[ExI] How the world collapses

[William Flynn Wallace]

Why aren't you guys worried about chemicals?  We are walking around with
over 50 chemicals in our bodies that weren't there when we were born.

Our rivers, creeks, air, oceans are polluted.  They are adding things to
our food, our drinking cups, our everything, that hasn't been tested for
effects on people.  You read every day about some chemical (never mind the
stories about drug recalls, generics not up to snuff, lawyers hoping you
got sick from testosterone supplements) that some company agreed to take
out of their product - or not.

How in the world will the geneticists, particularly the medical ones,
figure out what he holy hell is going on  with our diseases.  What effects
do these chemicals we are eating, breathing, etc. have on our genes and our
health?  50+ chemicals potentially changing us epigenetically.  What a mess.

bill w


On Sat, May 17, 2014 at 1:22 PM, Adrian Tymes <atymes at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sat, May 17, 2014 at 10:11 AM, John Clark <johnkclark at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, May 17, 2014 at 11:22 AM, Adrian Tymes <atymes at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >  The solar panels on my roof don't seem very illusory.
>>
>> But solar panels on the roof of my car are illusory
>>
>
> Did I mention solar panels on a car?  Cars need higher density fuels than
> straight solar power, it is true.  Once synthetic oil can be made cheaply
> enough - or electric cars are both similarly-priced as normal cars and have
> enough range (the Tesla series have enough range for most people, but
> they're a bit pricey; even with the "but you're not buying gas" factor,
> that's still shifting costs up front) - then the fuel can be collected and
> made from home solar, or renewables feeding through the grid.
>
> Either of these are possible, but they will take much work to achieve.
> Disasterbationists would have us give up on this work because it's not
> already complete.
>
>
>> > Neither do the large wind farms in the hills not too far from here.
>>
>> Today there are no purely economic reasons to build wind farms, there are
>> however tax and public relation reasons for doing so.
>>
>
> All power plants, even coal, have government subsidies of some sort -
> usually on the fuel, but with wind and solar it's not really possible to
> subsidize the fuel so they subsidize the plants instead.  Then people get
> confused because other types don't have plant subsidies.
>
>
>> To environmentalists alternate energy solutions are just fine as long as
>> they remain strictly on paper, just don't try to build anything on a large
>> enough scale to actually accomplish anything.
>>
>
> Those types of environmentalists - increasingly revealed to be astroturf
> by various competing energy interests - are starting to lose power.  But
> only starting to.
>
>
>> > Generally, any article that's yelling and screaming about how the world
>>> is collapsing and there's nothing we can do about it, isn't worth reading.
>>>
>>
>> I agree 100%.
>>
>
> Glad to hear it.  :)
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20140517/cd8c3796/attachment.html>