The weird part is that I really am a contrarian. I cant stand the eco tourism types with their anti bush suv stickers yet I have zero ability to relate to the industrial sportsman types and redneck inbred religious cult members. actually industrial sportsman can include both types equally. Just different. I also relate more with the artists as my girlfriend is one and I am also one (not typical art stuff tho). However she is more conservative as well. But we consider conservative to be the true meaning. CONSERVE on all fronts. Which requires a respect for the planet and the natural resources that are required to conserve and to enjoy life.
Its jsut wierd becuase in my world everyone would have an ecological pradigm with which they would live in. Not now thats been programmed out of most.
But if I was going to have to choose between them Id be more left leaning. They at least have wider spectrum of thinking. even if much of it is absolutely illogical and species. Whatever happend to living simply and free?
PeakOil is You
Where did all the doomers go?
Re: Where did all the doomers go?
by holmes » Wed 06 Dec 2006, 16:55:54
"To crush the Cornucopians, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentation of their women."
- holmes
- Intermediate Crude
- Posts: 2382
- Joined: Tue 12 Oct 2004, 03:00:00
Re: Where did all the doomers go?
by johnmarkos » Wed 06 Dec 2006, 17:11:39
Hey I'm gone too, and I'm an optimist.
It's not just here, either. I've stopped posting on Peak Oil Debunked, too.
At some point, I just realized that the argument (doomer vs. cornucopian) was just not worth having. I don't think there is a good way to talk about peak oil "across the aisle." The premises are so far away that it's like we're speaking a different language.
Too bad -- I learned a lot here. But there were at least points against my continued frequent participation in these forums.
1. I'm an optimist and thus by definition in the (defensive) minority. I just can't carry on like that.
2. I realized that PO is just a small facet of the larger problem (sustainability or ecological footprint).
3. I think these problems need to be approached from a different angle and I'm still trying to figure out what that is.
Maybe I'll post again when I figure out #3, if only to point you all to that essay on my blog once I've written it.
It's not just here, either. I've stopped posting on Peak Oil Debunked, too.
At some point, I just realized that the argument (doomer vs. cornucopian) was just not worth having. I don't think there is a good way to talk about peak oil "across the aisle." The premises are so far away that it's like we're speaking a different language.
Too bad -- I learned a lot here. But there were at least points against my continued frequent participation in these forums.
1. I'm an optimist and thus by definition in the (defensive) minority. I just can't carry on like that.
2. I realized that PO is just a small facet of the larger problem (sustainability or ecological footprint).
3. I think these problems need to be approached from a different angle and I'm still trying to figure out what that is.
Maybe I'll post again when I figure out #3, if only to point you all to that essay on my blog once I've written it.
-
johnmarkos - Tar Sands
- Posts: 866
- Joined: Wed 19 May 2004, 03:00:00
- Location: San Francisco, California
Re: Where did all the doomers go?
by TheTurtle » Wed 06 Dec 2006, 17:44:51
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('PolestaR', ' ')If refugees have shown us anything, no matter where they come from, they try and get to a better place. You act like walking is some skill you need to invest MORE time on other than your lifetime spent walking to be good at it.
Most people won't like walking, they'll hate it, but they can do it, regardless of how many Big Macs they have eaten in the last year. You've never been in a survival situation to know the desperation. Most won't be able to walk more than a 100 miles maybe without supplements along the way, but there will be supplements. Retreats like yours placed at a distance you thought no one would walk to.
Most people won't like walking, they'll hate it, but they can do it, regardless of how many Big Macs they have eaten in the last year. You've never been in a survival situation to know the desperation. Most won't be able to walk more than a 100 miles maybe without supplements along the way, but there will be supplements. Retreats like yours placed at a distance you thought no one would walk to.
Were you sleeping during Hurricane Katrina?
The refugees didn't walk out of NOLA trying to get to a better place. They made their way to the Superdome where they sat and waited to be rescued. Had relief taken longer to get there, I suspect most of them would have perished while waiting for someone to save them.
As AgentR has suggested, there is a big difference between spending ones lifetime walking to and from the refrigerator and walking for hours at a time over rough terrain. The first does not qualify one to effectively accomplish the second.
“Humankind has not woven the web of life. We are but one thread within it. Whatever we do to the web, we do to ourselves.” (Ted Perry)
-
TheTurtle - Heavy Crude
- Posts: 1905
- Joined: Sat 14 May 2005, 03:00:00
- Location: Along the banks of the muddy Mississippi
Re: Where did all the doomers go?
by Bas » Wed 06 Dec 2006, 19:10:43
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('johnmarkos', 'H')ey I'm gone too, and I'm an optimist.
It's not just here, either. I've stopped posting on Peak Oil Debunked, too.
At some point, I just realized that the argument (doomer vs. cornucopian) was just not worth having. I don't think there is a good way to talk about peak oil "across the aisle." The premises are so far away that it's like we're speaking a different language.
Too bad -- I learned a lot here. But there were at least points against my continued frequent participation in these forums.
1. I'm an optimist and thus by definition in the (defensive) minority. I just can't carry on like that.
2. I realized that PO is just a small facet of the larger problem (sustainability or ecological footprint).
3. I think these problems need to be approached from a different angle and I'm still trying to figure out what that is.
Maybe I'll post again when I figure out #3, if only to point you all to that essay on my blog once I've written it.
It's not just here, either. I've stopped posting on Peak Oil Debunked, too.
At some point, I just realized that the argument (doomer vs. cornucopian) was just not worth having. I don't think there is a good way to talk about peak oil "across the aisle." The premises are so far away that it's like we're speaking a different language.
Too bad -- I learned a lot here. But there were at least points against my continued frequent participation in these forums.
1. I'm an optimist and thus by definition in the (defensive) minority. I just can't carry on like that.
2. I realized that PO is just a small facet of the larger problem (sustainability or ecological footprint).
3. I think these problems need to be approached from a different angle and I'm still trying to figure out what that is.
Maybe I'll post again when I figure out #3, if only to point you all to that essay on my blog once I've written it.
That's exactly where I am John, though I still very much enjoy the multitude and variety of topics and viewpoints on this forum.
- Bas
Re: Where did all the doomers go?
by Jack » Wed 06 Dec 2006, 19:18:03
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('johnmarkos', '
')1. I'm an optimist and thus by definition in the (defensive) minority. I just can't carry on like that.
2. I realized that PO is just a small facet of the larger problem (sustainability or ecological footprint).
3. I think these problems need to be approached from a different angle and I'm still trying to figure out what that is.
')1. I'm an optimist and thus by definition in the (defensive) minority. I just can't carry on like that.
2. I realized that PO is just a small facet of the larger problem (sustainability or ecological footprint).
3. I think these problems need to be approached from a different angle and I'm still trying to figure out what that is.
1) I, too, am an optimist. I think I can go through several years of the dieoff before I become a casualty.
2) True. There are way too many people. The global population needs to be pruned to under one billion. Not to worry - that's coming.
3) Yes, there is a different approach. However, people get all huffy when I start talking about the joy of Iodine-131.
![[smilie=new_popcornsmiley.gif]](https://udev.peakoil.com/forums/images/smilies/new_popcornsmiley.gif "new_popcornsmiley")
- Jack
- Light Sweet Crude
- Posts: 4929
- Joined: Wed 11 Aug 2004, 03:00:00
Re: Where did all the doomers go?
by Bas » Wed 06 Dec 2006, 19:29:29
I'm sure we will regret how we have went about business over the last 50 years or so for centuries to come, that's the only thing I can say with certainty. If it's not for a big dieoff then it will be for climate change or something else or, more likely, a combination of issues.
- Bas
Re: Where did all the doomers go?
by PolestaR » Wed 06 Dec 2006, 22:15:19
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('TheTurtle', 'W')ere you sleeping during Hurricane Katrina?
The refugees didn't walk out of NOLA trying to get to a better place. They made their way to the Superdome where they sat and waited to be rescued. Had relief taken longer to get there, I suspect most of them would have perished while waiting for someone to save them.
As AgentR has suggested, there is a big difference between spending ones lifetime walking to and from the refrigerator and walking for hours at a time over rough terrain. The first does not qualify one to effectively accomplish the second.
The refugees didn't walk out of NOLA trying to get to a better place. They made their way to the Superdome where they sat and waited to be rescued. Had relief taken longer to get there, I suspect most of them would have perished while waiting for someone to save them.
As AgentR has suggested, there is a big difference between spending ones lifetime walking to and from the refrigerator and walking for hours at a time over rough terrain. The first does not qualify one to effectively accomplish the second.
Sorry but you did not read my further post which explained this (another skill lacking with hypothesizing). Katrina showed people (outside of it anyhow) that in a major crisis you might not be rescued, at least SOON. Either way going into Katrina people didn't think that no one would help them at all, and they were right, eventually the govt saved them. They had ways to survive provided by the govt which kept them from their own ideas. Why would most people start being violent and walking somewhere better when they know someone will fly in with a helicopter and take them to WALMART?
Even if you formulate that 80% of the population is unfit, that means 20% is fit and could easily walk great distances. I just find it hilarious how your lack of cognitive ability allows you to think of the average american/westernite as some 300lb slob that could barely walk 1 mile before they collapsed from a heart attack. I'd sure love to have you leading -MY- retreat....... "Well you see guys.. the reason we died was because I assumed only the odd person would leave Los Angeles".
WHEN people know there is NO hope and NO saviour they will quickly start thinking for themselves again, and formulate their own ideas. Like some in Katrina did, regardless of fitness. A lot will die in the city centers, I never proposed otherwise. However to think a great horde of people won't leave cities (it might only be 20-40% max, which when the base is 2 million makes it a horde) is ludicrous. I sure hope you place your retreat <100 miles from a city center along with AgentR here, we could do to wipe out a few more cornucopians.
Bringing sexy back..... to doom
- PolestaR
- Tar Sands
- Posts: 955
- Joined: Tue 21 Jun 2005, 03:00:00
Or am I misunderstanding that line?
