Peak Oil
Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Main Doomer Fallacy

What's on your mind?
General interest discussions, not necessarily related to depletion.
Post a reply

Re: Main Doomer Fallacy

Unread postby davep » Mon 16 Aug 2010, 17:07:38

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Carlhole', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Newfie', 'I')n my mind the current discussion over the amount and usability of free energy is one of the main reasons the cornucopians don't "get it."


You know, one of the primary reasons why I "don't get it", is that the entire global scientific/academic/military/industrial complex doesn't "get it" either - at least in regards to "total free energy available to humans". The main reason you construct huge, expensive energy research facilities is so that you "get" what you didn't "get" before you conducted experiments. And this stream of R&D is interesting to watch.

I tend to place more credibility on the energy discussion taking place within the pages of scientific journals and science magazines than I do an online, free-for-all forum like this one. It's a personal quirk, I admit. Really, I just use this place to post my own interest stream re energy/evolution, and salient pieces I run across. That's what a discussion board is for, right?

Or no? Perhaps your theory is the correct one: A discussion board is a tool to instill groupthink in its members?


May it just be that the boffins involved in such research are so engrossed in what they're doing that they don't see the bigger picture?
What we think, we become.
User avatar
davep
Senior Moderator
Senior Moderator
 
Posts: 4579
Joined: Wed 21 Jun 2006, 03:00:00
Location: Europe
Top

Re: Main Doomer Fallacy

Unread postby Ludi » Mon 16 Aug 2010, 17:14:04

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('davep', '
')
May it just be that the boffins involved in such research are so engrossed in what they're doing that they don't see the bigger picture?



Seems like the folks who read the boffins should be able to tell us which sources of energy are available to plug in tomorrow. Seems like this important information would be in those journals. :?:
Ludi
 
Top

Re: Main Doomer Fallacy

Unread postby Carlhole » Mon 16 Aug 2010, 17:24:58

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Ludi', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('davep', '
')
May it just be that the boffins involved in such research are so engrossed in what they're doing that they don't see the bigger picture?



Seems like the folks who read the boffins should be able to tell us which sources of energy are available to plug in tomorrow. Seems like this important information would be in those journals. :?:


Why would you have to contrive such a situation? Why would a single alternate energy source have to be able to fully replace hydrocarbons tomorrow?

There is no argument about the dependency of the world on fossil fuels, but these will be around for some very significant time. They are not going away anytime soon - as measured in decades. So why do you have to ask such a hypothetical question?
Carlhole
 
Top

Re: Main Doomer Fallacy

Unread postby frood » Mon 16 Aug 2010, 17:51:03

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I') tend to place more credibility on the energy discussion taking place within the pages of scientific journals and science magazines than I do an online, free-for-all forum like this one. It's a personal quirk, I admit. Really, I just use this place to post my own interest stream re energy/evolution, and salient pieces I run across. That's what a discussion board is for, right?

Or no? Perhaps your theory is the correct one: A discussion board is a tool to instill groupthink in its members?


Using the term groupthink is pretty hypocritical in your case when you depend upon a graph that makes no sense and a religious like zeal on the aspect of a "human singularity" that is just a huggable futurist term and simply that. Im not the one brainwashed here and thats a saddening fact to me that you have posted here a long time and still dont see the forest for the trees...sorry that means double plus bad in your terminology according to Orwell.
User avatar
frood
Wood
Wood
 
Posts: 26
Joined: Wed 22 Jun 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Brighton, UK
Top

Re: Main Doomer Fallacy

Unread postby Carlhole » Mon 16 Aug 2010, 17:55:21

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('frood', 'I')m not the one brainwashed here...


Hm Hmmm...
Carlhole
 
Top

Re: Main Doomer Fallacy

Unread postby davep » Mon 16 Aug 2010, 18:04:17

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Carlhole', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('frood', 'I')m not the one brainwashed here...


Hm Hmmm...


Instead of treating this as some kind of blog, how about addressing what people say?
What we think, we become.
User avatar
davep
Senior Moderator
Senior Moderator
 
Posts: 4579
Joined: Wed 21 Jun 2006, 03:00:00
Location: Europe
Top

Re: Main Doomer Fallacy

Unread postby frood » Mon 16 Aug 2010, 18:05:34

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Carlhole', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('frood', 'I')m not the one brainwashed here...


Hm Hmmm...


Silly rabbit, tricks are for kids.
User avatar
frood
Wood
Wood
 
Posts: 26
Joined: Wed 22 Jun 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Brighton, UK
Top

Re: Main Doomer Fallacy

Unread postby efarmer » Mon 16 Aug 2010, 18:13:23

We spend $700 Billion USD a year on defense right now, our defense runs on petroleum. We have proposed spending $28 Billion next year on alternative energy. Much of our defense hinges on protecting the petroleum producers and the distribution paths and choke points associated with petroleum.
I have to assume if something or a combination of somethings emerge that really show promise for other than TV commercials and campaign slogans like "clean coal technology" that it would justify shifting some of this expense toward covering the new technology like a blanket and dominating it first and pushing it forward.

Money speaks louder than words and ours is screaming to dominate petroleum supply.
User avatar
efarmer
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2003
Joined: Fri 17 Mar 2006, 04:00:00
Top

Re: Main Doomer Fallacy

Unread postby davep » Mon 16 Aug 2010, 18:19:52

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('davep', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', ' ')It will take the full force of national, regional, and local governments to break down and rebuild our living and working habitats to account for forever declining transport and manufacturing energy.


No, if and when things do start falling apart, it will require the wisdom of visionaries to build our future. It is crazy to think that TPTB will ever be able to deal with the seismic shift required.
Things will come apart but rather than despair now or pin my hopes on nameless visionaries, I'd rather believe the citizenry might shake off its self-indulgent cynicism and apathy and perhaps take control of its own government. That has happened before, though I have little faith of that reoccurring now.

My problem is I have tried the "local" route as best I could. You know CSA's cohousing, walkable communities, bike commuting, permaculture and THAT SH3T DON'T FLY. But then national government doesn't want me or my ideas either, so I guess we are mostly fubar


By visionaries, I meant people like us 8)

Local will work when it has to. Just be ready.
What we think, we become.
User avatar
davep
Senior Moderator
Senior Moderator
 
Posts: 4579
Joined: Wed 21 Jun 2006, 03:00:00
Location: Europe
Top

Re: Main Doomer Fallacy

Unread postby Carlhole » Mon 16 Aug 2010, 18:32:34

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('davep', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Carlhole', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('frood', 'I')m not the one brainwashed here...


Hm Hmmm...


Instead of treating this as some kind of blog, how about addressing what people say?


Because it seems like people lash-out in an emotional way rather than get interested in the main idea. I mean, really... Who gaf about their dumbass emotional attachments?

The main idea is that you can plot a trend of accelerating science beside a trend of resource declines. Both rely on pretty solid data but they run in opposite directions. So, how do you explain that?

I've already laid down my own ideas about the big picture here.
Carlhole
 
Top

Re: Main Doomer Fallacy

Unread postby Newfie » Mon 16 Aug 2010, 18:43:18

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Carlhole', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Newfie', 'I')n my mind the current discussion over the amount and usability of free energy is one of the main reasons the cornucopians don't "get it."

.....................
Or no? Perhaps your theory is the correct one: A discussion board is a tool to instill groupthink in its members?


Carl, I clearly stated that these were my opinions "In my mind..............." You have taken that and reframed it so that you are accusing me of trying "to install groupthink in its members?"

You are the one who is putting words in another's mouth, in this case mine. I did not attack you but merely stated an opinion. If you apply the same logic to all your thinking as you did in this response it is of no wonder that you don't "get it."

Ploink
When going through hell, keep going! Churchill
Nothing is ever lost by courtesy. It is the the cheapest of pleasures, costs nothing, and conveys much. E Wiman
I know there’s no solution, so I just enjoy what’s here and I enjoy the journey G Carlin
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 18651
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 04:00:00
Location: Between Canada and Carribean
Top

Re: Main Doomer Fallacy

Unread postby Newfie » Mon 16 Aug 2010, 19:03:56

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('efarmer', 'W')e spend $700 Billion USD a year on defense right now, our defense runs on petroleum. We have proposed spending $28 Billion next year on alternative energy. Much of our defense hinges on protecting the petroleum producers and the distribution paths and choke points associated with petroleum.
I have to assume if something or a combination of somethings emerge that really show promise for other than TV commercials and campaign slogans like "clean coal technology" that it would justify shifting some of this expense toward covering the new technology like a blanket and dominating it first and pushing it forward.

Money speaks louder than words and ours is screaming to dominate petroleum supply.


Yes, that was one of the points I was trying to make. We are putting our assets into the only game in town, which is fossil fuel, and oil in particular. If that is the collective wisdom of humans, or even just American's, then you can see that this is leading down an unfruitful path.

It matters little what we SAY we want to do, it matters most what we DO do. And what we do is oil, OIL, OIL.
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 18651
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 04:00:00
Location: Between Canada and Carribean
Top

Re: Main Doomer Fallacy

Unread postby Pops » Mon 16 Aug 2010, 19:31:33

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Carlhole', 'T')he main idea is that you can plot a trend of accelerating science beside a trend of resource declines.

Which resources, carl?
The legitimate object of government, is to do for a community of people, whatever they need to have done, but can not do, at all, or can not, so well do, for themselves -- in their separate, and individual capacities.
-- Abraham Lincoln, Fragment on Government (July 1, 1854)
User avatar
Pops
Elite
Elite
 
Posts: 19746
Joined: Sat 03 Apr 2004, 04:00:00
Location: QuikSac for a 6-Pac
Top

Re: Main Doomer Fallacy

Unread postby Carlhole » Mon 16 Aug 2010, 20:21:39

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Pops', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Carlhole', 'T')he main idea is that you can plot a trend of accelerating science beside a trend of resource declines.

Which resources, carl?


Any environmental resources, mineral resources, fossil fuels, etc.

It's no problem to plot curves for say de-forestation into the future 20 years. Any sort of typical plot might use sophisticated mathematics and might be written up in mathematics journals. But you can use similar statistics to plot accelerating science and technology. It's a recognizable trend with plenty of data supporting the idea of higher exponential growth rates in information sciences. The chart is long and strong.

And it stands to reason too. With high populations comes a sharply recursive, high-density knowledge and capability. As our environmental and energy problems grow, so does our collective attention, so does our understanding/reaction, so does our toolset. And this collective attention is truly an immense force, vastly under-estimated by doomers who need to assume too many constants in their unrealistically rigid equation.

This accumulation of knowledge and technical ability becomes an evolving thing in itself at some point. Evolutionary forces are most likely in the driver's seat.

Resource constraints are an evolutionary pressure. Now Science is also an evolutionary pressure, having risen as the result of previous evolutionary pressure. And now we are entering an era where supercomputers are growing big enough to evolve complex things (there will be a whole lot of virtual modeling of multi-cellular organisms, no doubt). No one really knows what the limits are in supercomputing. Quantum computing seems more likely than ever which only staggers the imagination further... Evolution is alive and scheming on Planet Earth.
Carlhole
 
Top

Re: Main Doomer Fallacy

Unread postby Ludi » Mon 16 Aug 2010, 20:26:05

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Carlhole', 'N')ow Science is also an evolutionary pressure



But an almost infinitely weaker one than say, population pressure, since all the collective Science of biologists, climatologists, etc has had almost NO effect on the behavior of the human population, who continue to severely damage the biosphere. In spite of Science being an evolutionary pressure, it does not seem capable of protecting the biosphere upon which human life itself depends.
Ludi
 
Top

Re: Main Doomer Fallacy

Unread postby Carlhole » Tue 17 Aug 2010, 00:39:43

Singularity Is Near pdf

Movie won't be accessible for a while yet.
Carlhole
 
Top

Re: Main Doomer Fallacy

Unread postby EnergyUnlimited » Tue 17 Aug 2010, 03:12:13

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Carlhole', '[')url=http://thepiratebay.org/torrent/3710554/Ray_Kurzweil_-_Singularity_Is_]Singularity Is Near pdf[/url]

Movie won't be accessible for a while yet.
Obviously not too near. Otherwise a Saturian Brain-Meld would do, rather than a .pdf :razz:

We are wasting time to debate troll.
He is not fit to present any personal input above parroting academic and corporate PR releases and ad hominem arguments.

Just one of these peoples who will argue on precious metals forum why fiat currency is best.
User avatar
EnergyUnlimited
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 7537
Joined: Mon 15 May 2006, 03:00:00
Top
PreviousNext
Post a reply

Return to Open Topic Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest



cron