Really??!! When did we all reach that conclusion?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben
Printable View
Really??!! When did we all reach that conclusion?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben
Oh yeah. We just stumbled around in the dark or individually burned piles of wood, coal, peat moss, parafin, or anything else we could ignite. Of course the oil lamp was a lot more efficient. We just had to devoid the seas of whales for the oil.Quote:
But he does make a point that we managed fine without electricity prior to circa 1880.
Ah yes, bogus nostalgia. Back to the bad old days so we can all drop dead earlier. Hey Ben, do you know why the President of the United States has to be 35 years old? It's not just an arbitrary number that the delegates pulled out of their collective asses. At the end of the 18th century, 35 was the average lifespan of an American man. If you managed to live past that, you were considered an elder. Go back to then? I don't think so. Especially at my age. Give up electricity? I don't think so. In a few more years (later rather than sooner I hope), I may need to plug in periodically to recharge the battery in my pacemaker.
Left, left, left? I don't think so. Derrick Jensen's just another fanatic one trick pony.
Ever since I can recall there have been people predicting the decline of civilisation, society, food production, fresh air and democracy, to name but a few enduring phenonema; there was even a tv series on the BBC in the 1970s called Doomwatch in which science played the role of sphinx, being at times a benefit to human society, at other times a curse, but never being either fully or even partially understood. I think it came out of that fear of annihilation that began with Hiroshima and was briefly jazzed up during the Cuban Missile Crisis of the 1960s, tv being about 10 years behind the times, as it usually was then.
Species come and species go, scientists are still discovering new ones in obscure volcanoes in Indonesia, at depths of the ocean previously inaccessible to human eyes -we still probably know more about the surface of the moon than the sea floors of the Pacific or the Caribbean. While people condemn the human race for its allegedly relentless sacking of planetary resources, nature itself hasn't exactly packed up - people still die of Malaria today, as they did in Ancient Egypt; a few years ago a friend of mine was attacked by an Owl in the early evening in the woods because he probably got too close to a nest he couldn't even see; and yes, the primnates of Indonesia and Africa may die out as human settlement trashes their home. But I doubt Bears, particularly those who seem to get their meals from settlements creeping into their territory, will ever become household pets, even in Canada.
Civilisation in Ancient Greece may have become part of 'our' tradition, but that tradition only began with the Renaissance, having been kept alive during our so called dark ages by Muslim scholars and libraries. At the time farmers were peasants, and like artisans, women, slaves and Barbarians were not part of civilisation because the Athenian elite did not consider them to BE civilised and therefore capable of discoursing on contemporary events or taking responsibility for public affairs. The idea that every one over the age of 18 should be part of the political system would strike the average Athenian as preposterous, and a recipe for chaos.
When the 'Great Powers' were carving up the world after 1918 and creating The League of Nations, the colonies of the defeated Empires were doled out to the Empires that remained on the basis that none of them could be allowed their independence (what Woodrow Wilson had called National Self Determination), because they could not, as it was stated at the time, Stand alone under the strenuous conditions of the modern world -this applied to the A class Mandates of the Ottoman Empire, the B class Mandates of Africa, and the C class Mandates in the Pacific -Jan Smuts, the South African who played a larger role in the Peace Processes than he deserved, remarked of the C class mandates that they could not possibly become independent because they were populated by savages and barbarians.
Climate change is real, deforestation is real, soil erosion is real, water shortages are real. All can be dealt with through the combination of modern science and political will. The future for space exploration lies with robots who can man missions to Jupiter, Saturn and the Infinite, so it could be worthwhile looking at these issues as contemporary ones that all have practicable solutions, not least because most of the people who contribute to this board and this thread are the ones who will be living through the changes of the next 50 years, long after I have vacated the departure lounge.
yeah ,yeah ,yeah ,so much bullshitQuote:
Originally Posted by Stavros
it's official global warming is over says prof.Curry
The world's oldest documented case of cancer is from ancient Egypt, in 1500 BC. Details were recorded on a papyrus, documenting cases of tumours occurring on the breast. It was treated by cauterization, using a method to destroy tissue with a hot instrument called "the fire drill." It was also recorded that there was no treatment for the disease, only palliative treatment.
Some cancers are caused more by the environment (or lifestyle) than due to genetics. Some are much more common now as we live longer - we only have to go back to 1900 to see that commonest causes of death were influenza/pneumonia and tuberculosis. Before that, death was due to water-bourn diseases. Some cancers are entirely due to genes - most early life cancers - brain tumours, leukemia, etc. The majority are a mixture of nuture and nature. Why do some guys smoke 100 cigs a day but still live to a 100?The best advice for a long life is still to choose your parents carefully.
End of problem - we can continue to fuck up the Earth.Quote:
Originally Posted by russtafa
oh no ,please,please not another graph
I know, it hurts your poor poor head to see evidence that overturns the preconceptions to which you are emotionally, politically and ideologically committed. But science is only about evidence, the best ways to present it, organize it, interpret it and understand it. Often that means you may have to comprehend a chart or two. Oops, sorry I just accidentally used some big words; they hurt your head too...don't they? :( You didn't mention the link. I assume you didn't bother to click on it, let alone read it. So much for good faith effort.