say a LFTR (LiquidFueledThoriumReactor) / MSRE (MoltenSaltReactorExperiment) in the next decade, we still need the agricultural ressources (fertile soil in abundance) to grow enough food.

Or the switch to complete "green" energy production, or a mix out of both.

 

Clean Water is another problem not easily solved, so with fracking poluting the groundwater supplies in Canada and the US (starting this B.S. in Eurtope as well), this is likely the biggest issue.

Mind that we talk about digestable sweet water, you may extract/desalinate "water" from seawater or condense it from humid air, but it lacks most of the minerals and ions the body requires, so we need yet, more enrgy to add these in the process...

 

Let's stop here and just hope, pray, do whatever it is you prefer, that the scientists messed up the numbers very badly and it won't happen for another two or more generations. :crazy:

[rrohde]

"Nach uns die Sintflut" ;)

[sobek]

"Nach uns die Sintflut" ;)

 

At this rate it will be "Über uns die Sintflut".

[NineLine]

I am pretty sure threads like this will be the death of me :D

[Pocket Sized]

Chit Chat

What relates, but doesn't fit in.

 

What relates

 

I... I don't quite see how this relates

[cichlidfan]

I... I don't quite see how this relates

 

To be fair, there are lots of threads in Chit Chat that don't relate. No harm being done so just let them go and ignore them if you wish.

 

:)

[shagrat]

I am pretty sure threads like this will be the death of me :D

Mist likely, you and me are dead before it has dire consequences in our countries, not so sure for our children and following generations.

 

As well as , people living in third world countries will be affected earlier.

 

The math and facts are pretty simple.

 

Yet I think we have a margin of one or two decades, maybe. That won't help our children, though.

[NineLine]

Mist likely, you and me are dead before it has dire consequences in our countries, not so sure for our children and following generations.

 

As well as , people living in third world countries will be affected earlier.

 

The math and facts are pretty simple.

 

Yet I think we have a margin of one or two decades, maybe. That won't help our children, though.

 

Dont worry the Asteroid Apophis is scheduled to hit off the West coast of North America in 2036. That will thin the herd, I am sure we will wait too long to do anything about that :)

[shagrat]

"Nach uns die Sintflut" ;)

That is an interesting point, it seems we will be old, but fully suffer and witness the results, if the predictions are more or less accurate.

 

I'll be in my sixties in 2030, so I hope the western "civilization" secures enough resources to keep us going another decade... Of course this means other people will starve or die, trying to defend their resources.

And I guess , if the question is should I die from thirst, or the other guy, it is the end of humanitarian ethics and good will.

 

So could the industry please develop a LFTR (thorium reactor) in the next couple years and solve at least the energy issues until we invent fusion reactors?

 

That would leave only two minor problems: fresh water and food

 

I think I just have a 'Soilent Green' and 'Dune' deja vu...

Edited November 2, 2016 by shagrat

[wavn]

They (the "elite") are heading for a halve billion people (instead of the 7 billion now) in about 2050: see "Agenda 21" and the "Georgia Guidestones": so no environmental problems anymore at that time.

However, It's not exactly clear what happens to the other 6,5 billion people....???.......

[sobek]

That would leave only two minor problems: fresh water and food

 

With energy in abundance, fresh water is no issue at all (reverse osmosis).

[shagrat]

With energy in abundance, fresh water is no issue at all (reverse osmosis).

That would give you demineralized water, which isn't exactly healthy Over time ("Bluthirnschranke").

And I really doubt the "energy in abundance" is available in 10 years.

 

Even if the concept of a LFTR is workable it needs to be designed, tested and build. Then you just need a couple thousands more in few years...

 

Then, or in parallel you would need to direct resources aka money and people to build the water production... Fully realizing that most people who would need that water for survival can never pay for the money/resources you invested? So it won't happen, unless these people threaten our own survival or at least have such a negative impact on finances, that it is cheaper to invest in their survival.

 

You could easily minimize the effects off AIDS in Africa by supplying expensive modern medication and treatments in the western world.

Unfortunately the countries suffering the most under AIDS can't afford the medication patent licenses or importing them. So we let them die, shrug our shoulders, mumble something about rules of capitalism and economy and look the other way.

 

Famines are still a big issue on a global level, while in Europe farmers get paid to reduce or worse destroy food production. Nobody would even consider to ship this food into needy regions, for humanitarian reasons.

 

Though even then it wouldn't help the exponential population growth.

 

I like the example with the bacteria and the bottles, doubling population every minute.

Ok, we need much longer to double the population, but it is a lost cause if we don't change our way of life, only prolonging the inevitable.

 

Back to more fortunate things...

[kolga]

First, I want to say that I do believe a crash of some sort is inevitable, but it is the globalist bankers, billionaires, and politicians who engineered the system to crash so when the riots start they can usher in the world government in the name of order.

 

The only way to change the current trajectory is to fundamentally change the system, which means that people would have to be more dependent on them selfs instead of the government and wal-mart :)

 

 

To Sith: I salute you for letting us have this discussion, I really enjoyed it. Sorry for the pain it caused you.

 

 

I think this is starting to go around in circles a little bit, so this will probably be my last post, I echo the recommendation for doing your own research and not relying on the media.

 

 

Safe landings!

[TomOnSteam]

I honestly did not expect this to be such a civil discussion!:music_whistling:

 

I don't think meat is the most dangerous thing right now: http://www.naturalnews.com/037249_GMO_study_cancer_tumors_organ_damage.html

The scary part of that revelation though is that this GMO crop is fed to the livestock we eat. A cow or pig eats a lot more of it than a human, so when you eat the meat or dairy, you are consuming a concentrated form of the bad things in GMOs.

 

By eating the grain or potatoes yourself instead of filtering them through another species, it ends up being less GMO in your body overall. Not that I'm a fan of GMO, because it destroys the topsoil in the long term.

 

Of course organic farming practices are much better, so if you can afford organic, buy it :)

It's not an "Either-Or" problem. We can eat organic plants and avoid both problems:thumbup:

 

 

 

 

What TomOnSteam suggested, may delay the problem, but to solve it, unfortunately, it would take much more.

Unfortunately yes, it is merely the beginning of a complete solution.

 

The reason why I'm enthusiastic about changing our diets is that we are able to do it ourselves and do it now - without government regulations or without waiting for a technological breakthrough, it allows us individuals to have a say about our destiny.

 

With solar/wind collection on each home it makes us even less reliant on governments and corporations for another one of our basic needs. But not all people are in a position where they can modify their homes, but everyone can make their diet more sustainable reasonably easily.

 

 

Dont worry the Asteroid Apophis is scheduled to hit off the West coast of North America in 2036. That will thin the herd, I am sure we will wait too long to do anything about that

Perhaps it will end like that after all. But when the Mars colony writes history, will the asteroid be considered a tragedy that extinguished the potential of a well meaning species, or will they say it cured the planet of the destructive hairless apes? :)