Head To Head
Log In
Register
U-Know! Forum »
What is better than Capitalism?
Log In to post a reply

Pages: 18 – [ Previous | 18 9 10 11 12 13 | Next ]
Topic View: Flat | Threaded
Dog 3000
Dog 3000
4611 posts

Re: Technology!
Sep 09, 2003, 22:39
The death rate as a whole has gone down -- a lot. Industrial accidents don't come close to killing as many people as small pox, dysentery, lack of food, etc.

Although I think you're wrong about the finite limits on energy (it all comes from the sun, and she's still pumping it out) it is true that there is a finite amount of space on the earth. "Living in boxes" sucks, but it's hard to see where else we're going to put all these people. Western cities are one thing (you can always move out to the countryside), but in East Asia they really don't have a choice in the matter. Before you know it there will be 2 BILLION people living in China . . . and most of the western part of the country is uninhabitable deserts and mountains (the vast majority of Chinese live in the Eastern part.)

The "good news" (wink) is that even in a worst-case scenario overpopulation is a self-correcting problem; when we do overpopulate the world people will start dying until equilibrium is attained (almost true by definition -- if we can support the current population then it's not overpopulated.)

Something else to think about is declining birth rates -- in a lot of central Europe (Germany in particular) the birth rate is below replacement level. In other words, the only reason the population there continues to grow is because people are living longer. This has it's own short-term demographic problems (aging population, who's going to pay the pensions?) but long-term it indicates that populations can level off to an equilibrium point with time.

Of course most of the babies being born live in the "third world" where birth rates are very high (for cultural reasons) while life spans are getting longer (due to medicine, better agriculture, etc.) It seems that the educated-city-living-"first world" lifestyle leads to lower birthrates, but obviously if that's the cause then by the time the "third world" gets there they'll be consuming tremendous quantities of resources like we are here in the "first world."

This seems like the potential crisis to me -- and ideas like mass sterilization, permanent poverty and destroying people's cultures from the outside are not appealing.

Pretty scary huh!

The best halfway solution I can see is for places like Europe to take in a LOT more immigrants than they have been. Doubt that would go over too well though.
morfe lux
301 posts

fission
Sep 09, 2003, 22:42
With respect to that, you may not be surpised to know that the 'Z' machine is currently owned by a company in the pocket of the US Gov (they also manufacture weapon systems).

I researched it sometime back, scant info, but I think the company is called Sandia. Enough energy no doubt to destroythe world manytimes over. Centralised energy production is another way to control the masses.
Dog 3000
Dog 3000
4611 posts

Re: fission
Sep 09, 2003, 22:44
What is this "Z machine" you speak of?

The only cases of people producing fusion (not fission) for energy-generating purposes that I've heard about turned out to be frauds.
stray
stray
2057 posts

Re: The real question is
Sep 09, 2003, 22:46
no I dont. I was just picking up on yr inaccuracies.
morfe lux
301 posts

Back of the class
Sep 09, 2003, 22:54
I think we're fucked.

I'm going to enjoy the natural landscape whilst it's still here. And photograph my experiences for the Blade Runner peeps to look at one day ;-)

I know one day we'll wonder why we ever let go of her skirts and kicked her in the fanny. I see plenty of kid's faces on the street who don't even know the questions to the answers.

Yours,

Krust y Ecologist.

Time for a new thread pt II I reckon, my eyes are sore!

PS i never suggested sunshine was a finite resource. I now it isn't. I was talking about natural resources, minerals, plants, clean water, fish, etc etc
morfe lux
301 posts

Re: fission
Sep 09, 2003, 22:57
http://www.abqtrib.com/arc1/news050698_fusion.html

http://www.sandia.gov/LabNews/LN06-29-01/key06-29-01_stories.html
Dog 3000
Dog 3000
4611 posts

Re: The real question is
Sep 09, 2003, 22:58
Not answering the questions either though . . . I admit I get my Marxists mixed up sometimes . . .
Dog 3000
Dog 3000
4611 posts

Re: Back of the class
Sep 09, 2003, 23:01
My point is that coal, oil, natl gas, fish, grain, etc. are all basically "stored sunlight" . . . there will always be enough "energy" if we can figure out how to harness it efficiently . . . the problem has more to do with space (as in elbowroom, not outerspace.)
Dog 3000
Dog 3000
4611 posts

fusion
Sep 09, 2003, 23:04
Oh that old thing. I thought maybe you were talking about "cold fusion" or something.

Well . . . the US fed gov is funding it, just like the space program.

If you want to fund your own fusion project go ahead . . . it's really expensive though.

One of the better uses for tax dollars if you ask me . . .
morfe lux
301 posts

Re: Back of the class
Sep 09, 2003, 23:10
You'll find that a species, once extinct, will remain extinct, some of which we don't even know are extinct because we killed them off before we discovered them. You advocate slash and burn because things will grow back, but what never grows back equally slowly if at all is the relationship between ourselves and the natural world. When that dies, then we can easily kill the entire planet and ourselves. It's a matter of practicality as well as philosophy. When the earth becomes nothing more to us than a hill to topple, to build aggregate, then what?
Pages: 18 – [ Previous | 18 9 10 11 12 13 | Next ] Add a reply to this topic

U-Know! Forum Index