Get real mr. Stone! The only way out is not magma. That's letting the volcano in. The only way out is production decrease. Nature has suffered long enough under the capitalistic hammering. — Dijkgraf
It's not the energy being clean or not of course this is important insofar the atmosphere is concerned, but more important is what is done with this energy. Or even more important, the scale of use. — HKpinsky
Things are getting too unpleasant. — Athena
I don't think anything would convince me to believe overpopulation is not a very serious problem — Athena
Magna energy you believe will save our asses will not fuel our cars, at least not if we don't have an energy grid for electric cars, and I don't think electric tanks are going to win wars. Another small fact, oil is sold in dollars and countries around the world hold dollars to pay for that oil and have tied their economies to the value of the dollar. — Athena
What if the magma lies too deep? — Cornwell1
that Magna energy you believe will save our asses will not fuel our cars, — Athena
I love pictures for helping me understand. Geothermal technology is very hopeful but not the answer for everyone. — Athena
Perfect! Yes, it is a shortcut and that is what is wrong with it. What will happen to your thinking if you do not use that shortcut? What will happen to your explanation and the reader's ability to understand what you think is wrong? :wink: There is great hope for you. — Athena
The great age is in danger of becoming extinct because of humans are reducing their territory. This does not happen when there are fewer humans. When there are few humans, nature repairs itself as fast man damages it. But as human populations increase so does the damage and today that means human activity is causing plants and animals to become extinct. — Athena
We are consuming forests faster than they can reproduce and in many forest areas the soil is very poor so once the forest is gone, it is gone. I live in timber territory where timber is a large part of the economy. Besides reforestation, we have Christmas tree farms and they are no longer healthy. If these nurtured trees can not thrive, for sure all those saplings we are planting are not going to survive! I am afraid timber is no longer a renewable product. There is not enough rain for them to survive. Fire goes with this problem. Our forests are suffering from drought and fire is destroying them, while the same drought condition means saplings will not survive. Now consider all the wildlife that depends on the forest. We need to stop cutting down our forest yesterday, or at least do this cutting with more care. — Athena
That will drive up the cost of timber up and therefore the cost of housing and already we have a serious housing problem and a huge homeless population. This includes disabled and elderly people, as well as parents with children, and this problem just keeps getting worse. We did not have that but now we do. Any growing thing can reproduce to the point of destroying its environment if nature does have a way of killing it off. That includes humans. This video may help convey the problem of overpopulation. — Athena
Different points of view are a good thing. I don't think anything would convince me to believe overpopulation is not a very serious problem and you will not be convinced that the apes and other species seriously need their habitats or they become extinct. Name-calling is divisive and not a good thing. — Athena
Hope for what? Not even if we had unlimited cheap energy would that make life on a finite planet unlimited. — Athena
That does not mean I do not have hope. I have hope that human beings are capable of understanding reality and like many people in China realize the importance of having one child. — Athena
This reasoning is based on reading geology books. We have a pretty good understanding of the world's supply of essential resources, where they are, and when the demand will be greater than the supply. — Athena
The hope must be based on information and education for living with our reality. The planet can not afford dreams of no limits. And as for who must die so that others can live- who wants to live through what future generations are going to live through? Some may survive and be able to maintain civilization but I don't think this will happen if we do not work with the facts. And we must come together for these few people to have a chance. We will die but if we do things right, they have a chance of living. — Athena
I endorse much of what you have written. Good people do tend to get angry when they see the immense potency of value being wasted away. I think that your frustration with those who do not understand the need (and power) of concerted effort towards the improvement of society is justified. I think the only pertinent thing to keep in mind would be that there are hidden yet dazzling diamonds in the sand.
Yeah, I think that cooperation at the highest level is vital (that is why I had earlier alluded to the fact that micro-level action seems to be more significant right now, which is good, but not perfect). Recent announcements, such as India announcing its goal to achieve net-zero carbon emissions, are appreciable, yet there is scope for improvement. I also agree that mixed economies are probably the best bet since imbalanced approaches do not seem to provide comprehensive solutions. Magma energy looks like an immensely interesting idea! I will surely look into this — DA671
Sometimes, a mist can obscure our ability to see the light. However, I am optimistic that it exists-and it is getting stronger. I have met others like you who, instead of falling prey to unbridled pessimism, wish to contribute towards making the world a happier place for all via the careful use of technology and investment in green energy. It's particularly heartening to see many young people supporting these ideas, sometimes in defiance of the views of their elders. The change will come as long as we remember the worth of combined effort. Everybody hopes some for growth and preservation, and others for destruction. However, hope remains in all of us, and I believe therein lies the strength of true and realistic hope. Best of luck to you for your future endeavours! — DA671
You keep on hammering on magma energy but is it indeed the safe answer to all our energy problems? How do you know the magma gods won't turn against us? In iceland it works, but there live only half a million of people. That's about 20 000 times less than the global population! Magma in Iceland resides under a thin surface. That's not the case for many countries, just like the Sun doesn’t shine everywhere to turn into usable energy.
Isn't the hammering too frolic? — Cornwell1
Knowing which technology is right or wrong usually comes after the fact. — Cornwell1
That's exactly what science has almost done! — Cornwell1
Despite of all this technology? Because all of this technology. — Cornwell1
Not really, because it's the wrong technology applied for the wrong reasons. It's science used as a tool, in pursuit of ideological ends, rather than developing and applying technology for reasons rational to a scientific understanding of reality. — karl stone
I express my profuse apologies if anything I said came off as rude/offensive. As I have said elsewhere, I do have a lot to learn, and that starts when the single-minded focus on "I" ends. — DA671
Cooperation instead of competition, generally. At least on the micro-level, I do see it a lot where I live. Small business owners coming together to fight for their rights and locals demonstrating together for a pothole near a house isn't uncommon. Of course, more needs to be done. — DA671
I was referring to their claim about them looking beyond themselves. I have seen people who do so, and I hope I can learn something from them. People are selfish, but there are also individuals like you who care about others and the ever-pervasive issue of myopic selfishness. I used to think that working together was a platitude, but I do not think so anymore, because it does have the capacity to bring change (such as the farmers' protest in India) and instil joy in the souls of countless people. — DA671
Holey cow! So we all should bow to the tyranny of science? — Cornwell1
I do not disagree with you entirely! I think that your point about many people focusing on their selfish and limited interests undoubtedly deserves attention. As I have said in my replies to Schopenhauer1, we certainly have to work together to address many of our contemporary issues. It would not be possible to do so without a change in one's mindset. No man is an island. — DA671
I only wanted to concur with the idea that there are good people in the world who do positive deeds, sometimes without the expectation of any fame or material wealth (which might be why they are not always known). Therefore, I think that hope for a better future continues to persist. I am sorry if my reply seemed to ignore what you had said; I did not intend to do so. Have a delectable day! — DA671
I agree. Despite the odds we currently face, I do think that there are many good people out there who do want to make the world a better place. — DA671
Speak for yourself... — Cornwell1
Again, speak for yourself. — Cornwell1
I look beyond my own sad self, though I'm not always sad. You should show some responsibility to truth here! I wonder sometimes even about the beginning of our universe and beyond. I agree we have a cosmic potential. though lying and cheating is no vindication of non-existence. On the contrary, it is a confirmation of existence: Mentior ac fallere ergo sum. — Cornwell1
We all know overpopulation is a problem that is only growing, by 2050 we will have to feed 10 billion people. — Schrödinger's cat
Riiight. Let's go to a slaughterhouse or an abortion clinic where we can observe the "the miraculous nature of everyday reality". — baker
It would be easier for you to convince me that you know enough, if you did not begin by declaring overpopulation is not a problem. — Athena
China has a very serious water supply problem, and places, where the water supply is from melting glaciers, will not be able to sustain their populations when the glaciers are gone. — Athena
Where I live there is a huge homeless population and poverty is a more serious problem because rents are so high, and none of this would be so if we were not dealing with overpopulation. — Athena
Do you really mind if there are less cars, less campers, less drones, less cameras, less washing machines, less kitchen aids, less stereo amplifiers, less microwave ovens, less roads, less fences, less light bulbs, less plastic bottles, less perfumes, less electricity wires, less computers, less experiments, less tools, less lasers, less production of useless stuff, etc.? — Cornwell1
You're not impressed by the above arguments about an infinite series of big bangs? It does seem absurd that something has existed forever with no explanation. — Down The Rabbit Hole
The energy coming from a fusion reaction is higher than what you put into it. The kinetic energy of two hydrogen nuclei in a fruitful event is less than the energy coming out. So clever engineering can make it work. — Cornwell1
Here I'm lost. Less production means less energy means less impact on nature. — Cornwell1
What seems more far-fetched:
(1) something from literally nothing
(2) an infinite past? — Down The Rabbit Hole
Then why they still trying? You can make it happen in a bomb, so why not in a plant? — Cornwell1
Or you can consume and produce less. — Cornwell1
Fusion could already have been economically if only enough effort had been put in it. — Cornwell1
Solar cells can get more economical still. You can put them on every roof top or even in the dessert. — Cornwell1
Hydrogen can be made with the aid of that energy and truly green cars produced. On my birth island in Italy, magma heath is used for saunas. Who knows what will happen if you tap magma energy for the whole Earth? Nobody. The best solution: lower the energy consumption. — Cornwell1
That sounds wonderful and I watched a show last night about Bill Nye the Science Guy and his fight to get religious leaders to accept science, We all need to picket this place at the top of the tourist season https://arkencounter.com/ . It is a theme park presenting a full-sized Noah's ark as though this were science. The people who present this park, and visit it, are the enemies of science. They are climate change deniers. Or perhaps we could find out which churches in our neighborhoods are climate deniers and ask to talk with them about global warming? — Athena
It is not strange to me that things are getting worse, because the ancients saw the end as a time when there was more life on earth than the earth could support. We are there. The mass of humanity has overwhelmed the earth's ability to support it. The world seriously needs population control and it would be nice to do this with reason, instead of killing the excess humans in our countries and making war on other countries. The refugee problem around the world is the reality of overpopulation. — Athena
You can harvest the wind too. Or solar energy. And use hydrogen to store the energy and make it portable. Only water will be waste. Not to mention fusion energy. — Cornwell1
Without scientific truth, economy wouldn't have grown as devastatingly as in the modern world. — Cornwell1
Yeah, well, what's more to say about it. — Cornwell1
Despite of all this technology? Because all of this technology. — Cornwell1
That's still technology. — Cornwell1
You might consider technology an art, the material expression of knowledge, and assign high value to state of the art technology, but it is embedded in a larger reality. It's a fact that if the presence of technology increases, and knowledge grows, they will reinforce each other exponentially, a fact supported by economic growth models. You might have a clean energy source, say the Sun, fusion, or magma, like on Island (where the world's first hydropen pump station opened up), you might recycle all you use, but if technology's presence grows exponentially, no technology in the world will be sufficient to restore the disturbed balance. Only a stable presence of tech can prevent disaster. Maybe a technology that doesn't grow but changes. — Cornwell1
Despite of all this technology? Because all of this technology. — Cornwell1
It kind of reminds me of Egypt and thinking it is the pharaoh's job to prevent chaos from destroying the harmony with nature that is essential to staying out of trouble. — Athena
How about philosophy that ties into cutting edge science, like cognitive theory or perceptual psychology? As an adherent of ‘scientific method’ I would assume you try to keep up with actual research results in such cutting edge fields. — Joshs
Ha Ha... thanks for the heads up!
If what you say has any element of truth within it then perhaps, over time, I will be less concerned about being able to hold my intellectual ground during dialogue with all comers on this forum. Hopefully, I will also never ossify and always maintain an open mind towards the viewpoints of others. — universeness
I am so going to steal the term 'intellectual masturbation,' I don't seem to have encountered (I refuse to say 'come across it'..oh,...I just did) it before. It is a great descriptor for the smug look I have often viewed on the face of one protagonist when they think they have just scored an intellectual point against another. I think I will be using that term when I see that look in someone's face again. I think its a great counter. I admit to secretly feeling that way myself, when in debate but I have always felt a little ashamed afterward. Or at least, it makes me question my own motivations and priorities when dealing with others around me. — universeness
This reminded me of Wittgenstein. — Joshs