[ExI] A Nobel laureate and climate change
rtomek at ceti.pl
Fri Sep 16 16:05:59 UTC 2011
On Fri, 16 Sep 2011, BillK wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 5:56 AM, Keith Henson wrote:
> > But people get hung up on arguing about trivia that just doesn't
> > matter. If we don't solve the energy problem with a SBSP,
> > StratoSolar, nuclear, or something I don't yet know about, then we are
> > in a world of hurt sooner and of far more serious consequence than hot
> > summers and Texas fires.
I can easily agree with Keith Henson on GW, only I think it does not
matter so much what the humans do about GW, because GW is a huge process
and it seems to me like trying to ride a whale with a pair of long ropes
in both hands. I wouldn't be surprised if it turned out that we tried to
ride a herd of whales rather than just one - because AFAIK the nature of
the climatic problem and the causes of climate changes (including recent
GW that started ca. 18000 years ago) are yet to be determined.
But looking from energy-wise perspective, I can now see that GW-touting
and eco-marketing can be, at their base, efforts that try to address
energy shortages (either happening now or foreseen coming some time from
now). Like replacing old light bulbs (that are quite green as a waste -
just some metal and glass) with eco-bulbs (mercury, plastics, heavy
metals) that, however, last about 10x longer and use 5x-10x less
energy. And the future bulbs can be even better. But I disgress.
Somehow it is easier to sell eco-gw-marketing to the people and tell them
they can change Earth climate (and maybe even Sun's energy output) if they
buy new eco-electric car. And a tablet.
> Correct, Keith. The problem is short-term thinking by politicians
> and corporate leaders.
> When the crisis hits, they hope that either,
> 1) they will be dead so it's the next generations' problem.
Certainly there must be some people like that, but...
> 2) they will be spending their last years in gated compounds with the
> other super-rich and their servants, so it is still the next
> generations' problem.
...but I don't buy this. If things go screwed, they are going to face
hundred millions of very hungry people (the rest might be dead but
a hundred mil is a problem anyway). And their servants will be the
first who can easily pack them a bullet in a head from the back. If you
look at the history of Rome, "barbarians" very rarely managed to kill an
emperor. I assume they may be arsholes but not idiots. Therefore I expect
them to do everything to turn our small boat away from a shite, if this is
possible to do, of course.
If we are going to end a journey in a shite, I don't think it would be
because "they" counted on a fresh start when the Earth is empty and clean
again. This is bullshit idea, I'm afraid (just in case someone is planning
to wait few hundred years or so in safe shelter, or build themselves a
golden city under a plexiglas cuppola).
Or to say it in one sentence, either we can get through or we will go to
hell together. Those who will have to wait their turn a little (like
abovementioned politicians and super-rich), are simply going to have
miserable last days of their lifes, knowing exactly what to expect. Like
on a Titanic, but this time Carpathia is not going to appear (unless it
is already orbiting Earth :-/ ).
Of course I may be wrong. Or half wrong. :-).
** A C programmer asked whether computer had Buddha's nature. **
** As the answer, master did "rm -rif" on the programmer's home **
** directory. And then the C programmer became enlightened... **
** Tomasz Rola mailto:tomasz_rola at bigfoot.com **
More information about the extropy-chat