Could Global Warming be the Savior of Humanity?

"Brad Guth" wrote in message
...



Expect another energy
speculation frenzy unless newer technology gives us viable
alternatives for obtaining more hydrocarbons from existing fields plus
uncovering new ones, as well as the world utilizing less per person at
the same time (good luck with accomplishing that lat one). The good
news is that natural gas reserves will likely outlast oil reserves by
a few decades at best, but then what?

The oil market is already on a hair trigger. Just the fear of
a shortage during Iraq caused oil prices to quadruple
in months. What if we had a ..real shortage?

And panics like that are all about confidence and expectations
more than the hard numbers, at least once in a thin market
as today, anything can set off a panic.



Myself , William Mook and Steven Chu have offered a few valid
solutions


I believe that free market democracies are best suited to explore
and fund new technologies, and provide political stability.
Best able to adapt and find solutions to any problem that
comes along.

Or, in military terms, democracy is the best force multiplier
when it comes to positive spin offs.

s

On Jan 18, 5:05*pm, "Jonathan" wrote:
"Brad Guth" wrote in message

...

Expect another energy
speculation frenzy unless newer technology gives us viable
alternatives for obtaining more hydrocarbons from existing fields plus
uncovering new ones, as well as the world utilizing less per person at
the same time (good luck with accomplishing that lat one). *The good
news is that natural gas reserves will likely outlast oil reserves by
a few decades at best, but then what?

The oil market is already on a hair trigger. Just the fear of
a shortage during Iraq caused oil prices to quadruple
in months. What if we had a ..real shortage?

And panics like that are all about confidence and expectations
more than the hard numbers, at least once in a thin market
as today, anything can set off a panic.

Myself , William Mook and Steven Chu have offered a few valid
solutions

I believe that free market democracies are best suited to explore
and fund new technologies, and provide political stability.
Best able to adapt and find solutions to any problem that
comes along.

Or, in military terms, democracy is the best force multiplier
when it comes to positive spin offs.

s

Where do you supposed that "free market democracies" exist?

Seems our nation lost whatever "free market democracies" when we
mutually perpetrated the cold war.

Are you suggesting that government and insider honesty doesn't matter?

What American agency is fully trustworthy?

~ BG

On Jan 18, 7:26*am, tooly wrote:
On Jan 17, 10:40*pm, Immortalist wrote:



On Jan 17, 6:00*pm, "Jonathan" wrote:

"Roger Coppock" wrote in message

....

So, if you're in a loosing situation, like falling from high place
without a parachute, realize that it could be a good thing. *At least,
this will keep your mind busy, until you hit the ground.

You only read the subject line, right ~

"people tend to make the best of something they know is bound to
happen"

The Psychology of Inevitability

George Bernard Shaw was hard hit by his father's alcoholism, but he
tried to make light of it. He once wrote: "If you cannot get rid of
the family skeleton, you may as well make it dance." In a sense,
dissonance theory describes the ways people have of making their
skeletons dance—of trying to live with unpleasant outcomes. This is
particularly true when a situation arises that is both negative and
inevitable. Here people attempt to make the best of things by
cognitively minimizing the unpleasantness of the situation. In one
experiment, Jack Brehm got children to volunteer to eat a vegetable
they had previously said they disliked a lot. After they had eaten the
vegetable, the experimenter led half of the children to believe they
could expect to eat much more of that vegetable in the future; the
remaining children were not so informed. The children who were led to
believe it was inevitable that they would be eating the vegetable in
the future succeeded in convincing themselves that the vegetable was
not so bad. In short, the cognition "I dislike that vegetable" is
dissonant with the cognition "I will be eating that vegetable in the
future." In order to reduce the dissonance, the children came to
believe the vegetable was really not as noxious as they had previously
thought. John Darley and Ellen Berscheid showed that the same
phenomenon works with people as well as vegetables. In their
experiment, college women volunteered to participate in a series of
meetings in which each student would be discussing her sexual behavior
and sexual standards with another woman whom she didn't know. Before
beginning these discussion sessions, each participant was given two
folders. Each folder contained a personality description of a young
woman who had supposedly volunteered for the same experience; the
descriptions contained a mixture of pleasant and unpleasant
characteristics. Half of the participants were led to believe they
were going to interact with the young women described in folder A, and
the remaining participants were led to believe they were going to
interact with the one described in folder B. Before actually meeting
these women, the participants were asked to evaluate each of them on
the basis of the personality descriptions they had read. Those who
felt it was inevitable that they were going to share their intimate
secrets with the young woman described in folder A found her much more
appealing than the one described in folder B, whereas those who
believed they had to interact with the young woman described in folder
B found her much more appealing. Just as with vegetables,
inevitability makes the heart grow fonder. The knowledge that one is
inevitably going to be spending time with another person enhances the
positive aspects of that person—or at least deemphasizes his or her
negative aspects. In short, people tend to make the best of something
they know is bound to happen.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0716733129/

An Example from the Civil Rights decades;http://groups.google.com/group/alt.p...81e9ae3bd4cc5e

But what does all this mean philosophically? *So, we lick this energy
crisis. *What next? *Our time remains limited, though we stretch it
out as much as possible. *so, we get to survive another 100 years...or
a thousand...or ten thousand. *It remains inevitable that someday,
humanity will be looking at it's last day of existence. *Or is this
wrong thinking?

It seems to me we only get a "MOMENT" here...though that moment is not
defined exactly [days, years, or tens of thousands of years?]. *But a
moment is still...only momentary.

Does this not change our philosophical purview of things? *How does
any creature make the BEST of their moment? *

I think it would be in ethics, an analysis of how we turn problems
into blessings or something. So many times after a catastrophe we
learn so many things.

By spending it trying to
stretch it out? *Perhaps. *No one wants to die. *It's just a question
I have; perhaps a rehash of the grasshopper versus the ant conundrum?
An old book title written by Robert Heinlein always stuck in my head,
"Time Enough for Love". *Not sure if it is applicable, but makes me
think nonetheless.

If it is possible to make resurrection machines humans will probably
discover how to build them and we will complain about to many millions
of years "for love" we have. What if people came to worry about having
to live to -Long-?

An embarrassing page I made back in 1995.
http://reanimater.tripod.com/

On 01/18/2011 02:00 AM, Jonathan wrote:

Please look at the following two 'versions' of Earth.
One is our past and ...future.

Earth 18,000 years ago
http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/last_glacial_max.html

Earth present day
http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/pr...erglacial.html



A Brief History of Ice Ages and Warming

"Except for two relatively brief interglacial episodes, one peaking
about 125,000 years ago (Eemian Interglacial), and the other beginning
about 18,000 years ago (Present Interglacial), the Earth has been under
siege of ice for the last 160,000 years."


The reigning climate pattern is where the Earth spends roughly 100,000
years in a deep ice age, followed by
a brief period of some 15 or 20 thousand warmer years where life explodes.

The last ice age ended some.....18,000 years ago....btw.

As far as I know, there's no good explanation for this
ice age cycle. Which would imply....strongly imply..
the cause is some as yet unknown astronomical change.

So when this occurs some century soon, humanity needs
to be ready, and have the ability to quickly and effectively
respond...one way of the other. Regardless if the future
is too warm, or too cold.

This leads me to what might seem like a contradiction.
I don't believe the current climate change is such a menace to our
future, all things considered. But I do
agree that the world should collectively begin
gaining the ability to manage the biosphere.

Which requires the nations of the world to be able
to manage..themselves..first. The answer to climate change is...social
change. World-wide freedom and democracy!

Climate change will cause the extinction of
the ...dictatorships of the world.
And to our great benefit!


Imho!


Jonathan


Global Warming a Chilling Perspective
http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/ice_ages.html



The next Ice Age is not expected for another 20,000 years, so if we all
agree to stop burning fuel until then, well yes you could be right.

Conversely, if we continue at the present rate, the folks in 20,000
years time will have nothing left to burn, so you're not doing them a
big load of help by burning it all now.

T.

On Mon, 17 Jan 2011 20:00:31 -0500, "Jonathan"
wrote:


Please look at the following two 'versions' of Earth.
One is our past and ...future.


Earth 18,000 years ago
http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/last_glacial_max.html

Earth present day
http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/pr...erglacial.html

"Except for two relatively brief interglacial episodes, one peaking
about 125,000 years ago (Eemian Interglacial), and the other
beginning about 18,000 years ago (Present Interglacial), the
Earth has been under siege of ice for the last 160,000 years."

So, what the **** does it matter? There weren't nearly seven
billion people on the planet back then; no hospitals; no airports;
no sewage treatment systems; no hospitals; no public schools. The
currebt warming period is the problem--- not past warming and
cooling periods.

The reigning climate pattern is where the Earth spends
roughly 100,000 years in a deep ice age, followed by
a brief period of some 15 or 20 thousand warmer years
where life explodes.

The last ice age ended some.....18,000 years ago....btw.

As far as I know, there's no good explanation for this
ice age cycle. Which would imply....strongly imply..
the cause is some as yet unknown astronomical change.

So when this occurs some century soon, humanity needs
to be ready, and have the ability to quickly and effectively
respond...one way of the other. Regardless if the future
is too warm, or too cold.

This leads me to what might seem like a contradiction.
I don't believe the current climate change is such a
menace to our future, all things considered. But I do
agree that the world should collectively begin
gaining the ability to manage the biosphere.

Which requires the nations of the world to be able
to manage..themselves..first. The answer to
climate change is...social change.
World-wide freedom and democracy!

Climate change will cause the extinction of
the ...dictatorships of the world.

And to our great benefit!


Imho!


Jonathan


Global Warming a Chilling Perspective
http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/ice_ages.html


--
http://desertphile.org
Desertphile's Desert Soliloquy. WARNING: view with plenty of water
"Why aren't resurrections from the dead noteworthy?" -- Jim Rutz

On Mon, 17 Jan 2011 17:58:19 -0800 (PST), Roger Coppock
wrote:

So, if you're in a loosing situation, like falling from high place
without a parachute, realize that it could be a good thing. At least,
this will keep your mind busy, until you hit the ground.

The many waves of massive deaths that rolled across Europe,
depopulating it through disease and famine, are considered by some
people to have been "good" for the current military-industrialized
society. The massive amount of death is considered to have freed
up available food and water for the survivors, and make live
easier for them. Same is true for the 7 times Christians tried to
eradicate Jews and Muslims and "not real true Christians" from the
planet.


--
http://desertphile.org
Desertphile's Desert Soliloquy. WARNING: view with plenty of water
"Why aren't resurrections from the dead noteworthy?" -- Jim Rutz

On Wed, 19 Jan 2011 18:01:46 +0100, Tom P
wrote:

*CUTS*

The next Ice Age is not expected for another 20,000 years, so if we all
agree to stop burning fuel until then, well yes you could be right.

Certainly I am not looking forward to the next ice age.

Conversely, if we continue at the present rate, the folks in 20,000
years time will have nothing left to burn, so you're not doing them a
big load of help by burning it all now.

If they exist. In 20,000 years there may be only a few hundred
thousand people alive. They won't have iron, nor steel, nor fossil
fuels.

T.


--
http://desertphile.org
Desertphile's Desert Soliloquy. WARNING: view with plenty of water
"Why aren't resurrections from the dead noteworthy?" -- Jim Rutz

On Jan 20, 4:20*am, Desertphile
wrote:

The
currebt warming period is the problem---

What is the "problem"? The Siberians using less fire wood for heating
is a problem?

MG

On Jan 19, 9:01*am, Tom P wrote:
On 01/18/2011 02:00 AM, Jonathan wrote:





Please look at the following two 'versions' of Earth.
One is our past and ...future.

Earth 18,000 years ago
http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/last_glacial_max.html

Earth present day
http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/pr...erglacial.html

A Brief History of Ice Ages and Warming

"Except for two relatively brief interglacial episodes, one peaking
about 125,000 years ago (Eemian Interglacial), and the other beginning
about 18,000 years ago (Present Interglacial), the Earth has been under
siege of ice for the last 160,000 years."

The reigning climate pattern is where the Earth spends roughly 100,000
years in a deep ice age, followed by
a brief period of some 15 or 20 thousand warmer years where life explodes.

The last ice age ended some.....18,000 years ago....btw.

As far as I know, there's no good explanation for this
ice age cycle. Which would imply....strongly imply..
the cause is some as yet unknown astronomical change.

So when this occurs some century soon, humanity needs
to be ready, and have the ability to quickly and effectively
respond...one way of the other. Regardless if the future
is too warm, or too cold.

This leads me to what might seem like a contradiction.
I don't believe the current climate change is such a menace to our
future, all things considered. But I do
agree that the world should collectively begin
gaining the ability to manage the biosphere.

Which requires the nations of the world to be able
to manage..themselves..first. The answer to climate change is...social
change. World-wide freedom and democracy!

Climate change will cause the extinction of
the ...dictatorships of the world.
And to our great benefit!

Imho!

Jonathan

Global Warming a Chilling Perspective
http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/ice_ages.html

The next Ice Age is not expected for another 20,000 years, so if we all
agree to stop burning fuel until then, well yes you could be right.

Conversely, if we continue at the present rate, the folks in 20,000
years time will have nothing left to burn, so you're not doing them a
big load of help by burning it all now.

T.

We should have been measurably tipping into the next ice age as of a
century ago. Instead the global trend is still strongly thawing us
out.

~ BG

"Desertphile" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 17 Jan 2011 17:58:19 -0800 (PST), Roger Coppock
wrote:

So, if you're in a loosing situation, like falling from high place
without a parachute, realize that it could be a good thing. At least,
this will keep your mind busy, until you hit the ground.

The many waves of massive deaths that rolled across Europe,
depopulating it through disease and famine, are considered by some
people to have been "good" for the current military-industrialized
society.
The massive amount of death is considered to have freed
up available food and water for the survivors, and make live
easier for them. Same is true for the 7 times Christians tried to
eradicate Jews and Muslims and "not real true Christians" from the
planet.



"The Winds drew off
Like hungry dogs
Defeated of a bone.
Through fissures in
Volcanic cloud
The yellow lightning shown.
The trees held up
Their mangled limbs
Like animals in pain,
When Nature falls
Upon herself,
Beware an Austrian!"




s





--
http://desertphile.org
Desertphile's Desert Soliloquy. WARNING: view with plenty of water
"Why aren't resurrections from the dead noteworthy?" -- Jim Rutz