08-28-2017, 05:49 AM
(This post was last modified: 08-28-2017, 05:55 AM by Bob Butler 54.)
Kinser
I’ve generally found that people will make predictions that reflect their values. The one question is whether the predictions are really predictions or dogma. Do you change the theory to reflect reality, or try to alter one’s view of reality to confirm the theory. For example, the West with its capitalist leaning theories have tended to favor a free press, where the East with its Communist theory favored censorship and propaganda. That is one way to measure the worth of a system, whether it is close enough to scientific to embrace reality, or whether you need to deny reality.
In some ways it might be better to make predictions that can be measured rather than empty political assumptions? I think we’ve laid out a number of differences. I think the next question to ask is what is really happening.
The global warming alarmists have their science. I’ve dabbled a bit. The Arctic ice is melting. Historically, when the Arctic goes, the Antarctic follows. With less light being reflected off ice, there is a large temperature jump up with associated extinctions and the like. The denialists of course disagree. For me, the key is the Arctic. If what is happening continues to happen, there will be a political kickback at some point. Reality should hopefully play a large role in this.
And, sure, there have been other climate shifts in the past, but none have opened the northwest passage in historical times. None have melted this much ice. None have begun to approach the current extinction rate. Partisanship will effect your blinders. This one is too big.
A lot of predictions of revolutions and civil wars have been flying around. If you buy into fixed clockwork S&H and that Industrial Age patterns will still persist, another might be due. I’d recommend that instead of blindly predicting violence, one should watch the spirals of violence carefully. Is there a spiral building? Around what issues? There are wars and rumors of wars, true enough. When has there not been? However, domestically we seem stuck in a mode where most to all of the violence is blamed on lone nuts. I’ve been watching for groups to organize violent actions such that they are ready to strike again, and which attract popular support. With infiltration doctrine and a well organized police, popular repeated up scale violence won’t be easy. I’m watching for it to become real. Thus far the major factions don’t seem to be making it real.
One problem may be division of wealth. No doubt is exists. The question is… so what?
A more pertinent question is how many are being pushed below the poverty level. How many will convince themselves that something must change. Domestically, economically, this rather obvious reason for civil war or revolution has not gone critical. It seems one of the things that ought to be watched, though. However, with the see saw running as it has, why go violent if one just has to wait a few years for a very likely paradigm swap?
It is one thing to make predictions according to one’s extreme partisan values. We all can. Pretty much all of us here do. It is another to watch the trends, to accurately judge where we are, and what happens soon.
It may well be that we’ll have the technology for a soft landing into a post scarcity world. I’m just saying I’m seeing more fracking than thorium reactors in the real world. I’m sympathetic that we might in time go nuclear. The question is whether the elites currently profiting off fossil fuel will be greedy enough to prevent any soft landing. Will the current fear of nuclear be overcome? How strong will the need get before the want to arrives?
One scenario involves global warming confirmed while the push for green technology isn’t being deployed. At minimum, there will be people angry with associated political turmoil. This has me watching rates of deployment, climate changes, spirals of violence, etc… So far, no. Everybody is too upset with tweets which hurt their feelings. Pardon if I roll my eyes and think the tweets are neither the problem or the answer.
There is a retail space crash coming, akin to the housing crash of a while ago. We’ll see how bad it is, and whether enough people go out of work to impact the restaurant industry. Will delivery services and internet massaging create enough jobs to mitigate those jobs lost? As far as I know, I’m the only one who has tried to make the link into restaurants. I am just cruising too many strip malls, and noting how the restaurants depend in great part on retail. The urges will be much the same, but economics changes as much as climate does. We’ll see. The point is you watch things rather than try for absolute predictions.
Anyway, can you appreciate the distinction I’m trying to make? Would you care to say what you are watching and why?
I’ve generally found that people will make predictions that reflect their values. The one question is whether the predictions are really predictions or dogma. Do you change the theory to reflect reality, or try to alter one’s view of reality to confirm the theory. For example, the West with its capitalist leaning theories have tended to favor a free press, where the East with its Communist theory favored censorship and propaganda. That is one way to measure the worth of a system, whether it is close enough to scientific to embrace reality, or whether you need to deny reality.
In some ways it might be better to make predictions that can be measured rather than empty political assumptions? I think we’ve laid out a number of differences. I think the next question to ask is what is really happening.
The global warming alarmists have their science. I’ve dabbled a bit. The Arctic ice is melting. Historically, when the Arctic goes, the Antarctic follows. With less light being reflected off ice, there is a large temperature jump up with associated extinctions and the like. The denialists of course disagree. For me, the key is the Arctic. If what is happening continues to happen, there will be a political kickback at some point. Reality should hopefully play a large role in this.
And, sure, there have been other climate shifts in the past, but none have opened the northwest passage in historical times. None have melted this much ice. None have begun to approach the current extinction rate. Partisanship will effect your blinders. This one is too big.
A lot of predictions of revolutions and civil wars have been flying around. If you buy into fixed clockwork S&H and that Industrial Age patterns will still persist, another might be due. I’d recommend that instead of blindly predicting violence, one should watch the spirals of violence carefully. Is there a spiral building? Around what issues? There are wars and rumors of wars, true enough. When has there not been? However, domestically we seem stuck in a mode where most to all of the violence is blamed on lone nuts. I’ve been watching for groups to organize violent actions such that they are ready to strike again, and which attract popular support. With infiltration doctrine and a well organized police, popular repeated up scale violence won’t be easy. I’m watching for it to become real. Thus far the major factions don’t seem to be making it real.
One problem may be division of wealth. No doubt is exists. The question is… so what?
A more pertinent question is how many are being pushed below the poverty level. How many will convince themselves that something must change. Domestically, economically, this rather obvious reason for civil war or revolution has not gone critical. It seems one of the things that ought to be watched, though. However, with the see saw running as it has, why go violent if one just has to wait a few years for a very likely paradigm swap?
It is one thing to make predictions according to one’s extreme partisan values. We all can. Pretty much all of us here do. It is another to watch the trends, to accurately judge where we are, and what happens soon.
It may well be that we’ll have the technology for a soft landing into a post scarcity world. I’m just saying I’m seeing more fracking than thorium reactors in the real world. I’m sympathetic that we might in time go nuclear. The question is whether the elites currently profiting off fossil fuel will be greedy enough to prevent any soft landing. Will the current fear of nuclear be overcome? How strong will the need get before the want to arrives?
One scenario involves global warming confirmed while the push for green technology isn’t being deployed. At minimum, there will be people angry with associated political turmoil. This has me watching rates of deployment, climate changes, spirals of violence, etc… So far, no. Everybody is too upset with tweets which hurt their feelings. Pardon if I roll my eyes and think the tweets are neither the problem or the answer.
There is a retail space crash coming, akin to the housing crash of a while ago. We’ll see how bad it is, and whether enough people go out of work to impact the restaurant industry. Will delivery services and internet massaging create enough jobs to mitigate those jobs lost? As far as I know, I’m the only one who has tried to make the link into restaurants. I am just cruising too many strip malls, and noting how the restaurants depend in great part on retail. The urges will be much the same, but economics changes as much as climate does. We’ll see. The point is you watch things rather than try for absolute predictions.
Anyway, can you appreciate the distinction I’m trying to make? Would you care to say what you are watching and why?
That this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom, and that government of the people, by the people, for the people shall not perish from the earth.