There is no such thing. Only people have ethics. Anyway, its only a method of (currently valueless) exchange. My goal is to get away from the unethical gov't sanctioned paper, soon. Real soon, like in maybe a year or two unless this world blows up first.
You can start by firing a 9mm at the forehead of the next gov't employee that harasses you. The word will travel up the chain and the top guy will start to consider thinking differently. It's coming.
You mean this one?
"Words separate man from animal and when words no longer have meaning man is nothing more than an animal. Even worse, when words have every meaning they become meaningless, neither good nor bad as they are simply untrustworthy. So then, man, sputtering meaningful meaningless words is nothing but an utter fool lower than basal animals and relegated as such."
--gs, 2099
Basil Fawlty would lose his basel over the use of basal in that sentence. Oh, and quote is stupid. Thought you'd like to know. :)~
R
Exactly.
Take your ass off your thumbs and Google it!
You don't have to, that's one of its apparent implications; to take it easy and enjoy life; write, do art, philosophise, lounge, lathe wood...
"Vlaun: That was one of the first garden books I ever read back in the
70s . . ."the No Work Garden Book."Mollison: Ah, great.
Vlaun: . . . her book and the Nearings' 'Living the Good Life.' They were the two people I read back then.
Mollison: I remember reading a book rather like the Nearings'. It was made in England . . . I've forgotten the guy who did it . . . and I thought it was a lesson in rotten hard work for very little result. It was sort of like a ground-down peasant primer. (laughs heartily) Just what I didn't want. I grew up like that, I grew up on farms on which you worked 18-hour days, hard work, and I thought, there's got to a better way..."
Nonsense. Permaculture isn't a fashion per se, so much as a process of truly living ethically and in harmony with nature, with natural processes, with the earth, and with ourselves. It is nature and intelligent observation and working with its processes and so forth that dictates its fashion if you want to call it a fashion. But then, based on how we've been going destructively/ unsustainably/etc. along as a species, I can see how some might regard it as a fashion!
If our species does nothing near along the lines of permaculture-- call it whatever you like, I'm sure Mollison would be just as thrilled-- and maintains the current status-quo, we may become extinct before too long, along with the species that our current lifestyle is destroying wholesale...
"All political systems that I know of, and most kings, have moved their whole nation to desert. And the things that we saw as most proud-- the cities and the canals and irrigation and so on-- are the things that killed their cultures. And it continues, unabated. If people don't seize power back, and make their own gardens, and sit in their own gardens of Eden, then we're all doomed, and the whole world ends in dust." ~ Bill Mollison, from YT video, 'The Permaculture Concept'
"[interview with] Bill Mollison: The first time I saw a review of one of my permaculture books was three years after I first started writing on it. The review started with, 'Permaculture Two is a seditious book.' And I said, 'At last someone understands what permaculture=92s about.' We have to rethink how we=92re going to live on this earth =97 stop talking about the fact that we=92ve got to have agriculture, we=92ve got to have exports, because all that is the death of us. Permaculture challenges what we=92re doing and thinking =97 and to that extent it=92s sedition.
People question me coming through the American frontier these days. They ask, 'What=92s your occupation?' I say, 'I=92m just a simple gardener.' And that is deeply seditious. If you=92re a simple person today, and want to live simply, that is awfully seditious. And to advise people to live simply is more seditious still. You see, the worst thing about permaculture is that it=92s extremely successful, but it has no center, and no hierarchy.
Alan: So that=92s worst from whose perspective?
Bill: Anybody that wants to extinguish it. It=92s something with a million heads. It=92s a way of thinking which is already loose, and you can=92t put a way of thinking back in the box. Alan: Is it an anarchist movement?
Bill: ...You won=92t get cooperation out of a hierarchical system. You get enforced directions from the top, and nothing I know of can run like that. I think the world would function extremely well with millions of little cooperative groups, all in relation to each other."
LOL...
Reminds me of that guy who came on recently, exclaiming something like, "I AM tough!"-- the one to whom Rico posted a link to some cartoon bird character.
...And this:
A little higher than falling off one's rocker. ;)
Hmmm...aren't people natural? A solitary dog is a miserable, and potentially dangerous, animal. Dogs are social animals - pack animals, and so are the animals we descended from. The big brains we developed have little to do with evolving superior abilities to survive - that's just a fringe benefit. We developed bigger brains because of our larger communal structures and more complicated communication requirements. To decide that it's not necessary to communicate with others because people are all idiots makes as much sense as deciding not to use your legs because your feet get tired.
You're not getting the point, Ken. Improve the land? WTF does that mean? Cultivation? Monsanto-fueled cultivation? The mound builders improved the land. Open-pit mining is improving the land to some.
What people need to wrap their heads around is that we've built a society based on the advances of a bunch of idiot savants. People that were too stupid to know the effects of what they were doing, but forged ahead anyway. The parallels in all walks of life are rife.
It's like the Zen master said, "Don't just do something - stand there!" Which equates to look before you leap, take a moment to get your bearings, put your best foot forward and all the other good advice that your mother told you.
R
p://
Sure. Put a live feed on the internet and we can all watch. So it'll work even better than before since there will be more eyeballs watching and you'll be able to share the joy.
But it's not about the toys, is it? It's not about the technical specs either. It's about sharing things, having respect for people you don't even know (or maybe you do) without them having to 'earn' your respect. You and WW have knocked heads and look through telescopes from different ends, but I have no doubt that you'd get along in real life and enjoy each other's company. Right? You're not throwing out the WW baby because you don't want to drink his bathwater (I know, it's more likely bong water, but that's neither here nor there!).
Edison...interesting. You know his history with Tesla, right? And how he set out to disparage and destroy Tesla's influence, when Tesla was on the right track and Edison the wrong one. Edison used his considerable wealth to stomp Tesla into the ground. Not exactly what I would call a progressive person, nor a good one. Using him as an example would be like using Osama bin Laden as a model of a peaceful man because he wasn't trying to kill _everybody_, just lots of them.
It's not the invention that creates problems, it's what people do with them. It's like a gun. Cool invention, useful as all get out, but some people insist on using it for bad purposes. An invention is power, and power corrupts. I've said many times that if someone wants to be a cop or a politician, don't let 'em, because the main reason for that is their desire to have power over others. Somehow I think you'd agree with that sentiment.
R
Good, I you're getting it.
I've wrote so many times that I post from cafes and that they are my offices. I even uploaded a picture once. LOL
loan them a 1000 acres, but I'd like to know WTF are the rules, if any, in = the commune, maybe WW can tell us that (?).
And *you* outta know.
But I suggest that it's not about Suzuki, but, ironically, about you:
Your ad hominems for Suzuki (etc.?), and previous, arguably libellous, words regarding your sister and guest (thieving?), and the framing of me as someone with a silver spoon in the mouth, (etc.), all hereon, seem to lend themselves to self-sabotage, and/or at least to less confidence with being a guest of yours (or to engage in a certain level of discourse with you) and so forth.
" 'The Emperor's New Clothes'... is a short tale by Hans Christian Andersen about two weavers who promise an Emperor a new suit of clothes that are invisible to those unfit for their positions, stupid, or incompetent. When the Emperor parades before his subjects in his new clothes, a child cries out, 'But he isn't wearing anything at all!' "
Perfect for someone who may engage in nudism regardless. (bloody hell there's some material for poetry in there for sure)
Of course you can take what I just wrote because it's your brand of medicine, right?
Mmm yum yum... bottoms up, sissyboy. ;)
Remember Waco?
Ya that all works really well.
ttp://
Ken and Don seem to be weaving all over the place with straw...
"A straw man argument is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position. To 'attack a straw man' is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by substituting it with a superficially similar yet unequivalent proposition (the 'straw man'), and refuting it, without ever having actually refuted the original position." ~
)
Well, considering that there is no architecture being discussed on this architecture forum, any place would be an improvement, eh?
Meaningless question in many respects as opinions and tolerances vary. I understand your point, but lose the 'best' and just ask about the pros and cons. Have you read Vitruvius?
)
Agreed. Check out this guy:
Your observation about the starview observation being impaired is exactly what WW is talking about, just in an area that's near and dear to your heart. If the developer who's going to be interloping near your place heard of your stargazing predilection, and told you that he hadn't thought about the starview as he's too busy to look up at night, but out of respect for your view he was going to put in the bulbs that don't impair the view of the stars, and insure that the light is directed and tightly controlled, would you be appreciative? I'm guessing you'd be _very_ appreciative and if anyone started talking smack about he guy, you'd back him up. That is all WW is saying. Respect the other guy's point of view and don't take away their view (or water, or trees, or whatever else is dear to their heart).
Hell, I don't even agree with everything I've written! ;)
All history is "skewed" by the vantage point. Consider it a lensing effect. Edison wanted small generators in every house (not a bad idea, but not achievable in his day) and was almost required as DC doesn't travel very well. Tesla wanted AC and a centralized distribution system, which was also a good idea and was achievable. Edison was aware of the advantages of AC distribution - he wasn't exactly slow on his feet (and he took naps which is to his credit), but he still disparaged Tesla's work at every opportunity and conspired to keep AC and Tesla from gaining ground. You do remember Topsy, right?
Of course Edison wasn't successful in the long run, but his ego and his money prevented him from looking for the best solution for everyone. He was just another business muckety muck doing dirty business deals to make a buck, and that isn't exactly news. It was akin to Genghis Kahn taking on Mother Teresa. Both advanced, on different fronts, and by different means and both were highly effective and became household names.
Nixon, too, was tinted by partisan history. He opened up China...oh, wait. Hmmm, maybe that's another count against him! ;)
R
)
Depends on how disagreements are framed. (The person or the topic?)
You mentioned here in writing something to the effect that you were big on logic. Could've fooled me. So far it looks like just so much personal image propaganda (while you trash others). But then, alt.arch has pretty much devolved into mostly spam (at least via Google) anyway.
te:
ze with nature?
ting)
Man, you just described Nirvana! Why limit it to 72 virgins when you can have hundreds of women with lots of experience?!
Which is left at the door when you enter alt.arch. :)~
You may want to look at those numbers again. You're off by almost half an order of magnitude.
Unfortunately you are 100% correct. You live in snow country so you must know how people skiing know they can't handle the trail, right? Exactly - they wipe out. What we're doing as a culture is exactly that. Skiing unmarked trails. And there's always an idiot leading the way saying, "Sure, this way is fine!" as he goes over the edge.
Why do we need more generators, Edison? We already have one big one. It's a distribution problem - get UPS on it.
R
Why did you put the outhouse in the bushes? Why do even stupid animals know not to shit where they sleep, but people don't? Apply that answer to your pit mine question.
R
I have this image of Rico and me spoon-feeding a couple of (presumably) grown adults with nasty, dismissive, obstinate, snarky attitudes as though they arrived here politely asking questions related to architecture.
Maybe the image is real. If so, there are better ways/places to occupy our times. If not, I fear the joke's on us.
I like the last bit especially...
I just had a bit of a potentially profound revelation today with regard to scale (related to levels of energy and their consumption) and how lots of it vastly out of scale with current sunlight may not work (with humans, etc.) vis-a-vis earth's current solar energy and carrying capacity and how humans evolved and maybe need to be. As you may know, I am transparently working on (continually upgrading) an online article temporarily located here:
The revelation may also have implications with space travel (and Fermi's Paradox): It may not be possible to properly/successfully exist as a species beyond certain scales, and scales of energy-access. The consideration of space travel of course involves extreme scales of distance and energy-- very much out of scale with us, how we live(d) and evolved.
Speaking of economics and scale, feel free to consider simulating a return on investment (or balance sheet accounting, or whatever it's called) of our current use of fossil fuels vis-a-vis our lifestyles; Because my hypothesis is this: You will find no _fundamental_ gain (maybe as a function over time) in quality-of-life (QOL), despite the cultural lies and myths. Or if you do, and with regard to the 'over time' bit; it is a gain that is borrowed against successive generations by the environmental depletions/destructions of all sorts that come with our current western lifestyle. In short, a fundamentally unsustainable QOL. So of course you need to factor that in as well.
That said, I find it intriguing, too, that our, at least western economy and/or money system, is debt-based.
BTW, in one of your recent posts, you mention craters and open-pit mines... Well of course in my article-in-process, I mention mountaintop-mining.
I notice by your comments that you still insist on attempting to bang (your blind notions of) me into pigeon holes I don't fit. While I won't bother this time with silver spoon-feeding you clarifications for your benefit, I will however leverage it, and what I just wrote, in suggesting that that's what we are doing as a culture; tapping and banging out our energies onto, and into a planet and lifestyle, respectively, upon which they do not and cannot fit.
I'll leave you with these 2 quotes. I probably already posted them, so perhaps I'm just trying to bang it into something where it just won't fit. ;9
"We're living at a dangerous moment because... 'empire', is in its last gasp, and empire, when it's in its last gasp will do anything to sustain itself... The US does not want to see the indigenous view of water, or natural gas, or oil, or resources in the ground to prevail... I was in a meeting of U'wa people who are fighting oil development in Colombia... and [the way] they talk about oil... [is] completely alien to the western development and corporate development model-- it just can't be understood even. So as a result, corporations, and US and prevailing western powers, don't think anything negative at all about going in and overpowering that if they can get away with it." ~ Jerry Mander, 'Alternatives to Economic Globalization: A Better World Is Possible'
"...the glory of the human has become the desolation of the Earth, and now the desolation of the Earth is becoming the destiny of the human. From here on, the primary judgement of all human institutions, professions, programs and activities will be determined by the extent to which they inhibit, ignore or foster a mutually-enhancing human- Earth relationship... ...Our relationship with the universe becomes a 'use' relationship. Now that's disastrous... Just like to say to another being-- human-- 'you used me'-- is about as terrible a thing a person can say. Now the planet Earth is telling us, 'You used me.'" ~ Thomas Berry (1914-2009), 'Evening Thoughts: Reflecting on Earth as Sacred Community'
Then I invite you to The Oil Drum, it's perfect for that. It's about energy, our future, economics, stuff like that-- right up your alley apparently-- and with much participation and many guest articles from those in the industries, including Herman Daly. I think you might enjoy it and if what you say is true, you may be teach us all a thing or two. Let me know when you've registered and where you've posted comments.
I think a lot is being passed to (and taken away from) the unborn to the degree to which they may eventually remain as such-- unborn.
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.