Money seems to have lost its meaning because it has lost what it was that it was supposed to represent. So talking about it in certain ways seems increasingly less meaningful, like a runaway debt-train. Like some people's lives, such as those who've been displaced from their land, resources and/or way of life via a corrupt profit-motive.
If Lake Okanagan (and surrounds) were in some other country, it might have already been polluted beyond return by so-called private industry and/or gov't.
The 40-hour work week's a joke and everything in life is fundamentally free.
Google Groups alt.architecture is getting a lot of spam lately, so I've had to sift more than usual to find this thread...
Funding seems to imply money, although I'm not necessarily against money, just its corruption. (So what else is new?) While I've wished for and pondered quick and effective self-correcting mechanisms for that sort of thing, we do have it in nature's revolts (global warming?), political/ideological revolutions (Cuba?), and wars (WW2?), etc., where not everyone/eveything survives or comes up roses. I guess that's the fundamental truth, ay? As for sci-research, in this light, I might inquire as to what kind do we need, but then what would it matter to our dreams or nightmares as long as we're around to have them?
"Courage and Cowards move, heroes to ecstasy Welcomes of war and wounds, vigil and victory Structures of atoms dance, sugar towards the taster Prey to the predator, love as we're falling down Through light and laughter flow, to dirge and death we go Mindless processions move, lanterns of burning towns Welcome to fray and feast, bliss in all sorrows found..."
Just to add from my previous post: If we're to have, or continue with, some kind of "elected officialism", and have them help manage and/or manage the funding of scientific research, how about I/we have choices and votes to contribute to our research of preference and with maybe something similar with added checks and balances for questionable research? I recall seeing an unsettling video that appeared to be a dog's head being brought back to life in a Russian (or Soviet) lab. I may have seen it on You Tube and it may still be there. There are viewer responses below and where you can add your own. Maybe the net in this and similar ways can help demystify scientific research and the gov't process, and engage the voting public. The gov't are the people right? Perhaps the less hours of work we do and the less, or the more selective, the funding and research gov't has to work with, the more responsible/important/critical the research may become if we agree that there's a question of responsibility, importance, etc., with some of it.
"Fundamental truth"? How about; 'whatever happens, nature will make the final determination' and/or 'we might get pretty screwed if we don't get our acts together before that happens'?
I'm in a public library in a foreign country with all kinds of children running around. What would be your advice on opening that link? ...BTW, there's this particular, most likely male, kid who has been carrying around and pushing in a stroller his younger baby sibling brother(?) all over the place. Who says guys (or children for that matter) don't have strong nurturing instincts? :) He just briefly sat down right near me with his sibling(?) on his lap looking quizzically at me on my laptop, perhaps because I noticed and smiled at them as they went by the umpteenth time with their stroller.
Ah yes, that queen thingy... She's indicative of a larger concern-- the kind of attitude, perhaps, that might keep (some of) us all square where we are and will ever be. I suppose some people are happy operating within the bee or ant model, so it might be best if those who are, get together in a separate colony with the queen and leave the rest of us alone.
Then maybe we need to re-define/-invent gov't: 'Govmonks R Us!'
formatting link
from the clip: "...So then the reason you pay rent is because if you don't, then some guy is going to come with a gun and force you out..." "...it's a really strange system when you have to pay... to exist... That forces us into the system..."
I've said it before, this thing will level out at ground zero, where the feet hit the floor. The skwalkbox at the top means nothing to me, the man on the ground is who matters. When the skwalker claims I have to wear my seatbelt I just ignore it. When the guy with the gun approaches me we have to deal like human beings, on MY terms, afterall, he approached ME. His costume is meaningless, his ideals are lifeless, is worth is valueless, to me. THIS is where the battle will take place. Not on high but on low, down on the ground. The clowns at the top live by ASSumptions, that what they think holds value. It does not, unless you give them value by voluntary submission.
Where the feet hit the floor...? What, when someone gets out of bed?
I'd be dead twice if it weren't for seatbelts. I wore them before there was a law about it. Neither time was I at fault, so it's not a "I'm a careful driver so I don't need them" thing. There's a good chance you'll never need them, but there's a chance that you will. Your neck, your call, but I don't see how you're "winning".
That sounds like a grade school dance approach to approaching someone. It's counterproductive and even making such a comment means you are making a ridiculously large number of assumptions to make whatever point it is you're trying to make.
An English teacher in high school said something that's stuck with me. "Respect is giving the other person the benefit of the doubt." Earning it...? How can someone you just met earn your respect quickly? Spit farther than you can?
You're making assumptions. A lot of them. Why are you assumptions better?
Listen, what's up with the whole negative attitude thing? Big fookin' deal - the world sucks and it ain't fair. You should have learned that in grade school and been well over it by the time you were 25. The only thing you're gnawing on, is your own gut.
You got out of FL before it went boom, you have a nice house you're investing your BS&T into and having fun doing it, you're long time married and the kids are grown and gone, and you're doing what you want. So what's with the whole the sky is falling schtick?
Well we all have blind spots, but sometimes we have to put our feet forward if we're going to go anywhere, despite the knowledge that we're not going to know precisely where they land... Watch those mines!
Cool term-- 'Al Gorean'... 'Al and his disparate collusion of colleagues...' ;)
Seriously, though, I wonder how big of a volcano-cone and emission one would have if one added the cumulative circumference of every exhaust pipe of every transport vehicle and fossil-fuelled energy plant around the globe. What is it at now? 85 million barrels of oil a day? (coal/gas/etc. not included) I wonder how that compares with a volcano.
Imagine one queen woman popping out kids at the global rate. What is the global rate these days anyway? 75 million? Well the more consumers the better, right?
Could you rephrase a bit of that? I've been doing my homework on peak oil, and it doesn't look like an oil company scheme. In fact that possibility is at the laughable stage over here.
Intriguing deduction, I wouldn't doubt it. I was just thinking of Pangaea the other day (also on Wikipedia), as an idea for the name of a new global free self-governing human tribe called the Tribe Of Pangaea. I'm about to look into what creatures were around at that time and maybe using one of their fossil forms as an icon for the tribe. This of course is just leisure-time thinking, more of which our society seems to need.
Makes sense.
I've been reading about the big differences between the earth having it and actually finding it, developing it, extracting it, refining it and the time, energy, environmental costs, etc. it takes. Sometimes I feel as though we're already up shit's creek and have lost one of our two paddles. Volcanoes I can live with.
Like the global warming scare, peak oil may be a fabrication as well. In the amazing world of the innertoobz if you search long enough you can prove AND dispel anything. But there is a general rule of modern life that goes something like this: "Follow the money" IOW, who will gain the most by widespreading the notion of peak oil? For the answer, watch the daily market signals mounted right out front of every gas station across the land. Currently, 'round here, it stands at 2.83 and climbing. The theory is that when things get scarce they get expensive.
It was a type of therapsid, which may be the link between lizards and mammals.
Wouldn't it be something if eaons pass and a new species studies our fossil/cultural remains. If you wanted to leave a message, maybe laser-etched at the atomic level to a molar, what would it be?
glance,
formatting link
Heard about it already, but it's a question of where it is and where's America's and why haven't they capitalized on it by now? They passed their peak around about 1970.
In any case, unless oil gets replaced almost as fast as it gets used up, our barrels are going to go half empty, or half-full if you're optimistic.
"Stuck on a ship of anger, argument, denial, procrastination and/or blame, etc., blindly sailing full-speed toward an iceberg with no lifeboat, rescue or warm water in sight." ...Sounds more like an epitaph... Ok, I'll work on the molar thing later.
Well sure, we can't fly around the world like superman with x-ray vision or subterranean fist-/head-drilling capabilities and confirm the peak oil issues.
So I guess we have to apply some methodology that's as scientific as we can get, relying on logic, lateral thinking ;) intuition, sifting, finding patterns, clues, doing a lot of cross-referencing, and so on.
An advertising message seems to require a single source or some kind of (consensus for) collusion and what it will contain, and how it will be promoted and so on. But that isn't easy in a world full of people running around and scientists and industry-insiders, etc. with different goals, motivations, knowledge, perspectives and agendas.
Don just wrote something about 'following the money': "For what it's worth, Bush's Crawford ranch has been completely off- the-grid since 2002. [coincidentally around the time of 9/11] The ranch is equipped with the latest in energy saving and renewable power systems. It has been described as an 'environmentalist's dream home.' Source The fact a man as steeped in the petroleum industry as Bush would own such a home should tell you something."
formatting link
"In 2003, the BBC filmed a three-part, relatively apolitical, documentary entitled 'War for Oil' about the role the Bush administration's knowledge of Peak Oil played in their decision to invade and occupy Iraq. As the documentary explains, in private the Bush administration sees the war in Iraq as 'a fight for survival.' In a purely Machiavellian world, they were probably correct in their thinking."
You can take these two examples (among many others) and plug them in like the wires of old telephone switchboards to see what kind of voices you get and where they're coming from-- one of which is Bush on television suggesting that America is "...addicted to oil."
In any case, if we want to put our feet forward and get anywhere, we have to decide with the best evidence we can get, which way we're going to step/go. Will it be off a cliff?
My money is on transitional towns:
formatting link
looks the surest bet to me and most in keeping with my values, even if peak oil's all advertising nonsense.
We touched on global warming on here before, incidentally, and my answer was essentially that, even if it is false, its "solutions" seemed more reasonable/attractive than its "denials".
BBC news had a car commercial just before that clip. Maybe they can "oxy5" it with a gas-station and long hose to the mainland or a supply of new GM personal gas-powered submarine Hummers. They can go anywhere. Too big to fail.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.