VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

04/26/25 2:32:24am [ Login ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ]
Subject: Re: four-dimensional space-time extensional ontology


Author:
pjk
 		[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]
Date Posted: 01/15/06 10:08:03pm
In reply to: krz 's message, "Re: nature podcasting" on 01/15/06 7:11:57am
 >I can understand pjk's reluctance about biomass energies >and concerns relative to exchanging waste of one resource >(petrol) for waste of another - but, I'm rather encouraged >and quite pleased that at least those who are exploring >alternative sources of fuel are recognizing two things:
>(1) a petroleum based culture will not surive forever and >it's in our economic interests to be on the lead of finding >new ways to do the same thing, and
>(2) going back to a 'better time' isn't part of their >thinking. This is a forward looking group that seems to >recognize some of the constraints put on the formulas.

>what's the alternative pjk? do nothing? something -
>even if mistakes are made are better than recognizing
>a problem but doing nothing to solve it. pjk -
>industrialism is bigger than all of us but to assume
>prior to taking action that action will fail because
>those in power are inherantly evil prevents trying.
>quite frankly - i don't think that's the mentality of
>this country nor would i hope for it.

krz - WTF? - slow down

What I said wasn't "reluctance" or contrarian. The general topic under which #1 is categorized is called Peak Oil - heard of it? As for point number 2 - I'm not a believer in the "good old days" as you seem imply, nor do I idealize the past any more than you idealize "forward looking people" whatever that means.

>I am inspired by the minds who can think so differently and >move forward challenging the status quo.

It's just that biomass is as old as cavemen and women and also what the poorest 15% of the earth use for fuel and not especially profound. AS for modern day genetic manipulation of crops... I'm quite suspect. The nuclear age challenges the status quo daily; I'm not inspired by all challenges to the status quo. i am not enamored of scientists or their discoveries, per se. I am distressed by those who favor war as a political solution. the protean types to which pa referred are not immune to the distresses of the world for they are human, not ancient greek gods. perhaps they are inspired by their distress. i don't think there are smiles painted on their faces.

if you look closely, i implied biomass might be a "sincere and meaningful avenue to sustainability." i said i didn't think it was practical on a level required to replace petroleum. we need to consider the health of the top soil for it would be foolish to suck the life out of it and then not be able to feed ourselves much less buy shit we really don't need to survive. biomass can/could be great for small communities where it fits into some kind of eco-balance. We're not going to be running Ford and GM on it. i alluded to the ruling class driven modern industrial state dynamic-mechanism that seeks to co-opt everything for its own voracious and unsatiable appetite for money and power (but didn't allude to the shrug their behavior gets from most americans - even the ones with lots of education and resources) and would cut down the last tree for biomass if they thought they could make money from it. the generally held myopic human view that looks to nature as merely a "resource" to satisfy its narcissitic and excessive economic "needs" is a view that I think is destined to lead to yet more misery and failure as it relates to our "success" upon this fragile planet that is ALIVE and not our play thing

there is no such thing as a mentality of a country. but there is such a thing as voting for anti-science and anti-environment and anti-conservation officials who waste money and resources and poo poo the global citizens trying to make a difference in solving the very real problems caused by our industrial culture. see for the UCS summary of the 2005 Energy Bill: http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_energy/clean_energy_policies/energy-bill-2005.html

and what is wrong with thinking about the past? What is wrong with looking to the past? Is there no wisdom there that might help us maneuver our way through the future? Are you a positivist? Is time linear? I don't know whether scientists have harmed humans and biodiversity more than they have helped - but I am not a turn-of-the-20th-century moonie with eyes glazed over at the wonders of "wizards" or their wizardry. it doesn't matter if you think that going back to campfires and horses is stupid and sophomoric - if the industrialized nations do not plan and put aside enough of today's resources to make the next technological transitions - and if today's behavior is any indication then certainly we will not, and many of the experts believe we may have already missed our chance - the concentrated forms of biomass energy left over from hundreds of millions of years ago will run out and we will be left with windmills and water wheels. and so be it. there are myths within our psyche warning us of what happens if we try to fly to the sun, if we pretend we are gods and are disconnected from the dust of which we are made. I don't know what the higher purpose is in this life or any. I don't know if living with nature on a small scale and dying at 45 is better or worse than being 90 years old with alzheimers and sneering aides not changing your diaper all day. I don't know if today's cures are worth the concentrations of heavy metals in the livers of polar bears or the profound pollution found in all corners of the globe. But what I do know is that forever is a long time and that the many thousands of years ahead of us will probably not look like life in the Jetsons. But it doesn't mean I don't wish for breakthroughs in cold fusion or solar panels that are 99.9% efficient. At this point we're still 99% dependent on fossil fuels to produce them. When that segment disappears from the circle or is hoarded to maintain a war machine, it will be far more difficult to find our way out of our dependence and it is not said that we will be able to do so - so perhaps there ought to be a Planck institute looking into the old ways before our common knowledge of the old ways of farming or weaving or medecine making disappears forever. Perhaps backwards looking is actually forward looking.

>without starting a ledger my experience is that risk
>usually results in reward - even if we can't see it in
>the moment. personally, i believe something is better
>than nothing and my experience is that the big
>advances (in health care anyway usually) come from
>small observations in individuals.

i too have risked and risk much in this life but i do not think of the results as rewards but rather a life richly lived - including the failures, the pain and the sufferng. i respect your belief that something is better than nothing, but I do not share that view. I believe that sometimes something is less than nothing and sometimes nothing is more than something.

>solving a small part of the problem is still solving a
>part of the problem and may be impetus for a sea
>change. I understand - it may also be imeptus for
>nothing but where do you want to put your emotional
>energy? i'd rather put mine in dreaming big and
>failing but at least trying.

for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. man's greed and foolishness are legendary and saying that doesn't mean that I'm for or against some vague expression of "solutions to problems" be they large or small.

this is all just very silly - biomass didn't begin with pa's post and just because I say "we must be careful not to create more problems with our solutions" doesn't mean I'm anti or pro-anything.

my day job is about small changes, not monumental. it is about interacting with adolescents and hoping for positive differences in the ways they think about the world and it is about helping to open the world a little more for them - among many many other things. please don't lecture me about dreaming big or relegating small changes as insignificant.
[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:
Subject Author Date
Re: when did you stop hitting your spouse?pjk01/15/06 10:58:02pm
4-Dtjm01/15/06 11:12:10pm

Post a message:
This forum requires an account to post.
[ Create Account ]
[ Login ]
Forum timezone: GMT-7
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.