ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Religion and Philosophy
 

Notices


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags consumerism , globalization , industrialization , sustainability

Reply
Old 26th March 2010, 07:09 PM   #241
sushil_yadav
Scholar
 
sushil_yadav's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 62
There are some people over here who keep asking me for solutions.

These people should know better.

The west has taken the copyrights to making all solutions in this world.

Look at all the grand solutions being made in Iraq and Afghanistan. The "Coalition of the willing" had the intention of giving "the shock and awe" treatment to Iraq and Afghanistan - but got the shock of its life instead. Now it is desperately searching for the exit door.

The Taliban was a creation of the west. As long as they were fighting the Russians they were heroes for the west. When they started fighting the Americans they have become terrorists - great.

It is time you people learned some lessons. It is not easy to find solutions after creating the problems.

sushil_yadav
PowerSwitch
Industrial Society Destroys Mind and Environment

Last edited by sushil_yadav; 26th March 2010 at 07:14 PM.
sushil_yadav is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th March 2010, 07:15 PM   #242
Sledge
Grammaton Cleric
 
Sledge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 7,114
So, as I said many pages back, you don't have any solutions. Then why are you still posting? The world is screwed. Ok, we get it. And? If there's nothing to be done about it, what do you want? A round of applause for your perception? Fine, I'll be happy to oblige...

... except for one thing: WE KNOW. We are aware of global warming, over-population, deforestation, yadda yadda, blah blah. And you know what else? WE'RE WORKING TO SOLVE IT. Are we doing enough? Maybe not. But at least we're doing something other than sitting around being massive hypocrites who can't even spell out what we mean by "consumer goods" or how we plan to murder 85% of the world's population.

If you're so genuinely worried about the state of the planet, I suggest you get off the internet and go do something useful. Failing that, I suggest you get off the internet. It's bad enough sharing it with 4chan without it also being full of people bringing warnings to the world that we heard 20 years ago.
__________________
"The perfect haiku would have just two syllables: Airwolf" ~ Ernest Cline

"Science knows it doesn't know everything, otherwise it would stop" ~ Dara O'Briain.
Sledge is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th March 2010, 11:17 PM   #243
Safe-Keeper
Philosopher
 
Safe-Keeper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 7,867
Quote:
... except for one thing: WE KNOW. We are aware of global warming, over-population, deforestation, yadda yadda, blah blah. And you know what else? WE'RE WORKING TO SOLVE IT. Are we doing enough? Maybe not. But at least we're doing something other than sitting around being massive hypocrites who can't even spell out what we mean by "consumer goods" or how we plan to murder 85% of the world's population.
</thread>
__________________
In choosing to support humanitarian organizations, it's best to choose those that do not have "militant wings" (Mycroft, 2013)
Safe-Keeper is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th March 2010, 12:17 AM   #244
Fiona
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 8,209
Originally Posted by Sledge View Post
So, as I said many pages back, you don't have any solutions. Then why are you still posting? The world is screwed. Ok, we get it. And? If there's nothing to be done about it, what do you want? A round of applause for your perception? Fine, I'll be happy to oblige...

... except for one thing: WE KNOW. We are aware of global warming, over-population, deforestation, yadda yadda, blah blah. And you know what else? WE'RE WORKING TO SOLVE IT. Are we doing enough? Maybe not. But at least we're doing something other than sitting around being massive hypocrites who can't even spell out what we mean by "consumer goods" or how we plan to murder 85% of the world's population.

If you're so genuinely worried about the state of the planet, I suggest you get off the internet and go do something useful. Failing that, I suggest you get off the internet. It's bad enough sharing it with 4chan without it also being full of people bringing warnings to the world that we heard 20 years ago.
Very unfair!!

We have always had people who carried sandwich boards with the message
"Repent: the end is nigh"

Why should not those people adopt new technology along with the rest of us?

Last edited by Fiona; 27th March 2010 at 12:55 AM.
Fiona is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th March 2010, 12:46 AM   #245
Lukraak_Sisser
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,023
What do the wars in afghanistan and iraq have to do with your industrial society thing?
1: we've been perfectly capable of fighting wars (badly) for all of recorded history
2: The whole 'the west is putting itself into quagmires' thing is as hypocritical as it comes. You're from India right Sushil? Since you seem to feel that all westerners are responsible for the wars our governments fight, when are you going to fix the situation in Kashmir?

What I also wonder about. Why come to a board for discussion when all you really want to do is re-iterate your statement over and over again?
I've asked you repeatedly what YOU do to save the world. What YOU do not use so as to make the world a better place.
Now I do not ascribe to your doomsaying in the least, but some personal examples. I cycle to work rather than take the faster public transport. I try to buy things not wrapped in unnecessary plastic. I turn electronics off when not actively using them.
All minor things I'm sure, but at least I can mention three. How about you?
Lukraak_Sisser is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th March 2010, 01:33 AM   #246
stilicho
Trurl's Electronic Bard
 
stilicho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 4,755
Originally Posted by sushil_yadav View Post
It is time you people learned some lessons. It is not easy to find solutions after creating the problems.

sushil_yadav
PowerSwitch
Industrial Society Destroys Mind and Environment
I've argued with people here in Canada that India should be created a permanent member of the UN Security Council.

Would that help?
__________________
"Suppose you're thinking about a plate of shrimp. Suddenly someone will say, 'Plate' or 'Shrimp' or 'Plate of shrimp,' out of the blue... It's all part of the cosmic unconsciousness." -- REPO MAN

LondonJohn: "I don't need to cite."
Rolfe: "I really hate lawyers."
stilicho is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th March 2010, 08:25 AM   #247
Little 10 Toes
Graduate Poster
 
Little 10 Toes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,573
Troll list:
1) Doesn't have proof of anthing: Check!
2) Ignores questions: Check!
3) Makes minor changes on opening statements: Check!
4) Change subjects when confronted with proof: Check!
5) Repeat steps 1 - 4: Check!
Little 10 Toes is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th March 2010, 12:38 PM   #248
TimCallahan
Philosopher
 
TimCallahan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,293
Originally Posted by Little 10 Toes View Post
Troll list:
1) Doesn't have proof of anthing: Check!
2) Ignores questions: Check!
3) Makes minor changes on opening statements: Check!
4) Change subjects when confronted with proof: Check!
5) Repeat steps 1 - 4: Check!
Thank you for spelling it out so succinctly. This will be my last post on this wretched thread. It has been an education on how easily one can get sucked in by a lying weasel of a troll. I urge everyone else to abandon this thread and let Sushi Yadayada talk to himself until the thread dies a well-deserved death.
TimCallahan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th March 2010, 05:32 PM   #249
The_Animus
Graduate Poster
 
The_Animus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,562
I may not agree with everything the OP has said, but I will say that I found a few gems in there that I consider rather insightful.
__________________
Straw Man, Ad Hominem, Moving the Goalposts, and a massive post count are all good indicators that a poster is intellectually dishonest and not interested in real discussion.

Feeding trolls only makes them stronger, yet it is so hard to refrain.
The_Animus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th July 2010, 09:20 PM   #250
sushil_yadav
Scholar
 
sushil_yadav's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 62
Industrial Society is speeding up the demise of ecosystems by providing jobs to all - education to all.

Mod WarningBreach of rules 4 and 6 removed. Do not copy and paste large quantities of material from elsewhere. If you want to discuss something posted elsewhere, a link and short sample should suffice.
Posted By:Cuddles

Last edited by Cuddles; 27th July 2010 at 02:05 AM.
sushil_yadav is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th July 2010, 09:49 PM   #251
Floyt
Chordate
 
Floyt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,637
You actually have some good points in there, but they are mixed up with some really overblown ones in one hell of an off-putting rant.
My overall comment is: you and everyone you are addressing is part of Team Humanity, and you won't get anywhere by exhorting your team-mates to slit their throats. This change will either be self-motivated and slow, or imposed by cirumstances and fast. We don't do self-motivated and fast.
Sad as it is.
__________________
They had no god; they had no gods; they had no faith. What they appear to have had is a working metaphor.
- Ursula K. Le Guin, "Always Coming Home"
Floyt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th July 2010, 10:11 PM   #252
tourmaline
Critical Thinker
 
tourmaline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 349
Wait a minute, its not like industrial society will cause earth to explode like the Death Star. Even if global warming were true, Earth will endure. Toxins will succumb to geologic systems and entropy. Earth will go on. Earth will out last man and preserve nice horizons of sedimentary rock loaded with trace fossils of drink containers, cigarette butts, toilet seats, etc for the next intelligent species to evolve. A species possibly started by a mutation caused by chemicals or nuclear fuel produced the very industrial society that you despise.

ETA: Who are we to deny life a chance to evolve?
__________________
"It is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring." -- Carl Sagan

"Madam, you are ugly. In the morning, I shall be sober" -- Winston Churchill

Last edited by tourmaline; 26th July 2010 at 10:19 PM.
tourmaline is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th July 2010, 10:17 PM   #253
slingblade
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 23,470
Wow. Way, way too long, didn't bother to read.


(It deserved a little more than just the usual 4 letters and the semi-colon.)
slingblade is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th July 2010, 10:18 PM   #254
Floyt
Chordate
 
Floyt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,637
Well, and should the Earth unexpectedly explode, there's very probably life elsewhere in the universe, but for most people there's limited solace in that fact. I don't think an interest in preserving the particular sample we are familiar with is a point worthy of attack per se
__________________
They had no god; they had no gods; they had no faith. What they appear to have had is a working metaphor.
- Ursula K. Le Guin, "Always Coming Home"
Floyt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th July 2010, 10:33 PM   #255
mike3
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,329
Originally Posted by sushil_yadav View Post
Destroy consumerism..... before it is too late.
Questions:

1. Why does this also mean destroy technology?

2. Why does it mean that one has to stop science? Science doesn't have to be about making "Consumer Goods", it can be simply about acquiring more knowledge, perhaps even to be used to help people as opposed to just making "toys" (Ipods, for example).

3. Why is science fundamentally bad? Not just military-industrial complexes, Multi-National Corporations, "Consumerism", etc. etc. etc. -- but SCIENCE itself. Why is this bad?

Last edited by mike3; 26th July 2010 at 10:47 PM.
mike3 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th July 2010, 10:33 PM   #256
lionking
In the Peanut Gallery
 
lionking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 34,364
Sushil, the earth's population is predicted to peak around the middle of the century (possibly earlier) and reduce after that. Technology will most likely find solutions to some of our seemingly insurmountable problems (as it usually has). You "hell in a handbasket" merchants have been wrong throughout history. You may be right now, but I doubt it.
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Sir Winston Churchill
lionking is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th July 2010, 10:36 PM   #257
mike3
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,329
Originally Posted by sushil_yadav View Post
Industrial Society is speeding up the demise of ecosystems by providing jobs to all - education to all.
So you think some people should be kept stupid?

Originally Posted by sushil_yadav View Post
Science, technology and industrialization lead to over-exploitation of ecosystems.
Human greed leads to over-exploitation of ecosystems. "Technology" has been around since humans first took a rock and used it as a tool to do something.

Last edited by mike3; 26th July 2010 at 10:39 PM.
mike3 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th July 2010, 10:44 PM   #258
tourmaline
Critical Thinker
 
tourmaline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 349
Originally Posted by sushil_yadav View Post
Science, technology and industrialization lead to over-exploitation of ecosystems.
Funny, without science we wouldnt even know about ecosystems, let alone if we were destroying them.
__________________
"It is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring." -- Carl Sagan

"Madam, you are ugly. In the morning, I shall be sober" -- Winston Churchill
tourmaline is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th July 2010, 11:24 PM   #259
Lukraak_Sisser
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,023
And in all that, still not a single hint on how it can be solved.

You still think humanity is bad for the world.
We kinda guessed that from your previous posts.

Yet here you are STILL using a computer, designed by evil science, built by evil industry, powered by evil oil companies.
Excuse me for not considering you all that supportive of your own position.
Lukraak_Sisser is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th July 2010, 11:37 PM   #260
tourmaline
Critical Thinker
 
tourmaline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 349
Originally Posted by Lukraak_Sisser View Post
Yet here you are STILL using a computer, designed by evil science, built by evil industry, powered by evil oil companies.
Excuse me for not considering you all that supportive of your own position.
Trolling or another hippy-crite?
__________________
"It is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring." -- Carl Sagan

"Madam, you are ugly. In the morning, I shall be sober" -- Winston Churchill
tourmaline is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th July 2010, 12:03 AM   #261
PixyMisa
Persnickety Insect
 
PixyMisa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Sunny Munuvia
Posts: 16,198
Originally Posted by slingblade View Post
Wow. Way, way too long, didn't bother to read.

(It deserved a little more than just the usual 4 letters and the semi-colon.)
No it didn't.

The exact same drivel has been spammed to at least ten other sites: http://www.google.com.au/search?q=%2...um=50&filter=0
__________________
Free blogs for skeptics... And everyone else. mee.nu
What, in the Holy Name of Gzortch, are you people doing?!?!!? - TGHO
PixyMisa is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th July 2010, 12:06 AM   #262
bokonon
Illuminator
 
bokonon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 4,437
So, they finally outsourced Ted Kaczinsky...
__________________
Laugh while you can, monkey boy.
bokonon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th July 2010, 12:08 AM   #263
mike3
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,329
Originally Posted by tourmaline View Post
Funny, without science we wouldnt even know about ecosystems, let alone if we were destroying them.
This is correct. THINKING, not emotion, is what tells us this. Thinking!

OP is too black and white. He says somehow that too much "thinking" is the problem. The problem is actually what type of thinking is being done. If you spend all your time thinking about how to just acquire and consume more toys, then yeah, that's a problem. But if the thought is about something else, something that helps people, heck, about trying to actually solve all these problems -- then it's a GOOD THING! If anything, unchecked emotions or desires, not thinking, is what creates ecological problems, like unending desire and for more and more stuff. This inhibits thinking, which would say "oopsie! There's limits here!", and proceeds to initiate destruction. Hey! Maybe that's why the OP doesn't see anyone else's points: because he doesn't "think" enough since he believes "thinking" too much is "destructive".

Same goes with "green technologies". According to our OP, "green technologies" don't exist. This is wrong. Stone technology, the first stuff ever developed, is probably about as "green" as it gets. And furthermore, there are degrees of "greenness", and technologies can be somewhat green, more green, or less green, and also a technology that is green can be made "ungreen" if it is not used properly. Wood construction is an example to illustrate this. In small enough quantities, it is actually green: wood does not poison the environment like petroplastics do, for example. But if used excessively, then it becomes a problem: deforestation occurs. Even the just-mentioned stone technology can be made ungreen, e.g. if you rip up too much and/or ecologically delicate land to extract the rock underneath. Yet none of this means to toss the technology out, it means we have to recognize the limits and "abide" by them.

Some technologies, of course, are not green at all, e.g. burning coal, natural gas, and petroleum to produce electricity: these processes inevitably produce harmful pollutants. Even if you can capture all the pollutants, you still have to extract the stuff, and there's limits there (and also the possibility for the unexpected to occur, like what recently happened in the Gulf of Mexico.).

Also, this guy seems to think that any "work" to produce anything but essentials needed for survival must be intrinsically detrimental to the survival of the planet. That's not true either (e.g. consider, for an extreme example, artistic carvings, done in stone.) And furthermore, with overpopulation, even producing those "necessary" items is destructive too, simply by sheer quantity overstepping limits.

Respecting limits does not mean getting rid of technology -- it means just what it says: respecting limits. There are limits which when crossed can make a technology that wasn't a problem into one, but these limits are not necessarily equal to zero. This point seems totally lost on the OP.

You could also argue that perhaps when we developed our technology, we did not take ecological concerns into consideration. Which is why, e.g. we developed technologies that produce toxic pollution, instead of trying from the get-go to find other methods that didn't. That, combined with greed: polluting technology was often CHEAPER, hence, greed. I'll give OP a plus though for making the point that ecology is more vital than economy (this, of course, implies that rejecting a "greener" technology or approach because it's more expensive is not cool), but this is not like something that isn't unknown amongst truly environmentally-conscious groups.

Oh yeah, and about this whole quantity/limits thing -- people have killed animals just to survive for most of the time they existed on Earth (at least while in a form sufficiently close evolutionarily/biologically to this one.). The problem is not this act itself, the problem is overstepping the limit. Technology also may make it easier to reach or exceed limits, but ultimately it's our failure to recognize them, or making things more important than such recognition, or just plain unadulterated greed, that makes us do so.

Finally, 100 years ago, technology was still much higher than the stone age...

(All the above was obtained by spending hard time thinking about these things, not "feeling".)

Last edited by mike3; 27th July 2010 at 12:12 AM.
mike3 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th July 2010, 01:14 AM   #264
Safe-Keeper
Philosopher
 
Safe-Keeper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 7,867
Originally Posted by tourmaline View Post
Wait a minute, its not like industrial society will cause earth to explode like the Death Star. Even if global warming were true, Earth will endure. Toxins will succumb to geologic systems and entropy. Earth will go on. Earth will out last man and preserve nice horizons of sedimentary rock loaded with trace fossils of drink containers, cigarette butts, toilet seats, etc for the next intelligent species to evolve. A species possibly started by a mutation caused by chemicals or nuclear fuel produced the very industrial society that you despise.ETA: Who are we to deny life a chance to evolve?
Wait a minute, its not like anti-Israeli sentiments will cause Central Asia to explode like the Death Star. Even if anti-Semitism were true, the landmass that comprises Israel will endure. Toxins will succumb to geologic systems and entropy. Central Asia will go on. Earth will out last man...
Lump of cold, lifeless rock over the thinking, feeling species who live on it. Glad you've got your priorities straight.
__________________
In choosing to support humanitarian organizations, it's best to choose those that do not have "militant wings" (Mycroft, 2013)

Last edited by Safe-Keeper; 27th July 2010 at 01:15 AM.
Safe-Keeper is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th July 2010, 03:11 AM   #265
Sledge
Grammaton Cleric
 
Sledge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 7,114
I don't suppose sushil actually put forward a solution this time? Just more "we're doomed," amirite?
__________________
"The perfect haiku would have just two syllables: Airwolf" ~ Ernest Cline

"Science knows it doesn't know everything, otherwise it would stop" ~ Dara O'Briain.
Sledge is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th July 2010, 04:02 AM   #266
Safe-Keeper
Philosopher
 
Safe-Keeper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 7,867
Originally Posted by tourmaline View Post
Funny, without science we wouldnt even know about ecosystems, let alone if we were destroying them.
It's always worth mentioning that humans are the only species I can think of that is self-aware to the degree that it can analyze its impact on its environment, and regulate the impact it is having on the local fauna and flora.

It's popular these days among certain people to lament how humans are destroying the world, driving species extinct, exploiting natural resources, etc. etc. etc. What everyone forgets is that we have this in common with every other species on Earth. Let's say you release 60 sheep into the wild. A nomadic pack of hungry timber wolves migrate into the area. Inevitable result? All the sheep die.

As far as I'm aware, only humans can sit down and go "hmm, our current 'kill all the sheep you see' strategy may not be sustainable. How about we try to get an idea of the total number of sheep in this valley? Then we could see if it could be possible to make the population last longer by placing quotas on our hunting?"

Humans seem to be the only ones who care. You won't see Simba sit down and think, "god, what a gruesome way we're killing those zebras. Let's hold council and see if we can find a way to kill them as quickly and painlessly as possible". The rabbit doesn't look at the population of its forest and go "too many bunnies, we'll run out of grass and face starvation if we keep reproducing at this rate".
__________________
In choosing to support humanitarian organizations, it's best to choose those that do not have "militant wings" (Mycroft, 2013)

Last edited by Safe-Keeper; 27th July 2010 at 04:05 AM.
Safe-Keeper is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th July 2010, 04:31 AM   #267
Ladewig
Hipster alien
 
Ladewig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 20,043
Originally Posted by sushil_yadav View Post
Industrial Society Destroys Mind and Environment

IQ Vs EQ

IQ always has an element of change in it – IQ is about trying to make/ discover/ invent something new all the time.
Change is an inherent feature of IQ.
IQ is also about thinking more in less time—it involves speeding up of mind. Someone who does more mathematics in less time is considered more intelligent in mathematics. IQ is about change and speed.

EQ is about sustainment of the same feeling/experience over a period of time. When we experience any higher-level emotion for 10 minutes we experience the same feeling( subjective experience) over and over again for 10 minutes.
The( same) feeling can sustain only if there is Repetition.
EQ involves Repetition—Constancy—Sameness.

IQ and EQ are contradictory.
IQ and EQ are opposites.
IQ and EQ are inversely proportional.
I don't suppose you have any evidence that IQ and EQ are inversely proportional? The idea that very smart people are incapable of emotions strucks me as rather absurd. But as I said, I am willing to consider any evidence that you have.

Why do you reject intelligence so strongly? Even if they were opposites, then wouldn't a balance of intelligence and emotions be a wiser choice than rejecting intelligence and embracing emotions? Consider these examples:

1) When a police officer enters a horrific crimescene, I don't want him to break down in tears and leave. I want him to use his intelligence to gather clues, to identify and store evidence, and to rationally consider the suspects.

2) When the doctor is working on a cure for a wide-spread, dibilitating illness, I don't want him to be emotionally overwhelmed by the scope of the illness, I want him to use his intelligence to approach the problem in a logical and efficient manner.
__________________
Is the JREF message board training wheels for people who hope to one day troll other message boards? It is not that hard to get us to believe you. We are not the major leagues or even the minor leagues. We are Pee-Wee baseball. If you love striking out 10-year-olds, then you'll love trolling our board.

Last edited by Ladewig; 27th July 2010 at 04:34 AM.
Ladewig is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th July 2010, 08:09 AM   #268
tourmaline
Critical Thinker
 
tourmaline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 349
Originally Posted by Safe-Keeper View Post
Wait a minute, its not like anti-Israeli sentiments will cause Central Asia to explode like the Death Star. Even if anti-Semitism were true, the landmass that comprises Israel will endure. Toxins will succumb to geologic systems and entropy. Central Asia will go on. Earth will out last man...
Lump of cold, lifeless rock over the thinking, feeling species who live on it. Glad you've got your priorities straight.
I was being a bit of a troll with that one.

But, its not lifeless. That cold lump of rock is where life comes from. I believe my trollish post expressed the idea that life would go on. I dont think it gave preference to rock over life or even humans. After humans have had their chance there will still be life. Life has survived through many mass extinctions.

As for Isreal, I disagree with things it has done as well as the events leading to statehood. This doesnt make someone anti-Semitic. I dont hate jews. I may hate individual jews because the are a-holes, but they are a-holes that happen to be jewish. But this is for another thread.
__________________
"It is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring." -- Carl Sagan

"Madam, you are ugly. In the morning, I shall be sober" -- Winston Churchill
tourmaline is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th July 2010, 09:55 PM   #269
TimCallahan
Philosopher
 
TimCallahan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,293
I wonder why Sushil Yadev is back, other than to not answer questions posed to him that logically arise from his provocative posts. So he provokes an angry response, then gets huffy about people responding to him. I've got a great idea: Let's starve this troll. I only joined in because I was startled by his sudden reappearance - like a fly you thought you had shooed away. Join me now, everyone, in letting this wretched thread die.
TimCallahan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st July 2010, 09:08 PM   #270
ParrotPirate
Graduate Poster
 
ParrotPirate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,585
OP=brainbarf.
ParrotPirate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st August 2010, 04:22 PM   #271
Beerina
Sarcastic Conqueror of Notions
 
Beerina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 24,637
Originally Posted by Safe-Keeper View Post
It's popular these days among certain people to lament how humans are destroying the world, driving species extinct, exploiting natural resources, etc. etc. etc. What everyone forgets is that we have this in common with every other species on Earth. Let's say you release 60 sheep into the wild. A nomadic pack of hungry timber wolves migrate into the area. Inevitable result? All the sheep die.
One of the interesting things in math was differential equations showed that predator/prey relationships were never stable.

"Stable" was a falsehood believed by "common sense". In fact, the prey population goes up, causing the predator numbers to increase, which kill down the prey to low levels (but never extinction), and the predators, in turn, starve off, allowing the prey to rebound.

A "stable" situation quickly degenerates into this up-and-down behavior. Always.


Moreover, it requires strained situations like your 60 sheep example for species elimination to truly occur. (And note predator/prey is not the same thing as displacement.) For normal, large populations, there is continued existence of both species subject to the natural cycles.

Humans, of course, can persist in the tracking until the prey is fully eliminated, and then shift, most of the time, to something else.

And while that may suggest danger, it in fact is why we are largely incredibly successful as a species, as measured by evolutionary standards = reproductive success and spreading. That we've "nowhere else to spread, and therefore will run out" is a false characterization of the current state of humanity.




Quote:
As far as I'm aware, only humans can sit down and go "hmm, our current 'kill all the sheep you see' strategy may not be sustainable.
It depends what you mean by "sustainable." I submit using actual measurements of the quality and quantity of life when graphed against certain politically incorrect economic positions, tested successfully via predictions vs. the '70s version of the sustainability crowd (which said modern crowd, I suggest, was birthed when its meme finally found a rationalization to re-energize itself and start spreading again precisely because of its miserable failure in its '70s incarnation in these exact predictions*.)





* Isaac Asimov, a 1970s gloom-and-doomer (as was my teenage self) was intellectually honest enough to admit that, while he didn't understand the why of Simon's successful predictions, Simon was correct.

Originally Posted by Julian Simon
Famous science writer Isaac Asimov expressed the bewilderment of a person who at least faced up to this intellectual predicament, as Ehrlich et. al. do not. Asimov read about the resources bet and then wrote:

Originally Posted by Isaac Asimov
Naturally, I was all on the side of the pessimist and judge my surprise when it turned out he had lost the bet; that the prices of the metals had indeed fallen; that grain was cheaper; that oil...was cheaper; and so on.

I was thunderstruck. Was it possible, I thought, that something that seemed so obvious to me - that a steadily rising population is deadly - can be wrong?

Yes, it could be. I am frequently wrong.
Asimov permitted himself to be bewildered. "I don't understand this," he wrote. And he says about economics in general: "I cannot understand it, and I cannot believe that anyone else understands it, either. People may say they understand it...but I think it is all a fake."

Unlike Asimov, the doomsayers refuse to allow themselves to be bewildered by the facts. Instead, they simply reject the facts and deride anyone who presents the facts.
__________________
"Great innovations should not be forced [by way of] slender majorities." - Thomas Jefferson

The government should nationalize it! Socialized, single-payer video game development and sales now! More, cheaper, better games, right? Right?

Last edited by Beerina; 1st August 2010 at 04:42 PM.
Beerina is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th November 2012, 10:27 PM   #272
sushil_yadav
Scholar
 
sushil_yadav's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 62
Some people in this thread have asked what is the solution??.....What is the solution for saving environment??....What is your solution??

This question would make sense if environment had never been saved before....... This question would make sense if environment had never been saved in the past.

People are asking a question whose answer has been known for millions of years.

You save environment the way it was saved for millions of years.

There is only one way to save environment.......Destroy less.

Animals saved environment by destroying it only for food.

Hunter_Gatherer Society saved environment by destroying it only for food.

Agrarian Society saved environment by destroying it only for food, clothing and shelter.

For millions of years the list of things that destroyed environment never exceeded food, clothing and shelter.

You cannot save environment by destroying more of it.........You cannot save environment by destroying it for thousands of consumer goods and services in addition to food, clothing and shelter.

Production of thousands of consumer goods and services must stop immediately.

A pure non-industrial society is not possible now because Industrialization has increased world population to 7 billion.......World population increased from 1 billion in 1800 to 7 billion in just about 200 years after industrialization.......In the absence of industrialization world population would have been less than 2 billion today.

If we want to save the remaining environment we must minimize the things that are destroying environment.

At present we are destroying environment for Food, Clothing, Shelter plus Thousands of Industrial consumer goods and services.

We must eliminate the things that were added last to the list......which means Thousands of consumer goods and services, most of which have existed for only about 100 years out of Hundreds of Thousands of years of Total Human Existence on earth .........these have to be eliminated or minimized.

The only way to save the remaining environment is by stopping Industrial Activity for production of consumer goods and services immediately........Industrial Activity must be limited to food, clothing and shelter.......and even in these three fields production and consumption must be kept to the minimum.

.
.

There were two major switch-overs in human history.........Hunter_Gatherer Stage to Agrarian Stage........And Agrarian Stage to Industrial Stage.

Hunter_Gatherer Society was least destructive.......Agrarian Society was hundreds/ thousands times more destructive.......Industrial Society is millions of times more destructive.

The first switchover may very well be excused but not the second one.......When man switched over from Hunter_Gatherer Stage to Agrarian Stage he was not aware of the small size of our planet and the limited resources it contained........But when man switched over from Agrarian Stage to Industrial Stage it was sheer lunacy of people who started and promoted Industrial Activity all over the world despite having a fair knowledge of the small size of planet and the limited natural resources.

This planet is just 40,000 km in circumference.......It is very small......It can sustain a Hunter_Gatherer Society or Agrarian Society...... Not an Industrial Society.

Hunter_Gatherer Society destroyed environment only for food.......Agrarian Society destroyed environment primarily for food, clothing and shelter........That is the limit on this planet......This planet cannot sustain an Industrial Society which destroys environment for "thousands of consumer goods and services" in addition to food, clothing and shelter.

Industrial Activity for production of "thousands of consumer goods and services" must stop immediately.



Industrial Society Destroys Mind and Environment

Last edited by sushil_yadav; 6th November 2012 at 10:44 PM.
sushil_yadav is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th November 2012, 10:51 PM   #273
Beelzebuddy
Master Poster
 
Beelzebuddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,681
You might wanna consider making a new thread, so we don't have easy access to six years of people saying how sick they are of this thread.

Originally Posted by TimCallahan View Post
I wonder why Sushil Yadev is back, other than to not answer questions posed to him that logically arise from his provocative posts. So he provokes an angry response, then gets huffy about people responding to him. I've got a great idea: Let's starve this troll. I only joined in because I was startled by his sudden reappearance - like a fly you thought you had shooed away. Join me now, everyone, in letting this wretched thread die.
Beelzebuddy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th November 2012, 11:02 PM   #274
sushil_yadav
Scholar
 
sushil_yadav's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 62
Originally Posted by Beelzebuddy View Post
You might wanna consider making a new thread, so we don't have easy access to six years of people saying how sick they are of this thread.
You are wrong.

Originally Posted by The_Animus View Post
I may not agree with everything the OP has said, but I will say that I found a few gems in there that I consider rather insightful.
sushil_yadav is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th November 2012, 04:49 AM   #275
dafydd
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 35,398
Originally Posted by sushil_yadav View Post

Industrial Activity for production of "thousands of consumer goods and services" must stop immediately.
Making millions and millions of people unemployed. What a great idea.
dafydd is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th November 2012, 04:51 AM   #276
wobs
Muse
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 559
I have come across this poster on other forums, and the volume of mistakes in their thinking is staggaring. I've seen evidence of a hatred of humanity, of a wish for the human race to die off dressed up as a concern for the environment.

It's a pouring out of emotion, with no intelligence or evidence.
__________________
"To vowels. They stop consonants sticking together like boiled sweets in a paper bag."
wobs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th November 2012, 05:01 AM   #277
Lukraak_Sisser
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,023
'The environment' survived the onslaught of massive meteorite impacts, partial and possibly even complete global glaciation and the introduction of the poison oxygen into the mix.
Each of these events caused effects far more extensive than anything our puny meddling does.
Most of the environment is bacteria, which would happily continue with no major changes if all multicellular life were to dissapear tomorrow.
Lukraak_Sisser is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th November 2012, 05:11 AM   #278
Dancing David
Penultimate Amazing
 
Dancing David's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 36,156
Originally Posted by sushil_yadav View Post
S

Agrarian Society saved environment by destroying it only for food, clothing and shelter.

[/b]
Interesting, you don't know what an agrarian culture is, I wonder what happened to Carthage and the culture there? Why is it desert now?

Hmmm, so a preindustrial culture never destroyed the ecology?

Seriously?
__________________
I suspect you are a sandwich, metaphorically speaking. -Donn
And a shot rang out. Now Space is doing time... -Ben Burch
You built the toilet - don't complain when people crap in it. _Kid Eager
Never underestimate the power of the Random Number God. More of evolutionary history is His doing than people think. - Dinwar
Dancing David is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th November 2012, 05:20 AM   #279
sushil_yadav
Scholar
 
sushil_yadav's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 62
Originally Posted by dafydd View Post
Making millions and millions of people unemployed. What a great idea.
And what a great idea to continue destroying environment without which man will not even exist.....Humans are alive because of nature....Humans owe their very existence to animals, trees, air, water and land.

Industrial Society has existed for barely 250 years which comes to almost Zero Percent of Total Human Existence on earth....Humans have spent more than 99.99% of their time on earth in Non-Industrial Societies [Hunter_Gatherer and Agrarian].....Industrial Society is an Anomaly....Only Non-Industrial Societies are sustainable.
sushil_yadav is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th November 2012, 05:24 AM   #280
sushil_yadav
Scholar
 
sushil_yadav's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 62
Originally Posted by Dancing David View Post
Interesting, you don't know what an agrarian culture is, I wonder what happened to Carthage and the culture there? Why is it desert now?

Hmmm, so a preindustrial culture never destroyed the ecology?

Seriously?
.

Yes seriously......Very seriously.

In pre-industrial society environmental destruction was localized and very small compared to environmental destruction of Industrial Society......It is like comparing the Lamp with the Sun.

In the absence of Industrial Machines only limited destruction of nature was possible......Agrarian Societies only destroyed some ecosystems on the land - forests and soil......Marine ecology was almost 100% safe in Agrarian Stage.

No Agrarian Society poisoned the planet with trillions of tonnes of Metal Waste, Plastic waste, Chemical waste, Gaseous waste, eWaste and Nuclear Waste.

Agrarian Society destroyed environment for Agriculture......Industrial Society has destroyed environment for Agriculture and Industry - Mining Industry, Logging Industry, Energy Generation Industry, Manufacturing Industry, Construction Industry, Transportation Industry, Recycling Industry.

Industrial Society has destroyed the entire planet - The Land, The Sky, The Oceans.....It has decimated millions of other species.

Industrial Society is millions of times more destructive than any pre-industrial society.....It has destroyed most of the Biodiversity and Ecosystems on earth.
.

Industrial Society Destroys Mind and Environment

Last edited by sushil_yadav; 7th November 2012 at 05:28 AM.
sushil_yadav is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Religion and Philosophy

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:56 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.