Doomstead Diner Menu => The Kitchen Sink => Topic started by: RE on February 19, 2012, 03:57:45 PM

Title: Welcome!
Post by: RE on February 19, 2012, 03:57:45 PM
Welcome to the Doomstead Diner!  Here you will find a great hub for discussion and information pertaining to the ongoing Economic Collapse of the Industrial Economy.

DD is the result of the last 5 years of research and debate we have been engaged in on many other boards, including the Reverse Engineering Yahoo Group, where the founding members of this board all come from.  There are many great sources of information out there still, good Blogs and a few good message boards as well.  Here at the DD, our goal is to bring together all the information we can to assist in planning for the world to come.

Blogs and Message Boards both have their limitations, so to overcome them we have integrated both formats into this website.  All the posts made on our Blog are mirrored  inside the database of the Mesage Board, and are categorized for easier research of older posting.  We have enabled HTML and Photo and Video embedding for any member who posts up inside the message board area, so you can compose your own articles complete with all the multimedia you would like to include in the body of the article.  This takes some playing around with, but we will have an FAQ section here to answer questions on how you do this.

There are no explicit "rules" or Code of Conduct here at DD.  We do however hope that members will keep in check the temptations to ad hom arguments and excessive Napalm.  If it gets out of control, the Mod staff here reserves the right to ban posting.  No posts will ever be edited for content, it either posts up or it doesn't or gets deleted.

We hope that all members will be respectful of each other and maintain decent decorum in the discussions and debates, and understand their legal responsibilities for what they write.  We provide the Forum for discussion, but we do not control what you choose to keyboard out.  This responsibility ultimately falls on you.

With all that in mind, we Welcome you here to join with us on the Doomstead Diner as we investigate, discuss and debate the ramifications of the Economic Collapse of Industrial Civilization.  Often referred to in shorthand as TEOTWAWKI.  The End of the World as We Know It.

RE
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: peter on February 25, 2012, 09:40:15 AM
 
Here's my take on equality and the intent of this forum...
(Forum administration is not excluded.)

Rather than talking specifics I'll talk about my philosophy regarding the role this forum could possibly play in our lives.
 
The Internet has brought forward a lot of information that suggests our current way of life is very destructive to the world in general and also to ourselves. There are many indicators that our society will self-destruct if we don't change our ways.

(http://www.doomsteaddiner.net/uploads/peter/2012/feb/difference.jpg)

However there is a large contingent of our society that is still comfortable within the status quo and really resents that anyone is suggesting that they/we must change our ways. They have a strong vested interest in maintaining the status quo.

(http://www.doomsteaddiner.net/uploads/peter/2012/feb/fat.png)

TPTB are the worst offenders and use their power and influence to try to stamp out any dialog among disaffected people that would jeopardize their position. They actively fund/organize efforts to keep Internet discussion from effectively leading to change.

(http://www.doomsteaddiner.net/uploads/peter/2012/feb/covert.jpg)

The way this  is accomplished is mostly covertly by creating dissension between individuals so they can't organize themselves to effectively create an alternative lifestyle.  Understanding how this is accomplished is essential to avoiding their trap.

(http://www.doomsteaddiner.net/uploads/peter/2012/feb/source.gif)

We have been conditioned from birth to unconsciously accept that there is only one truth that must apply to everyone equally. For others to think and act differently than ourselves is seen as offensive, often to the point of starting wars and worse. Creating one rigid set of laws and rules which 'you/we' favour can never work for everyone. This applies to a forum along with other aspects of life.

(http://www.doomsteaddiner.net/uploads/peter/2012/feb/bottom.jpg)

Understanding that  "truth" is always "relative" rather than "absolute" is essential to learning to interact with others comfortably.

I'll use an analogy to describe the difference between "absolute" and "relative".

 
If myself and someone else were both looking at one of my cats for the first time, each from a single fixed but different position, and we had never seen a cat before, and I was looking the cat in the face, and the other person was looking at the cat from the rear, we would each describe the cat very differently.

(http://www.doomsteaddiner.net/uploads/peter/2012/feb/catfront.jpg)

(http://www.doomsteaddiner.net/uploads/peter/2012/feb/catrear.jpg)

About all we could agree upon is the general colour. Because of the way we have been conditioned we would likely end up in an argument because we each see very different things. Such arguments are actively encouraged in our society.

(http://www.doomsteaddiner.net/uploads/peter/2012/feb/chickend.jpg)


In the analogy above the way to approach agreement/cooperation is to both step out of our rigid fixed initial position and look at the cat from more angles. After each viewing the cat from many different relative positions, we would discover  that both of us had been right. We also discover that a cat has more aspects than just the one seen from our original fixed position. In fact there are infinite relative aspects to a cat all of which are just as valid as any other.

(http://www.doomsteaddiner.net/uploads/peter/2012/feb/sucks.jpg)


It is critical to understand that in real life, similar to the example above, every single situation we encounter has all the aspects of a cat [infinite] and that anyone else may potentially have a valid opinion or vision even if it disagrees with ours.

IF we desire to cooperate/coexist we must be respectful of each other and assume the other persons views are as valid as our own and the only apparent differences are the result of the other person viewing a different aspect of the situation than the one we have seen.

Adding the information others provide to our own allows us to get a fuller [more accurate?] view of the situation. Disregarding the other person's input leaves us stuck with our own limited perspective. Being stuck leads to arguments with others instead of constructive dialog.

(http://www.doomsteaddiner.net/uploads/peter/2012/feb/sale.jpg)


In the real world we do need to assess the other person's ability to grasp the "big" picture. If it becomes obvious they are stuck in a single "absolute" viewpoint and unwilling to increase their perspective/understanding then their input is of 'limited' value. Even then they should be dealt with respectfully. Calling them idiots and worse for being unable to grasp the bigger picture starts wars.

(http://www.doomsteaddiner.net/uploads/peter/2012/feb/perspective.jpg)


It is possible to disagree in a respectful manner but this is mostly missing on the Internet. Respectful behavior towards each other on the internet and elsewhere is critically needed if we hope to change the world.

My intent is to make this forum a place where we can increase our understanding cooperatively which will result in our being able to create a different and hopefully better world.


 
(http://www.doomsteaddiner.net/uploads/peter/2012/feb/coop.jpg)

Peter


 
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: sensetti on February 26, 2012, 05:46:26 AM
RE

I see you have been busy! I am looking forward to the new blog, it looks great. :)

sensetti
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: RE on February 26, 2012, 12:20:05 PM
thanks sensetti.  the "look" of the blog is the work of our resident computer wizard, Peter. should be a fun place for collapse discussion  8)

RE
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Danno on April 12, 2012, 07:18:11 PM

Hi All,
Thanks for letting me join. I like the post Peter, a decent take on humanness. As this looks to be the 'Welcome' thread, I'll introduce myself here!

I've been a student of all things for some time now. I started coming out of my stupor some 12 years ago when I found out about the limits of resources starting with oil. I have a son and a daughter in law that get it. They are the only people I know on the meat plain that I can learn from. I'm trying to put an act together here that may bring our community up to speed. It is not that they don't want to but, IMHO, lack the information to make reasonable decisions to meaningfully affect their future. TPTB, resources, how money works... My son and I have come to the conclusion that we are pretty much screwed where the whole world is concerned. I have hopes that community can survive.

To be clear, I don't see an 'event', an Armageddon, in our future. At least, nothing that will change our rural setting other than we-be the frog in the kettle. I'm old enough that my concern is not for my ass, but for my kids'. My boy is scary smart, but I don't think life would be very worth living if he had to do it without community, smart or not.

As far as the economy, I see it is a lively topic here. I'll post there eventually. In a nut shell, I think looking at the numbers will reveal the future. There is little chance of hyperinflation, we just don't have the mechanism to support it. Sure government spending is getting a bit much and the QEs are akin to printing. But the dollar amounts are rather paltry compared to total credit market debt.  And BTW, I am staunchly opposed to the system of legal tender as bank created money. It is sad that most folks in this country don't have a clue as to how fundamentally corrupt this is. They hear capitalism and stop there. If they would look capitalism up in the dictionary and compare it to our present condition... But that would mean doing some work.

9/11? It was a couple of years after it happened and the other theory came to my attention. As one person brought up the approach of F77 I thought I would run the numbers and snuff that out. The numbers told me I could not. There is no way an airliner, even with a well seasoned pilot, could make that approach on the pentagon. Of course, I found so many things wrong with that day from there. If the same experts that defend the official story would just 'do the science', but they won't.

My son is a student of human nature. His latest books, 'The Authoritarian' and 'The Psychopath Test'. It is from books like these that he thinks we are screwed. I see the occupiers gather to listen to the likes of Robert Reich as if a god, I think we are screwed.

So, this looks like it will be a fun place!

Best, Dan.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: peter on April 12, 2012, 08:03:04 PM
Hi Dan.... Welcome on board. Good post! I'm looking forward to picking your brain.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Danno on April 13, 2012, 07:10:32 PM
Hi Peter,
Thanks. Don't pick too much, I don't have a lot left. :)

We'll see if I survive this place. I've only stuck with one listserver group for an extended time. My day job is going to keep me pretty busy until May.

Best, Dan.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: peter on April 13, 2012, 08:11:43 PM
"The Psychopath Test", sounds interesting. What is it?
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Danno on April 13, 2012, 08:40:30 PM

It was written by Jon Ronson, the same guy that did 'The Men Who Stare at Goats'. It is investigative journalism on the subject of psychopathy. It gets slow toward the end but not hard to read. There was a 'This American Life' on psychopaths about a year ago he had a hand in. The test was created by Robert Hare who is interviewed quite a bit in the book.

Jon does not try to lead you to any conclusions, he did a good job of just being a journalist. Right after you read the book you might find psychopaths under the bed :) They are really all around us. I think the book leads to a better understanding of our condition. Mitt Romney seems to pass the test with flying colors. Dog on the car roof and all.

I found 'The Authoritarian' even more interesting. It is so how human nature works at the tribe level.

Best, Dan.

http://www.youtube.com/v/6MWpxH-RlFQ
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: peter on April 13, 2012, 09:22:15 PM
This book is a very difficult read but offers a lot of insight.

http://www.sott.net/articles/show/224670-Political-Ponerology-A-Science-on-The-Nature-of-Evil-adjusted-for-Political-Purposes

(http://www.sott.net/image/image/s2/51906/medium/Ponerology.jpg)

Quote
Comment: Now more than ever people need to understand the devastation and suffering wrought on our world by the few at the expense of the many. Presented for the first time on Sott.net, what follows is Laura Knight-Jadczyk's comprehensive review of Political Ponerology: A Science on The Nature of Evil adjusted for Political Purposes, the product of monumental efforts from intrepid researchers of a generation past to bring humanity into awareness about the psychopaths that rule our world.

Its been a few years since I read the book but I remember I uploaded a copy to share. I'll find it and put up a link. There is a lot of good relevant material at SOTT.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: RE on April 13, 2012, 09:56:07 PM
This book is a very difficult read but offers a lot of insight.

http://www.sott.net/articles/show/224670-Political-Ponerology-A-Science-on-The-Nature-of-Evil-adjusted-for-Political-Purposes

(http://www.sott.net/image/image/s2/51906/medium/Ponerology.jpg)

Quote
Comment: Now more than ever people need to understand the devastation and suffering wrought on our world by the few at the expense of the many. Presented for the first time on Sott.net, what follows is Laura Knight-Jadczyk's comprehensive review of Political Ponerology: A Science on The Nature of Evil adjusted for Political Purposes, the product of monumental efforts from intrepid researchers of a generation past to bring humanity into awareness about the psychopaths that rule our world.

Its been a few years since I read the book but I remember I uploaded a copy to share. I'll find it and put up a link. There is a lot of good relevant material at SOTT.

We probably should make a Reference Book Page, especially with books that are available online as pdfs.  On the To Do List.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: reanteben on April 13, 2012, 11:18:00 PM
welcome dan!

seen 'fishead' and listened to the this american life episode, the latter of which I felt was a bit of a soft-peddle.

this 37min vid, 'defense against the psychopath,' is a good primer. towards the end it details the two options for dealing with a psycho. the recommended one is to evade them, much as peter did with his visitor, and the other, last resort option, is to expose them. nothing worse than a blown cover, apparently, for a psycho.

http://www.youtube.com/v/MgGyvxqYSbE&fs=1

following up on peter's post, nassim at TAE introduced the board to 'political ponerology.' here's an interview with the editors of the book that I enjoyed very much:

http://www.sott.net/articles/show/148141-The-Trick-of-the-Psychopath-s-Trade-Make-Us-Believe-that-Evil-Comes-from-Others
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: peter on April 15, 2012, 07:41:50 AM
Finally got through fishead on my less than stellar satellite link. Overall I think it's an excellent video however there's a couple of significant disconnects for me.

The video does a good job of describing the harm done by individual psychopaths but doesn't touch on what happens when the majority or all top positions in corporate or public organizations eventually become filled with psychopaths because they get rid of all those that have a conscience. Psychopaths do seem to be able to cooperate with other psychopaths just fine if it suits their purposes. When their combined efforts capture an asset it appears to me they then use that asset to further consolidate control both inside and outside the organization. Eventually everyone is required to take on psychopathic attributes just to survive.

The final segment that suggests that being a good/positive example affects those around you and also makes them better people probably only applies to non-psychopaths. I think it is dangerous to leave the audience hanging without warning them that such methods might not work with psychopaths.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: peter on April 15, 2012, 07:45:40 AM
Here's a link to get the book Political Ponerology (http://www.doomsteaddiner.net/uploads/peter/ponerology.pdf)

(http://www.sott.net/image/image/s2/51906/medium/Ponerology.jpg)
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Danno on April 15, 2012, 01:12:20 PM
Hi Peter, reanteben

So I read the start of the book in pdf. Thanks. Good stuff. I've ordered the book, 300+ pages, I've got to use paper. I spend enough time looking at this screen now. I've missed many of the books my son has read as he Kindles them.

Yea, NPR soft peddles everything from what I see. I do have KJZZ in my ear all day. But I don't watch TV and read major media rags; it is my current even feed. I see NPR as the leftest-pseudo-intellectual authoritarian. Much like FOX is the authoritarian for the right side types. They both have the same agenda. Keep folks asking the wrong questions so they don't have to worry about the answers.

And yes, I agree with your assessment of fishhead. The hope bit in the end just didn't ring. But it is typical to conclude with, 'there is a fix!' If we had some bacon, we could have bacon and eggs, if we had some eggs...

Best, Dan.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: bluebird on April 15, 2012, 02:33:44 PM
I too have ordered the book, Political Ponerology. From the little I have skimmed here, this sounds so much like the police chief in our small village of 2500 people. He loves the power of his badge and cites everyone for the smallest of infractions, because he is the chief. It appears he has mandated to the regular officers to do the same. No warnings are given, you go to court for everything. Before he became chief, the income generated from citations was appx $1000/$2000 per month. Now the income every month has jumped to $8000/$12,000 per month.

Spouse and I are fighting some legal issues in our community because we have been targeted by this police chief for 3 years for attempting to expose his behaviors. We have a few people who are supporting us, but it's been difficult, because people have so much faith and trust in the police and refuse to open their eyes otherwise.

It seems the chief's psychotic behavior has swept up our village officials too. If our village officials had reprimanded/terminated this psychotic chief three years ago when we first became targets, then the community would not be in the mess it is today with all the chief's continued unacceptable dishonest behavior. We even voted a new mayor in January, and still nothing has been done about the chief. 

But a couple weeks ago, our next door neighbor 10 year old child was targeted by this same psychotic chief. Now, more people are waking up to his unacceptable behavior because this also affects the schools.  But if the chief's inappropriate actions had been dealt with earlier, a young child would have not been traumatized by this chief. 
 
And still the village officials are doing nothing. They appear to be of the mindset that we are the problem for stirring up stuff. They just don't see what is going on. Yet if somebody doesn't stand up, then I fear the gestapo taking over.
 
 


 







 
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: peter on April 15, 2012, 02:51:46 PM
The best book I have found on the subject of how psychopaths are created by our society is Wilhelm Reich's, "The Function of the Orgasm."

The title is kind of misleading but sexual frustration is a very powerful emotional manipulation tool. This book is impossible to get online. I spent about 4 hours trying to find a copy and only came up with one in russian. I have scanned parts of the book before and it's time I scan the whole thing.  I'll post it when I'm done.

In the mean time I'll attach another document from Reich I found online that covers a portion of the material in the book relating  to creating Fascism. THE MASS PSYCHOLOGY OF FASCISM, By WILHELM REICH
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: peter on April 15, 2012, 04:37:56 PM
It's been a few years since I've gone through all this material and dementia is setting in. My memory isn't what it used to be. The last post just reminded me of the most important point about psychopaths which also isn't covered.

Pretty much all the information available about psychopathy hints it is a natural condition of personality dysfunction that only some people are born with. The truth is much more horrible. Anyone can be made into a psychopath  with the right conditioning and that conditioning is omnipresent within our society and has been for many generations.

We are all victims of it to varying degrees. If we can function 'normally' within society we are far from being healthy empathetic individuals. Most of our personality is the result of the 'norms' our society has conditioned us to. The conditioning happens from the time we leave the womb if not before. Our parents have been conditioned to the 'norms' of society before us and unknowingly, because they think their behavior is normal, are our first brain-washers.

Some of the points made by Reich regarding what we see as healthy familial behavior undeniably demonstrate how destructive they are to our personalities.

The proof is in the pudding which can clearly be seen regarding our acceptance, even if reluctantly,  of the mayhem being conducted by our leaders on innocent parties who get in their way. Visualize that the 16 people butchered recently in the night raid in Afghanistan were your sisters and brothers, or mothers and fathers. Would you be satisfied with our common reaction of just reading and complaining about it? Our personalities have been so dominated within our patriarchal/hierarchical society that those above us can get away with mass murder and worse.

The first step to doing anything about it is to realize and accept how fucked up we all are.

The second step is possible and means rebuilding our individual norms on a healthier model.

Title: Time has COME for the INQUISITION!
Post by: RE on April 15, 2012, 07:15:35 PM

The first step to doing anything about it is to realize and accept how fucked up we all are.

The second step is possible and means rebuilding our individual norms on a healthier model.

Can I add in another Step here?  IMHO, between Step 1 and Step 2 we need to add in a Step where we take all the Scumbags and give them a First Class Ticket to the Great beyond.   >:(

If your Kitchen is infested with Cockroaches, you'll never have a Healthy Kitchen until you EXTERMINATE THE VERMIN!  Bring in the Orkin Man!

Sure, you can make the case that as soon as you drop into the Extermination Game you are just as bad as the Illuminati, but I don't buy that argument.  If you accept the principle that Good and Evil are ABSOLUTES and not RELATIVE concepts, then it's GOOD thing to send EVIL people to the Great Beyond and a BAD thing to send GOOD people to the Great Beyond.

Its a Done Deal now that LOTS of people are going to take a trip to the Great Beyond here.  I just want to make sure the RIGHT people get the First Class Ticket the Soonest. Our Kitchen will be a lot CLEANER without all the Cockroaches running around here.  You don't get a Clean Kitchen by playing Mr. Nice Guy with the Vermin.  You bring on the Orkin Man.

It's TIME for the INQUISITION.  It's TIME for the Auto da Fe!  It's TIME for the EXECUTIONS to begin here.  Nay, it is PAST time for that already.  Let the Reign of Terror BEGIN here!  Robespierre had it RIGHT, he just did not go far enough.  This time, we REALLY Clean the Kitchen! No more Mr. Nice Guy!

http://www.youtube.com/v/CSe38dzJYkY

RE
Title: Re: Time has COME for the INQUISITION!
Post by: Surly1 on April 17, 2012, 03:25:46 PM


Can I add in another Step here?  IMHO, between Step 1 and Step 2 we need to add in a Step where we take all the Scumbags and give them a First Class Ticket to the Great beyond.   If your Kitchen is infested with Cockroaches, you'll never have a Healthy Kitchen until you EXTERMINATE THE VERMIN!  Bring in the Orkin Man!

// It's TIME for the Auto da Fe!  It's TIME for the EXECUTIONS to begin here.  Nay, it is PAST time for that already.  Let the Reign of Terror BEGIN here!  Robespierre had it RIGHT, he just did not go far enough.  This time, we REALLY Clean the Kitchen! No more Mr. Nice Guy!


Problem with that approach is, like always, you start with Robespierre and end up with Stalin. Per Peter's reference above to psychopathy; nice to know they can be made, as well as born.
Title: Re: Welcome to Digit93
Post by: Surly1 on April 17, 2012, 03:28:55 PM
Welcome to digit93, a friend who has been bedazzled by the inspired prose and sparkling give-and-take of the Double-D!

She's likely to lurk for a while-- so be gentle!!
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: EndIsNigh on April 17, 2012, 04:17:48 PM
On a mostly emotional level I can understand the sentiment RE presents here.  Obviously we're talking about post-collapse?  Will this be possible to coordinate under such a scenario, with all the other chaos that's bound to be going on? 

Welcome aboard digit93, nice to have you and hope you enjoy your stay!
Title: Re: Time has COME for the INQUISITION!
Post by: RE on April 17, 2012, 04:36:16 PM


Can I add in another Step here?  IMHO, between Step 1 and Step 2 we need to add in a Step where we take all the Scumbags and give them a First Class Ticket to the Great beyond.   If your Kitchen is infested with Cockroaches, you'll never have a Healthy Kitchen until you EXTERMINATE THE VERMIN!  Bring in the Orkin Man!

// It's TIME for the Auto da Fe!  It's TIME for the EXECUTIONS to begin here.  Nay, it is PAST time for that already.  Let the Reign of Terror BEGIN here!  Robespierre had it RIGHT, he just did not go far enough.  This time, we REALLY Clean the Kitchen! No more Mr. Nice Guy!


Problem with that approach is, like always, you start with Robespierre and end up with Stalin. Per Peter's reference above to psychopathy; nice to know they can be made, as well as born.

When he morphs into Stalin, you off him also.

RE
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: reanteben on April 17, 2012, 05:05:43 PM
(http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lj7slhfNYR1qbkynd.jpg)

welcome digit93!  :)
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: peter on April 17, 2012, 09:25:50 PM
Hi digit93! Glad you could join us and looking forward to getting to know you.

Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: peter on April 20, 2012, 10:59:24 AM
nobody just signed up as a member  :wav: very glad to see you.  :emthup:
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Surly1 on April 20, 2012, 11:28:06 AM
nobody just signed up as a member  :wav: very glad to see you.  :emthup:

Welcome back nobody!
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: peter on April 24, 2012, 09:24:46 AM
Quote
The United States is Run by Sociopaths, Economics and Evil
Politics / Social Issues Apr 17, 2012 - 02:22 PM

By: Casey_Research

Doug Casey, Casey Research writes: I recently wrote an article that addresses the subject of sociopaths and how they insinuate themselves into society. Although the subject doesn't speak directly to what stock you should buy or sell to increase your wealth, I think it's critical to success in the markets. It goes a long way towards explaining what goes on in the heads of people like Bernie Madoff and therefore how you can avoid being hurt by them.


But there's a lot more to the story. At this point, it seems as if society at large has been captured by Madoff clones. If that's true, the consequences can't be good. So what I want to do here is probe a little deeper into the realm of abnormal psychology and see how it relates to economics and where the world is heading.

If I'm correct in my assessment, it would imply that the prospects are dim for conventional investments – most stocks, bonds and real estate. Those things tend to do well when society is growing in prosperity. And prosperity is fostered by peace, low taxes, minimal regulation and a sound currency. It's also fostered by a cultural atmosphere where sociopaths are precluded from positions of power and intellectual and moral ideas promoting free minds and free markets rule. Unfortunately, it seems that doesn't describe the trend that the world at large and the US in particular are embarked upon.

In essence, we're headed towards economic and financial bankruptcy. But that's mostly because society has been largely intellectually and morally bankrupt for some time. I don't believe a society can rise to real prosperity without a sound intellectual and moral foundation – that's why the US was so uniquely prosperous for so long, because it had such a foundation. And it's also why societies like Saudi Arabia will collapse as soon as the exogenous things that support them are pulled away. It's why the USSR collapsed. It's the reason why countries everywhere across time reach a peak (if they ever do), then stagnate and decline.

This isn't a matter of academic contemplation, for the same reason that it doesn't matter much if you're in a first-class cabin when the ship it's in is taking on water....    Continued (http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article34180.html)
Title: Flapjax Resurfaces!
Post by: RE on May 02, 2012, 01:41:39 PM
GREAT NEWZ!

Flapjax, who collaborated with me as the Artist in the original Doomstead Diner Comic Strip has emailed me back, and we will likely write some new strips here in our new classy DD Website.

Give the Flapster a warm DD greeting!

http://www.youtube.com/v/mPaed8I3V1A

RE
Title: Re: Flapjax Resurfaces!
Post by: peter on May 02, 2012, 02:16:19 PM
GREAT NEWZ!

Flapjax, who collaborated with me as the Artist in the original Doomstead Diner Comic Strip has emailed me back, and we will likely write some new strips here in our new classy DD Website.

Give the Flapster a warm DD greeting!

http://www.youtube.com/v/mPaed8I3V1A

RE


:pile: :hi: Great stuff Flapjax.

Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: paul on May 04, 2012, 11:50:45 AM
I guess the best way for me to intro myself is to say that I lurked at TAE since TOD days and never posted.  I am very grateful to those folks for their work but feel that DD is closer to where i'm at.  I'll probably lurk mostly here but wanted to say hi and that this "feels" like a great place :)  Thanks and hello from the ozarks!  p.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Surly1 on May 04, 2012, 12:10:12 PM
I guess the best way for me to intro myself is to say that I lurked at TAE since TOD days and never posted.  I am very grateful to those folks for their work but feel that DD is closer to where i'm at.  I'll probably lurk mostly here but wanted to say hi and that this "feels" like a great place :)  Thanks and hello from the ozarks!  p.

Welcome. Don't be shy. Plenty to feast on here at the Diner.

Belly up to the buffet!
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Golden Oxen on May 04, 2012, 12:45:16 PM
Hi Paul. Welcome aboard. :hello:
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: JoeP on May 04, 2012, 03:44:34 PM
Welcome Paul. Wise choice. The Diner is the real deal.
 
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: reanteben on May 04, 2012, 03:58:54 PM
welcome paul, lurker extraordinaire! thanks for making the jump. :)
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: nobody on May 05, 2012, 06:53:29 AM
My standard Norwegian welcome to Paul -and ?Ed?
Sit long and talk much.

"I guess the best way for me to intro myself is to say that I lurked at TAE since TOD days and never posted."
I really get this.  You can do whatever you want here and there are no limits to the discourse.  It's "everybody into the pool!"
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: paul on May 05, 2012, 07:12:38 AM
 :emthup:  this place is cool! thanks for being here.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: davep on May 07, 2012, 09:23:05 AM
Hi, davep here from the old days on peakoil.com.

It's a nice looking forum you've got going, RE. I'll have a good browse. I like the category headers already. And po.com is dying on its backside.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: RE on May 07, 2012, 10:01:58 AM
Hi, davep here from the old days on peakoil.com.

It's a nice looking forum you've got going, RE. I'll have a good browse. I like the category headers already. And po.com is dying on its backside.

I thought I recognized that handle!  Welcome to the Diner Dave!  How did you find out about us?

Do you still have posting priviledges on Peak Oil?  If you do, I'd appreciate it if you let the old crowd know about the Diner.  Sure would be great to get some of the old crowd in here, Pops especially.  Of course, there are a few I would rather NOT see here as well.  LOL.

RE
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: davep on May 07, 2012, 10:08:59 AM
Hi, davep here from the old days on peakoil.com.

It's a nice looking forum you've got going, RE. I'll have a good browse. I like the category headers already. And po.com is dying on its backside.

I thought I recognized that handle!  Welcome to the Diner Dave!  How did you find out about us?

Do you still have posting priviledges on Peak Oil?  If you do, I'd appreciate it if you let the old crowd know about the Diner.  Sure would be great to get some of the old crowd in here, Pops especially.  Of course, there are a few I would rather NOT see here as well.  LOL.

RE

I already have! http://peakoil.com/forums/reverse-engineer-s-explanation-of-markets-and-investing-t45154-210.html (http://peakoil.com/forums/reverse-engineer-s-explanation-of-markets-and-investing-t45154-210.html)

I found out about the Diner from the yahoo group, but have been generally too busy (I'm working in Switzerland on Lake Geneva now, and commuting back to the doomstead in France every weekend). Plus I'm a mod on two forums, so I've not really had time to dive in.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: RE on May 07, 2012, 10:52:32 AM

I already have! http://peakoil.com/forums/reverse-engineer-s-explanation-of-markets-and-investing-t45154-210.html (http://peakoil.com/forums/reverse-engineer-s-explanation-of-markets-and-investing-t45154-210.html)

I found out about the Diner from the yahoo group, but have been generally too busy (I'm working in Switzerland on Lake Geneva now, and commuting back to the doomstead in France every weekend). Plus I'm a mod on two forums, so I've not really had time to dive in.

Wow, is that ever an OLD thread!  2008!

You're a Big Cheese Mod there now?  The Ban on RE is off now?  Is Wisconson Cur still there?  I don't think he would like me back.

RE
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: davep on May 07, 2012, 11:11:40 AM
I hardly see him around. I think he spends more time on malthusia.com

I'm mainly a Mod to deal with the spam during European time zones. Sometimes there seems to be more spam than genuine contributions.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Jb on May 07, 2012, 12:57:36 PM
A warm welcome to davep!

I hope you will give us the latest news from the EU when you have time. Seems like things took quite a turn this week.

Cheers,

Jb
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: RE on May 07, 2012, 02:50:23 PM
I hardly see him around. I think he spends more time on malthusia.com

I'm mainly a Mod to deal with the spam during European time zones. Sometimes there seems to be more spam than genuine contributions.

How about Nazi Jack?  He still around?  Monte?

RE
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: davep on May 08, 2012, 12:52:40 AM
I hardly see him around. I think he spends more time on malthusia.com

I'm mainly a Mod to deal with the spam during European time zones. Sometimes there seems to be more spam than genuine contributions.

How about Nazi Jack?  He still around?  Monte?

RE

No, Jack disappeared to Malthusia too. Monte basically ended up getting laughed off the boards.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: RE on May 08, 2012, 01:46:39 AM
I hardly see him around. I think he spends more time on malthusia.com

I'm mainly a Mod to deal with the spam during European time zones. Sometimes there seems to be more spam than genuine contributions.

How about Nazi Jack?  He still around?  Monte?

RE

No, Jack disappeared to Malthusia too. Monte basically ended up getting laughed off the boards.

I've never been to Malthusia, I suppose I have to check it out now.

Curious about Monte getting "laughed off"?  His spin was annoying, but he was not foolishly stupid.

I also wonder about Mr. Bill.  He was the first Capitalista Pigman I took on, on  any board, but he disappearred off Peak Oil before I got shit canned.

How about Pretorian? Nefarious?

RE
Title: Slog and DD Crossposting
Post by: RE on May 12, 2012, 10:11:04 AM
I have been in touch with a blogger from across the Pond, JA Ward who writes the Slog.  He will be joining us here shortly I believe, so give him a warm Diner Welcome.  We will cross post articles and hopefully build our readership this way.

BTW, his stuff is hilarious  ;D

RE
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: reanteben on May 12, 2012, 03:34:54 PM
super!   :emthup:
Title: Re: Slog and DD Crossposting
Post by: RE on May 12, 2012, 04:47:42 PM
I neglected to give the URL for the Slog.  You can go read there at

http://hat4uk.wordpress.com/ (http://hat4uk.wordpress.com/)

until the Slogger himself shows up here.

RE
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Jaded Prole on May 19, 2012, 07:55:10 AM
I've stumble in here via Surly1 and this smorgasbord looks like much to consume before I do much posting  - a real wealth of info and wisdom. I'd like to think this cycle of civilization can undergo transformation without complete collapse though I know it isn't likely. As a long time activist I know what we are up against and I know the odds. That said, I've emphasized building community as the foundation for the next society. Though I'm all but locked out of any chances for worthwhile employment, as a poet and publisher I have put out a progressive literary journal, the  Blue Collar Review (http://Partisanpress.org) which chronicles 15 years of the politically aware working class experience in poetry and prose. That and freelance writing scrapes in a few bucks and gives me the satisfaction of making some kind of contribution to the evolution of consciousness.

Glad to have found this place.   
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Golden Oxen on May 19, 2012, 07:59:35 AM
Welcome to the Diner Jaded Prole. Looking forward to reading some of your poetry and your comments.  :hi:
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Golden Oxen on May 26, 2012, 06:51:20 AM
Welcome steve from virginia, Nice to have you at the Diner, Heard much about your mind blowing postings.  GO :hi: :hi:
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: reanteben on June 05, 2012, 05:51:32 PM
welcome again, CYPMagain. I went from ben to reanteben at the Reverse Engineering yahoo group for the same reason no doubt. way to pad the stats.  ;D
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: hellsbells on July 04, 2012, 05:42:40 PM
Hi everyone ! Thanks for letting me join.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Golden Oxen on July 04, 2012, 06:03:23 PM
Hi everyone ! Thanks for letting me join.
Hi hellsbells, The pleasure is all ours. Welcome to the Diner   :hi:
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: hellsbells on July 04, 2012, 06:07:41 PM
Thank you. I'm still finding my way around, exploring and all that, to the sound of distant fireworks. Happy Fourth.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: roccman on July 23, 2012, 07:04:05 AM
rocc's onboard!! what's for dinner?
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Surly1 on July 23, 2012, 07:33:13 AM
Greetings hellsbells and rocc, good to have you here. The Diner buffet is loaded; bring your appetites!
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Surly1 on July 23, 2012, 02:11:08 PM
Welcome new member Aftefevop! Enjoy the many courses at the Diner, where you can find a discussion thread on almost everything worth discussing!
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Surly1 on July 28, 2012, 11:42:23 AM
Welcome to new members KineticBrian, ThoreauFan, and flenseempipsy! Nice to have you aboard. Read the blog, plunder the Forum, and belly up to the Doomstead Diner buffet!
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: RE on July 30, 2012, 07:54:58 PM
(http://www.zmescience.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/black-hole-galaxy.jpg)
Welcome to our newest member, Super Gravity.  SG follows briefly after Gravity joined a few days ago.  Think they are Related?  LOL.  Gravity around here is getting very strong.  We need Anti-Gravity to join soon or the Diner will be sucked into a Black Hole.   :icon_mrgreen:


RE
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: buzzard on July 31, 2012, 11:55:46 PM
Well, I guess I should have checked in here first before I began shooting off my mouth in a couple other threads. Damn! I see some familiar faces swarming around DD like bees at the hive. I have made similar journeys to most of you only [shall we say] second tier. Being computer illiterate and a life-long stutterer I have mostly lurked down through the years. I occasionally have a good idea. I'll let you know when one comes by. About all I can come up with at the moment is: We're royally screwed unless those benevolent Arcturians swoop down and clean up our play pen. I'm a big fish in a little pond in my local neighborhood. I am worshiped as a seer and eccentric while being slightly feared. Works for me.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: RE on August 01, 2012, 12:41:09 AM
Well, I guess I should have checked in here first before I began shooting off my mouth in a couple other threads.

(http://gifsoup.com/view1/3873993/josey-wales-1-o.gif)
Don't worry about that on the Diner. Shooting First and Asking Questions Later is the Diner Way.  :icon_mrgreen:

RE
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Surly1 on August 03, 2012, 09:13:18 AM
Welcome to new Diners Craig, Mable_invick, and bitechiniff, who have just joined our menagerie. Look around, and jump right in.

Nice to have you here.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Surly1 on August 06, 2012, 01:57:31 PM
Welcome to our newest member, Inhiseegooche , who has chosen to sign up for this madhouse. Welcome, and drink deep!
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Surly1 on August 09, 2012, 01:56:32 PM
Welcome to new members Helen_Imarl, bobbyjol, inhifallumefe, and  clothingkkj, who have recently had themselves admitted to our asylum. Cruise the forums, post and article, and try to refrain from licking the windows. Pretty much anything else is OK here . . .
Nice to have you here.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Surly1 on August 14, 2012, 09:18:01 AM
Here's a great big Doomy welcome to our newest members, Angel-Angel, jackluve, Gyncantethy, and bobbyjol, who have, like us, chosen to jettison common sense, good taste  and prevailing wisdom, and joined this company.

Welcome to a board both crazed and uncommon.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Surly1 on August 17, 2012, 02:23:55 PM

Greetings to new members exiniaZen, Maximusdyery, arnold97, and sidneydvksh, all of whom have taken leave of their senses and chosen to join us.

Enjoy your stay. While cruising the buffet, don’t forget to try the Doom.

Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Golden Oxen on August 20, 2012, 06:20:21 PM
Welcome newest member Daniel Patten. Always happy to have a new member join the Diner.   :hi:
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: agelbert on August 26, 2012, 05:28:46 PM
Welcome to Monserrate. Thank you for joining us. You will love the ability to post images and also video on your comments that we offer here (just experiment with the buttons and hit preview to test your results before posting). It puts pizzazz in your communication. This is rare on the internet. Don't forget to try those buttons for emoticons.  :emthup:
 :hi::multiplespotting: :circle: :eusa_clap:

You can Move text and change fonts as well as bold and italics and many other html tricks and tools.

Tell your friends. Free speech is sacrosanct here.

Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: agelbert on August 27, 2012, 10:14:02 PM
Welcome to KetQueede & PypeGreef.

Thank you for joining us. You will love the ability to post images and also video on your comments that we offer here (just experiment with the buttons and hit preview to test your results before posting). It puts pizzazz in your communication. This is rare on the internet. Don't forget to try those buttons for emoticons.  :emthup:
 :hi: :cat: :dog: :icon_rabbit:
You can Move text and change fonts as well as bold and italics and many other html tricks and tools.

Insert videos and images too!

Clock second hand mechanism

Tell your friends. Free speech is sacrosanct here.

Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Surly1 on September 02, 2012, 09:46:06 AM
Welcome to new members Bot Blogger, pansceptic, Grooloribia, allosmosext, Kilmoon, DaShui, Uzhas, Kristioljk, and Futilitist. Killmoon has, of course, already been active and has gotten herself dubbed Annie Oakley.

(http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSG00B2mop1ZHbntfkfZ55RPee9DdBhL9bctt3a3zc7iChvEYwC&t=1)

So come on out from behind the refrigerator, stop lurking, and join the Big Show!

(http://pwa.wrestlingx.net/wrestlerimages/the_big_show.jpg)
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Golden Oxen on September 06, 2012, 07:37:37 AM
Welcome  DarcieGale. Nice to have you on board.

The Diner is nearing 300 members # 296, four more to another milestone!    :icon_sunny:
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: widgeon on September 06, 2012, 04:16:10 PM
Hey Ya'll.  I'm in the cyber-wilderness looking for a home after being cast aside elsewhere.

Maybe there's enough doom here to suit me?

I enjoyed the "55" post.  I'm 51 and can relate.  I can see "my retirement" slipping away day-by-day and it provokes strange emotions.  Character Displacement.

Just last night someone completely unexpected asked me about wind power - if I thought they'd ever amount to anything.  I wasn't sure exactly where the question was coming from but took my shot - 'we've become accustomed to using a remarkable amount of energy that we take for granted; wind power will never provide that.'

It got the discussion going.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Golden Oxen on September 06, 2012, 05:06:43 PM
Welcome widgeon, Glad you dropped into the Diner. Make yourself at home.

Know what you mean about wind power, it has it's place but "No Maas" We sure can use up some energy without realizing it , as you say.                          :hi:
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: RE on September 06, 2012, 08:32:15 PM
Hey Ya'll.  I'm in the cyber-wilderness looking for a home after being cast aside elsewhere.

Maybe there's enough doom here to suit me?

Welcome to the Diner WG! :hi:

Given that I am "Full Doom" and project out a return to something resembling Paleolithic living; and I also will Publish Guy McPherson's "Uber Doom" Predictions of an Extinction Level Event by Mid Century, I don't think there is any other website where you will get more Doom than on the Diner.  :icon_mrgreen:

We do have our Hopeful folks here in the Diner also, Surly hopes the Ghandi meme for Non-violent change will work and Agelbert comes on strong for the potantial of Renewable Energy.  Peter who is currently AWOL has one of the finest Hydroponic setups around and believes we can feed our population without energy intensive industrial agriculture.

So there is a variety of opinion, and even more variety of opinion on Strategies to deal with the oncoming Storm.  Much to discuss, much to hash out here on the pages of the Doomstead Diner.

Doomstead Diner: #1 for DOOM on the Net!

RE
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Surly1 on September 13, 2012, 09:19:03 AM
A great big Doomy welcome and extra helpings of Diner slops to new members Singe, bigirish2, Snowleopard, marcelsan, Glainty Glassaische, carminehyv, and Essetrypleaps. We now have 317 members of this particular asylum.

Plunder the pantries-- there are plenty of subjects here, especially in the forum, where virtually any subject is discussed in a setting free from manipulation and flat out censorship. (We do, have and will delete SPAM with a merciless impunity.) So if you're not selling viagra or generic drugs from India, you're probably OK.

Welcome aboard. We are delighted to have you with us.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: OldHorseman on September 13, 2012, 08:48:28 PM

Hey!

   Just heard about this Doomstead Diner, thought I'd pop-in and check it out.


                   -Hoss.

Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: RE on September 13, 2012, 09:09:01 PM

Hey!

   Just heard about this Doomstead Diner, thought I'd pop-in and check it out.


                   -Hoss.

Welcome Hoss!

(http://comandantehamilton.com.ar/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/hoss.jpg)

That was the easiest Diner ID yet to peg!   :icon_mrgreen:

RE
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: OldHorseman on September 13, 2012, 10:30:49 PM

   Put Grizzly Adams' beard on there, and you're pretty-much spot-on.  8)

Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Futilitist on September 13, 2012, 10:56:44 PM
Welcome Oldhorseman,

I think you will like it here.

I've just been banned from LATOC for this:
http://www.doomsteaddiner.net/forum/index.php?topic=842.75 (http://www.doomsteaddiner.net/forum/index.php?topic=842.75)
read to the bottom

What do you think?

---Futilitist
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: agelbert on September 14, 2012, 12:23:45 AM
Welcome aboard, Hoss.  :hi:

You may be surprised at how great (and varied) the subject areas are at the Diner. Lotta great reads! :icon_mrgreen: :icon_sunny:

(http://ponderosascenery.homestead.com/files/birdman33a.JPG) 
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: agelbert on September 14, 2012, 12:30:44 AM
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3123/2448963317_e8a7fc2cef.jpg)

 :hi:   OldHorseman is here. Glad to have you saddle up along with the rest of us!
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Golden Oxen on September 14, 2012, 02:10:03 AM
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3123/2448963317_e8a7fc2cef.jpg)

 :hi:   OldHorseman is here. Glad to have you saddle up along with the rest of us!

Why does this picture make me think of RE?      ;D
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: OldHorseman on September 15, 2012, 12:04:39 PM
.

   Actually look a bit more like this...

(http://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash4/2118_1062697096344_4016_n.jpg)

.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: agelbert on September 15, 2012, 01:14:10 PM
OldHorseman,
I can see it is definitely a wise policy to stay in your good graces.  :emthup: :icon_mrgreen:

Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: OldHorseman on September 15, 2012, 10:02:56 PM
.

   Okay... Got a few minutes for a more proper introduction.

   Some of you may remember me from old LATOC.  I was the senior moderator over there.  I joined the day the forum opened and was continuously active until Matt pulled the plug, with the exception of six weeks when a was sidetracked by death. (But I'm feeling MUCH better now.)  ;D

   Last couple of years, I've been an Administrator over at The Oil Age.

   We've been building/living our doomstead for a decade and a half now.  General approach has been circa 1912 sustainable tech level augmented with a few modern bits to replace the lost 19th Century infrastructure.  (Free-standing alt-energy deep well, for instance.)

   Got horse & buggy, dairy & eggs, woodstove and game.  Coal forge blacksmith shop. Roll our own ammo.

   My old blog isn't updated that often anymore, but the archives have lots of doomsteading articles.

   Would love to reconnect with folks who are serious about keeping some grits in the pot and MZBs at a distance as the walls of Babylon continue to crumble.

.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: RE on September 15, 2012, 10:33:40 PM

   Some of you may remember me from old LATOC.  I was the senior moderator over there.  I joined the day the forum opened and was continuously active until Matt pulled the plug, with the exception of six weeks when a was sidetracked by death. (But I'm feeling MUCH better now.)  ;D

WOW!  I am HONORED to have you aboard OH!  An ORIGINAL LATOC Mod! Bringing together 1st and 3rd Generation Collapse Websites!  I only got my Wake Up Call in 2007, so I missed the earliest days of Peak Oil and LATOC.

As I think you can see by now, I am a pretty Unconventional Admin and operate by a different set of "rules" than Peak Oil or LATOC or TOA ran/run by.  For the most part though, I still think Intelligent Debate here dominates the Napalm so I have yet to see a need for Banning or Censoring on the Forum.

If you have some Old Posts from LATOC which you think are worthwhile Refreshing here for New Kollapsniks, I will make you a Byline on the Diner Blog to publish them periodically, along with new stuff you might write also.

The Diner is FIRST CLASS publication platform, the best on the Web for Collapse Blogs IMHO.  Just about any layout is possible, multimedia embedding etc.

WELCOME AGAIN to the Diner!

RE
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: agelbert on September 16, 2012, 11:38:27 PM
:hi: bywheda!

Enjoy the site and don't forget to try posting images and/or video to accentuate and improve your communication. If you need help on doing that, just ask. I didn't know either a couple of months ago and picked it up. It's easy and fun. :icon_sunny:
I like this particular emoticon when I post something that I find shocking by our government. :jawdrop:

To make that emoticon just write the word jawdrop with a colon on either side. :icon_mrgreen:
Here are some examples and I have spelled them out below with a space before and after the colons.
 Welcome  : hi : :hi:
cheering and celebration : multiplespotting : :multiplespotting:
Group holding hands in a circle : circle : :circle:
clapping : eusa_clap : :eusa_clap:
Coins piling up  : pile : :pile:
Flame war : 13344-6 : :13344-6:
: angry1 : :angry1:
: angry2 : :angry2:
: angry3 : :angry3:
: angry4 : :angry4:
: angry5 : :angry5:
: hammer : :hammer:
: wc :  :wc:
 Have fun. ;D
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Surly1 on September 25, 2012, 02:31:06 PM
Welcome to new members HeidiL , JasonHep ,travelling_without_moving,  Nosferatu, peterdarwin, js2081, and woodtayl, all of whom have recently slipped into the Diner and are now standing in the back looking for a table, or are hugging the walls. And who could blame them.

Come on in, read a bit, and post away. I wouldn't order the Stew, though...
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: RE on September 25, 2012, 02:48:12 PM
Welcome to new members HeidiL , JasonHep ,travelling_without_moving,  Nosferatu, peterdarwin, js2081, and woodtayl, all of whom have recently slipped into the Diner and are now standing in the back looking for a table, or are hugging the walls. And who could blame them.

Come on in, read a bit, and post away. I wouldn't order the Stew, though...

PD made one post.  :emthup:

Special Today is Spanish Melee and 2% Off on Apples.  :icon_mrgreen:

RE
Title: Re: Welcome! DarrylW8
Post by: Golden Oxen on October 25, 2012, 03:00:24 PM
Hi DarrylW8, Welcome to the Diner. Just finished listening to the video posted on your profile, and got a kick out of your comment about yourself.  Hope you enjoy your stay.       :hi:
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: moniker on November 11, 2012, 08:46:08 AM
Thank you for providing this platform for communications regarding what is going on in our world today. I was prompted to join this website after reading RE's Subway Swan Song on The Burning Platform, where I commented that I too commuted to Stuyvesant H.S. on the number 7 train, and then reading ~55 here.

I started at Stuyvesant in 1974, about the time RE seems to have graduated. I went to school with Jeff Eisman, whose older brother Nat may have been a contemporary of RE's there and at Columbia.

After personally being affected by the 1974 WTC bombings, 911 and the recent economic troubles, I began searching the web for some insight into what is going on. I have become convinced that most important political decisions today are made by a small group of people, the power elite. I was aware long ago that the Western scientific/technological system would eventually self-destruct.

I had the misfortune to work for a good number of years in a company run by someone who is almost certainly a power elite member, though at the time I had no idea what this meant. This is serious business.

Ok I get it, but what to do?
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: WHD on November 11, 2012, 10:12:17 AM
Quote
Ok I get it, but what to do?

moniker,

Welcome! And congratulations on your pulling your head out of the sand. Now, you have come to the eternal question.  :icon_scratch:

RE would say, move to a remote locale, stock up on supplies and make a bug-out plan. GO says buy gold and silver. El G removed himself to Mexico. roamer is out in the North Dakota oil fields making a bunch of money, planning a homestead. Agelbert wants to gut the fossil fuel industry and pour all our resources into alternatives.  JoeP keeps us up on a wide range of topics with his Newz. Ashivn is trying to keep us all out of hell. I'm here in Minneapolis setting up a greenhouse and hoop houses in defiance of people eating people propaganda, making sure anyone who cares to look knows I'm growin food.

Trick is, what do you feel called to do with this new knowledge? There is no wrong answer, I think, except to stick your head back in the sand and plug back in to the hologram. Blessings, as you work that out. And keep asking questions.   
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Surly1 on November 11, 2012, 10:35:45 AM
Quote
Ok I get it, but what to do?

moniker,

Welcome! And congratulations on your pulling your head out of the sand. Now, you have come to the eternal question.  :icon_scratch:

RE would say, move to a remote locale, stock up on supplies and make a bug-out plan. GO says buy gold and silver. El G removed himself to Mexico. roamer is out in the North Dakota oil fields making a bunch of money, planning a homestead. Agelbert wants to gut the fossil fuel industry and pour all our resources into alternatives.  JoeP keeps us up on a wide range of topics with his Newz. Ashivn is trying to keep us all out of hell. I'm here in Minneapolis setting up a greenhouse and hoop houses in defiance of people eating people propaganda, making sure anyone who cares to look knows I'm growin food.

Trick is, what do you feel called to do with this new knowledge? There is no wrong answer, I think, except to stick your head back in the sand and plug back in to the hologram. Blessings, as you work that out. And keep asking questions.

The $64,000 question.

Seeking the answer is the Grail Quest of this particular gathering place. Or, to choose another simile, the elephant that this gaggle of blind men is trying to describe.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: WHD on November 11, 2012, 10:47:28 AM
Quote
the elephant that this gaggle of blind men is trying to describe.

Surly1,

Rather than an elephant, maybe a brontosaurus.  :icon_mrgreen:
Title: Welcome Moniker!
Post by: RE on November 11, 2012, 02:23:36 PM
Thank you for providing this platform for communications regarding what is going on in our world today. I was prompted to join this website after reading RE's Subway Swan Song on The Burning Platform, where I commented that I too commuted to Stuyvesant H.S. on the number 7 train, and then reading ~55 here.

I started at Stuyvesant in 1974, about the time RE seems to have graduated. I went to school with Jeff Eisman, whose older brother Nat may have been a contemporary of RE's there and at Columbia.

After personally being affected by the 1974 WTC bombings, 911 and the recent economic troubles, I began searching the web for some insight into what is going on. I have become convinced that most important political decisions today are made by a small group of people, the power elite. I was aware long ago that the Western scientific/technological system would eventually self-destruct.

I had the misfortune to work for a good number of years in a company run by someone who is almost certainly a power elite member, though at the time I had no idea what this meant. This is serious business.

Ok I get it, but what to do?

:hi: MNK!  We have at least one other Stuyvesantian here, but you are the only other #7 Flushing Line Straphanger that I know of.  :icon_mrgreen:  I did graduate in 1974, but Nat Eisman doesn't ring a bell.  Anyhow, since I try to stay Anon, I don't generally run down all the real names of my contemporaries.

(http://www.heavyeggs.com/uploads/files/2010/October/15/a95/866/99a57b4b8d4692b9e2563c18328b0120eb/1287168242t-risky-business_l.jpg)
Serious Bizness indeed.  And Risky Bizness too.  :icon_mrgreen:

Risky on the Poltical level, since topics of conversation often revolve around things like Revolution, Secession, and Retribution for High Crimes Against Humanity here on the Diner.

Risky on the Personal level, because it has come to (past, actually) the point where the individual has to make some real  hard Life Choices in how to deal with the oncoming storm.

There are different approaches to all these choices, and we discuss them here for how realistic they might be and what the upsides and downsides are to all of them.  You can find many of these discussions over on the Doomsteading board.  Feel free to revive any old topic there or start a new thread of your own.

One of my Main Themes is that it is important to GTFO of Dodge as I like to put it, which means exiting the Big Shities like NYC.  I personally live in Alaska now.  Low population Zone with good resources.  However, not all people are free to easily relocate for many reasons, so for them I suggest the Bugout Machine paradigm.  You'll find more about this stuff if you poke around the Blog and here inside the Diner also.

On the psychological level it is important to prepare yourself for more loss of Freedom and greater levels of Fascism as we move forward here for a while.

Finally, probably the most important thing I hope to offer with the Diner is Making Connections with others, forming a virtual community of aware people to begin with, and perhaps eventually IRL community based on the principles and ideas discussed on these pages.

Anyhow, I am glad my Encore appearance over on TBP brought in at least one new Diner of Value.  I can use this to say I-told-you-so to Surly.  LOL.

RE
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Petty Tyrant on November 11, 2012, 04:59:41 PM
Hi and welcome Moniker

What to do? Thats for you to decide, but avoid all the "we just need" wastes of time you will hear from people when you tell them what you think and are thinking of doing. Nothing will change soon. My 2c is only your own self sufficiency well away from the city is worth doing, there are models involving owning or not owning property, and I think part of a larger group would be best.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Pops on December 12, 2012, 05:14:47 PM
Hello in the diner! Don't shoot, its me, Pops!

LOL I see you've built your own Big Whiskey, RE, looks good, well integrated and all that.


Some of you may've seen me around, I've been at po.com since the start in '04, TB2k and Frugal Squirrel's before that, The Well and various dialups before that.

Short version of RL: Male - 55 years, freelance graphic designer - 20-something years, small ranch on the Ozarks Plateau - 8 years. We moved out of CA in 04 to monetize some of the stupid real estate appreciation and because I am a Lander from way back we moved out to the sticks. You could call it a doomstead I suppose since I could survive here with few inputs for a long time, generations actually. (Or I could before my T cells went rouge on my pancreas.)

I don't do much on the blog and site but they are at www.mygrandkidsfarm.com (http://www.mygrandkidsfarm.com) if you're interested.


My current sentiments are:
Capitalism is entering it's death throes as predicted by Marx and evidenced by increasing speculation, debt and class warfare.
Declining returns to natural capital are masked by global labor arbitrage and geographic specialization gains but of course there is only so much globe to arbitrage before the workers can no longer afford the flivers.
Meanwhile peak oil is proceeding pretty well as predicted, the fracking media blitz notwithstanding

Having said all that I'm not necessarily a doomer in the flavor of Doom as destiny. TEOTWAWKI is possible but "the end of the world as we know it" isn't the end of the world.... if it were we wouldn't say "as we know it". I'm more of a "punctuated descent-er" meaning that as our endowment of fossil slaves (and other resources) is spent, we'll descend from this peak of civilization. But the appearance will be that of a smooth plain with even some periods of growth or at least speculative bubbles followed by sharp drops - exactly like that between the recessions of the twenty-oughts.

Gregor Macdonald blogged recently that the repricing of oil is complete and we are now at a new normal price for crude oil of around $100 which is up from $25 or so from the 80s to early 00s. As of Jan 3, brent will be at a yearly average price of $110/bbl for 2 years running, that is the highest yearly price in real terms ever. Since it isn't possible for oil to fall below the marginal cost of production of somewhere in the $50 - $100 range for any length of time, the question remains how our collective economies will ultimately react to this rendering of the excess fat.

Then there is climate change, on which I'm basically agnostic. As a lefty, my knee automatically jerks in that direction but I'm not convinced it will cause overnight armageddon certainly and probably will just become another part of the background noise of decline.

So anyway, maybe I'll see you all around.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: RE on December 12, 2012, 05:49:28 PM
Hello in the diner! Don't shoot, its me, Pops!

:hi: Pops!

Great to have you stop in for a bite at at Diner!

Have you got a copy of that pic we took at your doomstead?  I can't find mine.

RE
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Nosferatu on December 14, 2012, 06:47:49 PM
Surly said
"Come on in, read a bit, and post away. I wouldn't order the Stew, though..."

The Stew is fine, i guess. The problem is our stomach, somewhat spoiled by the foolish delicacies of the industrial (and affluent) age. Personally, I'm glad it's over.
I love most of your posts, and never forgot a line of yours: "the noise you hear is the global capitalist sucking the bottom of the milkshake". A very graphic and brilliant metaphor (where do you get it?) that brought to my mind last scene of There will be blood, a favorite of mine.
Greetings
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Petty Tyrant on December 14, 2012, 07:01:42 PM
Nos, That IS a good one, :emthup: no wonder he gets paid for it if he can come up with captions and catchphrases like that. And yes Im glad its over too.
Title: Welcome Muckingfess!
Post by: RE on May 05, 2013, 07:56:06 PM
:hi: Muckingfess!  Nice to see you again!

Looks like that Special Notice I sent out from Reverse Engineering made it through your Spam Filter.  :icon_mrgreen:

Don't be shy, post up!  Great bunch of Regulars here.

RE
Title: Welcome Michael Sosebee!
Post by: RE on May 18, 2013, 01:51:01 AM
:hi: Michael!  Don't stay shy, POST UP!

Gang, Michael Sosebee is a Collapse Filmmaker.  He's an Uber-Doomer in Guy McPherson's Camp I do believe.  Here is a Video from Michael I turned up after checking in on Nature Bats Last (http://guymcpherson.com/2013/05/at-long-last-a-safe-place-to-cry/).

RE

http://www.youtube.com/v/ZsPqtWfIQoQ?feature=player_profilepage
Title: Welcome Rhonda!
Post by: RE on May 19, 2013, 08:05:10 PM
:hi: Rhonda!  Another new Diner of the Fair Sex!

Help me Rhonda, post up!  :icon_mrgreen:

http://www.youtube.com/v/4Te_lCF69Aw?feature=player_detailpage

RE

Title: Welcome Orren Whiddon!
Post by: RE on May 28, 2013, 09:57:24 PM
:hi: Orren!

For any Diners that don't know, Orren is the founder of 4 Quarters Interfaith Sanctuary where the Age of Limits Conference Haniel was reporting from over the Memorial Day Weekend was held.  We're honored to count you among the Diners here Orren.  :icon_sunny:

Don't be shy, we Diners are a Friendly bunch of Blabberkeyboarders and Know-it-Alls!  Everybody on the Diner is an EXPERT!  :icon_mrgreen:

Any advice and help you can give us on getting our Sustaining Universal Needs (SUN)  :icon_sunny: Foundation off the ground will be most Welcome.  Right now discussion on this is mostly occurring behind the scenes on a Protected Board.  PM me if you want to join in those discussions.

RE
Title: Re: Welcome! Diner 500 Joins
Post by: Golden Oxen on June 16, 2013, 11:14:27 AM
Welcome Louise AGL  Diner # 500   :hi:
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Golden Oxen on July 08, 2013, 12:01:31 AM
Hi Kmandrup, Welcome to the Diner. :hi:
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Ralph on July 11, 2013, 03:38:29 AM
Have tried to register a few times over the past few weeks, keep getting "Sorry, registration is currently disabled".  Thought maybe it was due to the migration, now wondering if it's because I use Tor? 

Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Golden Oxen on July 11, 2013, 03:56:27 AM
Have tried to register a few times over the past few weeks, keep getting "Sorry, registration is currently disabled".  Thought maybe it was due to the migration, now wondering if it's because I use Tor?

Hi Ralph, Glad you finally made it. :laugh: Welcome to the Diner and thanks for your persistence.  :hi:
Title: Welcome Ralph
Post by: agelbert on July 11, 2013, 11:30:10 AM
Quote
Hi Ralph, Glad you finally made it. :laugh: Welcome to the Diner and thanks for your persistence.  :hi:


Same here!  :icon_sunny:

Enjoy the Diner! (http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/tuzki-bunnys/tuzki-bunny-emoticon-036.gif)
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: DoomerSupport on July 11, 2013, 12:38:30 PM
Have tried to register a few times over the past few weeks, keep getting "Sorry, registration is currently disabled".  Thought maybe it was due to the migration, now wondering if it's because I use Tor?

I checked and the TOR-blocking modification is not installed on the site.  I created a new account on here recently for auto-posting of blogs, and encountered no problems.



Title: Welcome Berticus!
Post by: agelbert on July 11, 2013, 05:57:20 PM
:hi: Berticus!

Hop on to our comment threads, feel free to express yourself and, above all, enjoy the ride!

(http://dl7.glitter-graphics.net/pub/2046/2046807qoer9uc27q.gif)(http://yoursmiles.org/psmile/pilot/p0504.gif)

Are you the Bear from the Sgt Grumbles cartoon?  :icon_mrgreen:
Title: Welcome HumbertoR!
Post by: agelbert on July 30, 2013, 07:15:41 PM
:hi: HumbertoR




Enjoy the Diner! :ernaehrung004: 
Title: Welcome VenettaS2!
Post by: agelbert on July 31, 2013, 11:23:09 AM
:hi: VenettaS2




Enjoy the Diner! (http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/emoticon-object-098.gif)
Title: Re: Welcome Mario!
Post by: Surly1 on August 04, 2013, 06:08:23 PM
WELCOME Mario Piperni to the Diner Blog!


(http://mariopiperni.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/mario_site-pic-250_px-copy.jpg)

For those who don't know, Mario is an excellent artist with a keen political sense. I have used his artwork in blog posts on numerous occasions, and really enjoy his work.
Check out his site here:
http://mariopiperni.com (http://mariopiperni.com)


Enjoy the Diner!
Title: Welcome Kmkirb!
Post by: agelbert on August 11, 2013, 09:27:10 PM
Welcome Kmkirb to the Diner!  :hi:

Enjoy yourself and feel free to write long and detailed posts if you feel up to it.

I'm looking forward to reading some of your posts!  :emthup: :icon_sunny:
(http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/tuzki-bunnys/tuzki-bunny-emoticon-036.gif)

If you have any questions about navigating the place, feel free to ask.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Surly1 on September 11, 2013, 06:32:06 AM
Welcome new member debigarwol to the Diner Forum!
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: RE on October 02, 2013, 04:43:59 PM
:hi: new Diners Riley & Analisa!

 :multiplespotting:

RE
Title: Re: Welcome! Hi Will
Post by: Golden Oxen on October 09, 2013, 07:59:02 AM
Welcome to the Diner Will, glad to have you on board.   :hi:
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Bob S. on December 29, 2013, 02:12:04 AM
Hi - my name is Bob S. and I'm an Uber-Doomer who also posts at Guy Mcpherson's blog - Nature Bats Last.

RE has invited me here to grace me with his unexpurgated version of his opinions.

He's been spamming NBL with this shitty attitude that anybody who don't buy his line of crap is out of touch.

He sees himself as some sort of savior of humankind sent to save us from ourselves. Folks disagreed and he had a hissy fit and challenged NBL posters to come to the Diner and experience his brilliance.

Let's begin.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: RE on December 29, 2013, 02:14:42 AM
Hey Bob!

:hi: to the Diner!

Hopefully we don't overwhelm you with Hopium here.

RE
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: monsta666 on December 29, 2013, 03:40:31 AM
First of all welcome to the Diner. :hi:

People of all positions are accepted here and opinions are welcome so don't feel shy to post. Have a look around the forum and pay particular attention to the Geological & Cosmological Events (http://www.doomsteaddiner.net/forum/index.php?board=6.0) board if climate change is your thing.
Title: Re: Welcome! Ube-Doom Time Liner
Post by: step back on December 29, 2013, 04:22:42 AM
I'm an Uber-Doomer who also posts at Guy Mcpherson's blog - Nature Bats Last. ... [RE] challenged NBL posters to come to the Diner and experience his brilliance. ... Let's begin.

Some people believe that Universe will, in billions of years form now, expand into a hopelessly cold and dispersed oblivion.

Some people believe that, due to biological evolution, the human race won't exist in millions of years from now.

Some people believe that, due to ecological destruction, Earth will not be habitable for humans in about 100 or more years from now.

Some people believe that, due to depletion of cheap fossil fuels, civilization as we know it won't exist in about 10-20 years from now.

So which kind of time line doomer are you? (and p.s. yes welcome although probably by now TEOTWAKI has already occurred.)
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Petty Tyrant on December 29, 2013, 05:24:12 AM
Hi - my name is Bob S. and I'm an Uber-Doomer who also posts at Guy Mcpherson's blog - Nature Bats Last.

RE has invited me here to grace me with his unexpurgated version of his opinions.

He's been spamming NBL with this shitty attitude that anybody who don't buy his line of crap is out of touch.

He sees himself as some sort of savior of humankind sent to save us from ourselves. Folks disagreed and he had a hissy fit and challenged NBL posters to come to the Diner and experience his brilliance.

Let's begin.

Hi Bob
Welcome to DD. Lets begin by defining uber-doomer in your case and I can define uber-doomer in my own case, and we can take it from there. Im not going to try and defend ALL the saviour or executioner stuff so please put that aside, but if you want to critique any of the other writings such as the recent 'Oil Shell Game' Im happy to hear your opinion.

So is your definition of an 'uber-doomer' a defeatist?
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: RE on December 29, 2013, 12:28:26 PM
Bob is one of the Uber Doomers who was most annoyed that I was delivering a Hopium pill on NBL.  The definition of Uber Doomer here being that he is one of the folks convinced that NTHE is coming by Mid Century, nothing will stop it and nothing you can do can change the outcome for yourself.

RE
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Petty Tyrant on December 29, 2013, 02:14:39 PM
I suspect that much, but would go further into the near term implications.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: WHD on December 29, 2013, 03:02:31 PM
Hi - my name is Bob S. and I'm an Uber-Doomer who also posts at Guy Mcpherson's blog - Nature Bats Last.

RE has invited me here to grace me with his unexpurgated version of his opinions.

He's been spamming NBL with this shitty attitude that anybody who don't buy his line of crap is out of touch.

He sees himself as some sort of savior of humankind sent to save us from ourselves. Folks disagreed and he had a hissy fit and challenged NBL posters to come to the Diner and experience his brilliance.

Let's begin.

Well, with fingers like that tappin out the keys, methinks we have found another Diner! LOL

WHD
Title: Re: Welcome! Ube-Doom Time Liner
Post by: WHD on December 29, 2013, 03:09:19 PM
I'm an Uber-Doomer who also posts at Guy Mcpherson's blog - Nature Bats Last. ... [RE] challenged NBL posters to come to the Diner and experience his brilliance. ... Let's begin.

Some people believe that Universe will, in billions of years form now, expand into a hopelessly cold and dispersed oblivion.

Some people believe that, due to biological evolution, the human race won't exist in millions of years from now.

Some people believe that, due to ecological destruction, Earth will not be habitable for humans in about 100 or more years from now.

Some people believe that, due to depletion of cheap fossil fuels, civilization as we know it won't exist in about 10-20 years from now.

So which kind of time line doomer are you? (and p.s. yes welcome although probably by now TEOTWAKI has already occurred.)

step back,

I know you asked Bob S. that question, but:

What if I think I'm coming back, unless of course humans fuck this up and there aren't any people left to make babies, in which case I will be incarnated on some other planet with "intelligent" creatures, wherever I am needed.  :laugh:  :laugh: :laugh:

WHD
Title: Re: Welcome! Ube-Doom Time Liner
Post by: Petty Tyrant on December 29, 2013, 03:16:37 PM

What if I think I'm coming back, unless of course humans fuck this up and there aren't any people left to make babies, in which case I will be incarnated on some other planet with "intelligent" creatures, wherever I am needed.  :laugh:  :laugh: :laugh:

WHD

I believe that is the way it works WHD.
Title: Re: Welcome! Ube-Doom Time Liner
Post by: RE on December 29, 2013, 03:27:12 PM

What if I think I'm coming back, unless of course humans fuck this up and there aren't any people left to make babies, in which case I will be incarnated on some other planet with "intelligent" creatures, wherever I am needed.  :laugh:  :laugh: :laugh:

WHD

I believe that is the way it works WHD.

Since all times exist in the infinite, I don't think I need to be reborn on another Planet as another form of Sentient life.

I will be reborn circa 1000 AD or so on Planet Earth, as the Navigator who took the first Cat Rigged Sailing Canoe from the Marquesas to the Big Island of Hawaii.  I will relieve that experience for all Eternity.

(http://mendonews.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/hokulea.jpg)

I will hold this image in my head when I pass into the Great Beyond.  I will make it there.

RE
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: RE on December 29, 2013, 03:35:48 PM
Hi - my name is Bob S. and I'm an Uber-Doomer who also posts at Guy Mcpherson's blog - Nature Bats Last.

RE has invited me here to grace me with his unexpurgated version of his opinions.

He's been spamming NBL with this shitty attitude that anybody who don't buy his line of crap is out of touch.

He sees himself as some sort of savior of humankind sent to save us from ourselves. Folks disagreed and he had a hissy fit and challenged NBL posters to come to the Diner and experience his brilliance.

Let's begin.

Well, with fingers like that tappin out the keys, methinks we have found another Diner! LOL

WHD

Bob is dropping in here fixin' for a barfight.   :icon_mrgreen:

(http://stream1.gifsoup.com/view2/4105134/barfight2-o.gif)

RE
Title: Re: Welcome! Ube-Doom Time Liner
Post by: WHD on December 29, 2013, 03:43:23 PM

What if I think I'm coming back, unless of course humans fuck this up and there aren't any people left to make babies, in which case I will be incarnated on some other planet with "intelligent" creatures, wherever I am needed.  :laugh:  :laugh: :laugh:

WHD

I believe that is the way it works WHD.

Since all times exist in the infinite, I don't think I need to be reborn on another Planet as another form of Sentient life.

I will be reborn circa 1000 AD or so on Planet Earth, as the Navigator who took the first Cat Rigged Sailing Canoe from the Marquesas to the Big Island of Hawaii.  I will relieve that experience for all Eternity.

(http://mendonews.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/hokulea.jpg)

I will hold this image in my head when I pass into the Great Beyond.  I will make it there.

RE


That would be fun.  :)
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: WHD on December 29, 2013, 03:47:29 PM
Hi - my name is Bob S. and I'm an Uber-Doomer who also posts at Guy Mcpherson's blog - Nature Bats Last.

RE has invited me here to grace me with his unexpurgated version of his opinions.

He's been spamming NBL with this shitty attitude that anybody who don't buy his line of crap is out of touch.

He sees himself as some sort of savior of humankind sent to save us from ourselves. Folks disagreed and he had a hissy fit and challenged NBL posters to come to the Diner and experience his brilliance.

Let's begin.

Well, with fingers like that tappin out the keys, methinks we have found another Diner! LOL

WHD

Bob is dropping in here fixin' for a barfight.   :icon_mrgreen:

(http://stream1.gifsoup.com/view2/4105134/barfight2-o.gif)

RE


He must be busy getting drunk, to fix up his courage. (http://www.sherv.net/cm/emoticons/bad/drunk-smiley-emoticon.gif) (http://www.sherv.net/emoticons.html)
Title: Re: Welcome! Ube-Doom Time Liner
Post by: RE on December 29, 2013, 03:49:31 PM
That would be fun.  :)

Meanwhile, until we do buy the last ticket, we got the Big Island of SUN  :icon_sunny: to Navigate to. There's a CHALLENGE for you.

RE
Title: Re: Welcome! Ube-Doom Time Liner
Post by: WHD on December 29, 2013, 03:54:31 PM
That would be fun.  :)

Meanwhile, until we do buy the last ticket, we got the Big Island of SUN  :icon_sunny: to Navigate to. There's a CHALLENGE for you.

RE

Right. Because WHY bemoan NTE (or not) unto Depression and stagnation and death, when you could help build something extraordinarily beautiful.  :icon_sunny:

http://sun4living.com/?p=434 (http://sun4living.com/?p=434)
Title: Re: Welcome! Ube-Doom Time Liner
Post by: RE on December 29, 2013, 04:11:31 PM
That would be fun.  :)

Meanwhile, until we do buy the last ticket, we got the Big Island of SUN  :icon_sunny: to Navigate to. There's a CHALLENGE for you.

RE

Right. Because WHY bemoan NTE (or not) unto Depression and stagnation and death, when you could help build something extraordinarily beautiful.  :icon_sunny:

http://sun4living.com/?p=434 (http://sun4living.com/?p=434)

I really do wonder about the psychology of people who mire themselves in despair here, whether extinction is in the offing or not.

If these are the last days on Earth, WTF spend them like this?  Not to mention, who but other melancholy people can you hang around with?  Talk about being a DOWNER at a Christmas Party!  LOL.  I mean it is bad enough being a Doomer who figures ALMOST everybody dies, at least you can still turn the conversation around to the positive outcomes for anybody that does survive, like for instance a world with no more Banksters!  LOL.

Not to mention there is that Intervening Time between now and when everyone is DEAD that you have to negotiate here.  You do have the choice here of course at any time NOT to negotiate it and off yourself, but if you are not going to pull your own plug then moaning and groaning about it on the internet seems to me to be a "dead" end.  LOL.

Overall I see this as an excuse for inaction.  Which is plain dumb as long as you are still alive and ticking.  Might as well do something constructive with the time left, then party into the last Sunset with your friends in worst case scenario.

Best case, you make it through to the Other Side of the Zero Point.  What's to lose with this?  I just don't get it.

RE
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Eddie on December 29, 2013, 04:16:41 PM
Hey Bob S.

The best guesses for NTHE generally line up pretty close with what I would have expected the rest of my life expectancy to be anyway, in the best of circumstances. So one way or another, I'm gone in 30 years or so.

So, I say, we got this little bit of time before the ocean temp gets too hot and the food chain breaks down. We might as well use it.

People definitely have done some incredibly dumb, suicidal stuff to the planet, and I don't expect a get-out-of-doom-free-card, or anything. But...people sometimes do some amazing stuff too. It remains to be seen exactly how we might adapt, if we put our minds to it. Like RE, I prefer to go down fighting as opposed to just having a wake for the late great infestation known as Mankind.

And, there is the satisfaction that comes with just trying to live on a better path, whether the outcome is any different or not. That seems to me to be what Guy is doing, and I admire him for that.

Maybe it's just the chance to make a gesture. If that's all our efforts at changing the world turn out to be, I'm okay with that.

I've been reading NBL for a while, but only commenting very recently. I'd have to say that the regular commentors on NBL have their own little sets of idiosyncraces , to say the least. This might be the world's best example of the pot calling the kettle black. Before RE ever posted anything about SUN on NBL I told him Guy's readers were all a bunch of psychos. The comments over there are an interesting blend of the Five Stages of Grief mixed with a big dose of political correctness and and spiced with a dash of misguided feminism.

You said:

He sees himself as some sort of savior of humankind sent to save us from ourselves. Folks disagreed and he had a hissy fit and challenged NBL posters to come to the Diner and experience his brilliance.


He means well. And that's just like him to use his failure there as a means to lure you here. Don't look now, but you've been had.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: RE on December 29, 2013, 04:26:18 PM
He means well. And that's just like him to use his failure there as a means to lure you here. Don't look now, but you've been had.

Heh heh.  Eddie, stop giving away my secrets!

I scarfed up AT LEAST 3 new posters on this off-site Expedition, and probably quite a few more Lurkers too.  :icon_mrgreen:

RE
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Golden Oxen on December 29, 2013, 04:42:26 PM
Quote
Overall I see this as an excuse for inaction.  Which is plain dumb as long as you are still alive and ticking.  Might as well do something constructive with the time left, then party into the last Sunset with your friends in worst case scenario.

Best case, you make it through to the Other Side of the Zero Point.  What's to lose with this?  I just don't get it.

RE

An interesting question for sure. There are all kinds of factors that come into play that describe the different actions or in actions of individuals in my view

What is Doomsday really going to be like?

Would life be worth living under certain supposed outcomes?

Will I be willing to kill others to stay alive in  a mad max scenario?

Would manic depressive illness overtake me where I just withdraw and die?

Could one party in the woods with most of ones families and friends dead from the horror?

Are a supposed Doomsday and Death synonymous?

Am I an ass hole thinking I can find a safe spot on a Titanic without any lifeboats?

Will the Horror of it render me into  a state of shock and insanity?

Is it just too horrible and faithless a scenario to ponder and plan for?

Should the only attitude be that Doomer's are Looney's that have no faith either in God or their fellow man?

Is Satan working his cunning on me and rendering me a sick crazed evil man?

It is no doubt an extensive list, but I can understand fatalists who do nothing, and others who plan to try and survive, and a third group that think there is no Doomsday ahead.  :dontknow:





Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: WHD on December 29, 2013, 04:59:52 PM
Quote
I really do wonder about the psychology of people who mire themselves in despair here, whether extinction is in the offing or not.

Back in the day when I used to facilitate men's circles through the Mankind Project, we called it "worshipping the wound." Some guys, many of them actually, would get into the work claiming they wanted to make changes in their life, but week after week, the same shit. No matter how many "breakthroughs" a guy might have, he'd come back the next week, sounding like nothing had changed, wailing about the same BS. Because it wasn't change they wanted, but the DRAMA of their own mostly self-generated misery. Hardly a bigger wound than NTE.

Quote
Overall I see this as an excuse for inaction.  Which is plain dumb as long as you are still alive and ticking.  Might as well do something constructive with the time left, then party into the last Sunset with your friends in worst case scenario.

Huddling alone, or with a loved one or a few, or holding your head high, on land you have healed, healing yourself, with a tribe of equally extraordinary people?

Quote
Best case, you make it through to the Other Side of the Zero Point.

The seed of a new Aeon.


WHD


Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: buzzard on January 02, 2014, 10:45:50 AM
I discovered that the 'last pointless gesture' works for me. Strangely enough, after awhile even that has a point. Remember when you were a kid and getting up in the morning and running out doors was the point? "Put your shoes on."
"No time, Mom. I'm burning daylight."

That tree in the back yard is exactly where I left it. OK. We're good to go.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Petty Tyrant on January 02, 2014, 12:12:44 PM
I discovered that the 'last pointless gesture' works for me. Strangely enough, after awhile even that has a point. Remember when you were a kid and getting up in the morning and running out doors was the point? "Put your shoes on."
"No time, Mom. I'm burning daylight."

That tree in the back yard is exactly where I left it. OK. We're good to go.

I took some time to think about this, as well as all the hollering about putting shoes on before riding bikes that Ive done. Be damned if my kids arent going to get the big payback. Its not futile.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Eddie on January 02, 2014, 02:21:54 PM
Bob, we are brothers...Dads of Doom. I'm building for my kids and they don't even appreciate it...but I think they will, eventually.  ;D
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Petty Tyrant on January 02, 2014, 02:41:44 PM
Bob, we are brothers...Dads of Doom. I'm building for my kids and they don't even appreciate it...but I think they will, eventually.  ;D

I believe also were both this year putting one into college, possibly pointlessly. Ah well.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Jay on September 28, 2014, 02:55:17 PM
Thanks for the add.  Know some of ya'll from Peak Oil, Malthusia, etc.  Now time for some exploration....
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: RE on September 28, 2014, 03:14:17 PM
Thanks for the add.  Know some of ya'll from Peak Oil, Malthusia, etc.  Now time for some exploration....

A newby!  :hi:

RE
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: MKing on September 28, 2014, 03:17:22 PM
Thanks for the add.  Know some of ya'll from Peak Oil, Malthusia, etc.  Now time for some exploration....

You will LOVE it here!!  :emthup: :emthup: :emthup: :emthup:

We've got like 5 or 8 regulars, and can always use more!!
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: JoeP on September 28, 2014, 04:38:16 PM
Thanks for the add.  Know some of ya'll from Peak Oil, Malthusia, etc.  Now time for some exploration....

You will LOVE it here!!  :emthup: :emthup: :emthup: :emthup:

We've got like 5 or 8 regulars, and can always use more!!

There's no doubt that you are correct stating there are 5-8 "regular" posters here.  Why so few?  I mean I would think an Alexa algorithm would have a tough time figuring out this abnormality, huh?  So Jay, in any event, I hope you enjoy your time here.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: RE on September 28, 2014, 06:38:26 PM

There's no doubt that you are correct stating there are 5-8 "regular" posters here.  Why so few?  I mean I would think an Alexa algorithm would have a tough time figuring out this abnormality, huh?  So Jay, in any event, I hope you enjoy your time here.

More Negative Waves.  ::)

My guess would be that besides the fact most folks don't like chatting about Doom, the forum here can be rather intimidating for newbies.

On the Positive Waves side, Volcanoes, Earthquakes, Arctic Oil & Hong Kong Riots already has 277 Listens on Opening Day.  :icon_sunny:

RE
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: agelbert on September 28, 2014, 06:45:23 PM
Quote
On the Positive Waves side, Volcanoes, Earthquakes, Arctic Oil & Hong Kong Riots already has 277 Listens on Opening Day.  :icon_sunny:

RE

I agree with you 100%  about that Russian oil "bonanza". Good rant!  :emthup: :icon_mrgreen:

Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: RE on September 28, 2014, 07:02:13 PM
Quote
On the Positive Waves side, Volcanoes, Earthquakes, Arctic Oil & Hong Kong Riots already has 277 Listens on Opening Day.  :icon_sunny:

RE

I agree with you 100%  about that Russian oil "bonanza". Good rant!  :emthup: :icon_mrgreen:

Thanks AG!

Now at 284 Listens!  Averaging about 15 Listens/Hour at the moment.  :icon_sunny:

Listeners in the following Top 16 Countries:

1
United States
116 plays
2
Canada
24 plays
3
United Kingdom
8 plays
4
Netherlands
5 plays
5
Russian Federation
4 plays
6
Australia
4 plays
7
Czech Republic
3 plays
8
Germany
1 plays
9
Korea, Republic of
1 plays
10
Peru
1 plays
11
Austria
1 plays
12
Switzerland
1 plays
13
Panama
1 plays
14
Sweden
1 plays
15
New Zealand
1 plays
16
Barbados
1 plays

Top Cities Listening in:

1
Tampa, FL
4 plays
2
Vancouver, Canada
4 plays
3
Macon, GA
3 plays
4
Chehalis, WA
3 plays
5
North Hollywood, CA
2 plays
6
Mesa, AZ
2 plays
7
Philadelphia, PA
2 plays
8
Eagle, ID
2 plays
9
Russellville, AR
2 plays
10
Peabody, MA
2 plays
11
Victoria, Canada
2 plays
12
High Point, NC
2 plays
13
Edmonton, Canada
2 plays
14
Plano, TX
2 plays
15
Westhampton Beach, NY
2 plays
16
Southfield, MI
2 plays
17
Walton, United Kingdom
2 plays
18
Washington, NH
1 plays
19
Scottsville, VA
1 plays
20
Seattle, WA
1 plays
21
Toronto, Canada
1 plays
22
Toongabbie, Australia
1 plays
23
Squamish, Canada
1 plays
24
Rocklin, CA
1 plays
25
Vienna, VA
1 plays
26
Strathmore, Canada
1 plays
27
Rocky Point, NY
1 plays
28
Slippery Rock, PA
1 plays
29
San Jose, CA
1 plays
30
San Francisco, CA
1 plays
31
Tenino, WA
1 plays
32
Woodstock, IL
1 plays
33
Santa Barbara, CA
1 plays
34
Wildey, Barbados
1 plays
35
Richmond, VA
1 plays
36
Tulsa, OK
1 plays
37
Syracuse, NY
1 plays
38
Spotsylvania, VA
1 plays
39
Winnipeg, Canada
1 plays
40
Yorkville, IL
1 plays
41
Sussex, WI
1 plays
42
Roseville, MI
1 plays
43
Vienna, Austria
1 plays
44
Shepperton, United Kingdom
1 plays
45
Westcliffe, CO
1 plays
46
South Pasadena, CA
1 plays
47
Schaumburg, IL
1 plays
48
Pueblo Nuevo, Panama
1 plays
49
Princeton, NJ
1 plays
50
Seoul, Korea, Republic of
1 plays

This is quite good Global & National Distribution overall.

RE
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: JoeP on September 28, 2014, 07:11:48 PM

There's no doubt that you are correct stating there are 5-8 "regular" posters here.  Why so few?  I mean I would think an Alexa algorithm would have a tough time figuring out this abnormality, huh?  So Jay, in any event, I hope you enjoy your time here.

More Negative Waves.  ::)

My guess would be that besides the fact most folks don't like chatting about Doom, the forum here can be rather intimidating for newbies.

On the Positive Waves side, Volcanoes, Earthquakes, Arctic Oil & Hong Kong Riots already has 277 Listens on Opening Day.  :icon_sunny:

RE

I applaud the recent milestones you have subtly mentioned.  :icon_mrgreen:   I suppose I am saying I miss input from WHD, Roamer, and LD. Looks like they pretty much dropped off the map.
 
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: RE on September 28, 2014, 08:02:19 PM

There's no doubt that you are correct stating there are 5-8 "regular" posters here.  Why so few?  I mean I would think an Alexa algorithm would have a tough time figuring out this abnormality, huh?  So Jay, in any event, I hope you enjoy your time here.

More Negative Waves.  ::)

My guess would be that besides the fact most folks don't like chatting about Doom, the forum here can be rather intimidating for newbies.

On the Positive Waves side, Volcanoes, Earthquakes, Arctic Oil & Hong Kong Riots already has 277 Listens on Opening Day.  :icon_sunny:

RE

I applaud the recent milestones you have subtly mentioned.  :icon_mrgreen:   I suppose I am saying I miss input from WHD, Roamer, and LD. Looks like they pretty much dropped off the map.

Roamer recently joined me for a Collapse Cafe last week, and he drops in periodically to keep tabs.  He's bizzy though working many hours and living in a Man Camp in the Oil Patch.

WHD got a Girlfriend and is focusing on enjoying life, not dwelling on Doom.

LD recently went back to the EMT biz, and is bizzy with having to relocate, not to mention 2 young boys to raise.

However, I miss them also here.  :(

Rant Update: Now at 296 Listens.  451 Total Listens on Soundcloud so far today.  :icon_sunny:

RE
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: MKing on September 28, 2014, 08:31:03 PM
I applaud the recent milestones you have subtly mentioned.  :icon_mrgreen:   I suppose I am saying I miss input from WHD, Roamer, and LD. Looks like they pretty much dropped off the map.

But we now have Jay!!

Admittedly, there are like 2 regulars at Malthusia, the owner dropped off the map during her divorce (she is an old Po.com mod), and po.com still has a dose of regulars from even back in the day...sans Monte...that guy really kept the mcdoomsters hopping over there. But he's been gone ever since someone posted his employment record, that kind of privacy invasion is creepy, plus it really torpedoed his credibility.

But this place is wild, you can talk about any topic that TPTB will let you, there is plenty to listen to with the soundcloud stuff even if there isn't near as much posting activity as the far less popular sites (judged by Alexa, get your toolbar up and running to participate and help!).

If we all get the toolbar, even with just like 10 of us I'm betting we can drive the numbers down into the 3 digits in the US!!
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: RE on September 28, 2014, 08:36:53 PM

But this place is wild, you can talk about any topic that TPTB will let you, there is plenty to listen to with the soundcloud stuff even if there isn't near as much posting activity as the far less popular sites (judged by Alexa, get your toolbar up and running to participate and help!).

If we all get the toolbar, even with just like 10 of us I'm betting we can drive the numbers down into the 3 digits in the US!!

Currently, nothing will affect the Alexa Ranking, it is FROZEN for the last week or so.

I myself finally made an account there and downloaded a toolbar so I could make Support Inquiries.  Nothing so far other than they have some issue across the board with doing updates.

On the plus side, if they get it running again, all my hours on the Diner will get recorded now!   :icon_sunny:

RE
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: RE on September 28, 2014, 10:35:13 PM
One thing about the Alexa Ranking when it does work is that it is not affected much by Forum Participation.

Reason for this is that Alexa sees a trip to the Forum as a Single Page Hit, regardless of how many posts you read on the forum or how many you make.

The Alexa Ranking is based on the Page Hits for the Blog itself, which includes all the articles we publish, the Homepage, the Forum Page, the Podcast Page and the Vidcast page.  Obviously, the Homepage gets by far the most hits.

At the time the Alexa Rank got FROZEN, we were getting around 11 Page Hits/Visitor.  This mainly represents hits on archived Blogs.

Numerous Diners downloading the Alexa Toolbar could affect the ranking some, but at this point it would take quite a few to do that.  You can make a big dent with just a few people if you rank in the Millions, its harder to make a dent once you drop into the 100Ks.

RE
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: right to left on December 22, 2014, 12:48:28 PM

I've been reading NBL for a while, but only commenting very recently. I'd have to say that the regular commentors on NBL have their own little sets of idiosyncraces , to say the least. This might be the world's best example of the pot calling the kettle black. Before RE ever posted anything about SUN on NBL I told him Guy's readers were all a bunch of psychos. The comments over there are an interesting blend of the Five Stages of Grief mixed with a big dose of political correctness and and spiced with a dash of misguided feminism.
I've been reading Guy's NBL for more than a year now, and I found that NBL filled a big gap in the usual global warming dialogue that: warns of impending...almost completely unavoidable calamity/ but wraps up the message in bows and ribbons with some sort of...let's build lots of windmills and solar panels homily while there's still time...at least that's how the typical green message was coming across to me a few years ago when I first started taking environment issues seriously, and listened to Joe Romm, Bill McKibben etc. etc..  I found that, at least Guy McPherson had the guts to say: we've painted ourselves in a corner and now we're screwed.  Aside from Robert Jensen, I can't think of anyone else who was laying it out there honestly!

Personally, I think that 20 years ago...if the message was presented to most of us uninformed public as bluntly as we get it from a minority of environmentalists, the public would have taken the warnings more seriously, and been better prepared to make necessary adjustments to the way we have been living.....or maybe that's just fantasy, because at 57 and getting closer to 60, I can recall a time when honest reporting about environment, population growth, the problems of capitalism, all could be discussed in mainstream media, and that doesn't seem to be the case today, where any and every criticism of growth is stomped down as unrealistic and unnatural.

Some time around four years ago,  I started realizing that YES - global warming and ecological destruction were serious issues that had to be dealt with, and I joined 350.org and participated in a couple of local rallies.  But, it was with 350, that the gap between the problem and the solution really started to leap out at me.  The rallies were like all rallies - mostly made up of people who just want to get out in public and think that marching, chanting slogans and listening to speeches is equal to actually doing something to fix the problem(s).  And I don't think it matters a whole lot whether the problem is the environment, police brutality, banks confiscating our wealth etc....the rallies are mostly people who want to continue going about their daily lives, but take a day off to look busy and say that they did something to fix the problems.  As we go steaming our way towards a 6 degree+ world, I predict there will still be 350.org rallies calling for "green technologies" and "carbon capture."

All that said, I am still not sure what to do with NTE!  I know the Al Gore/McKibben approach is useless, but what good does it do just to keep repeating it's all hopeless, we're doomed?   At least before I go, I want to go at those who have steered our world down the course to extinction....because I don't buy the implicit theme of a lot of doomers that it's just human nature to consume our world to the point of exhaustion.  In a hierarchical society, like every form of capitalist economy, the wealthy elite, who have the most wealth and control most of the levers of power and influence, seemed to be damned determined to short circuit any efforts to change course and interfere with business.  Hell, I'm reading more articles from the business analysts that they are not happy about the efforts of our children in the millenial generation to tune out and drop out of conventional consumer capitalism's expectations of them. 

So, right now, I am trying to drop out as much as I can, and lower my carbon and ecological footprints, while still have to stay in the city for family reasons, for the next few years......so doomsteading is out, as a personal solution....although I am doing more camping and getting reacquainted with the wilderness again....so I'm prepared to at least survive the night, if I have to flee the city!

I think the biggest problem I have with the new theme coming from Guy regarding coming to terms with extinction, is that I CAN'T come to terms with this whether it's inevitable or not!  From a philosophical standpoint, I believe we have moral obligations to those who come after us in the future, and I also don't believe we have the right to drive other species into extinction!  The end result of climate change could end up worse than the Permian Extinction and take us right back to a microbial world with no plants, animals of any kind left on Earth.  I find the future trainwreck more and more unavoidable.....and I can't see myself ever getting comfortable and enjoying the end of the world.  I don't know how I will deal with it....right now, I mostly carry on with everyday life...but I'll never be at peace with future extinction, even if it happens long after my own life is coming to an end.

Well, that's my opening rant; I hope it means something to others, and isn't just the ravings of one more lunatic!
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Eddie on December 22, 2014, 01:14:50 PM
Makes sense to me. Welcome to the Diner.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: JRM on December 22, 2014, 01:41:29 PM
I think the biggest problem I have with the new theme coming from Guy regarding coming to terms with extinction, is that I CAN'T come to terms with this whether it's inevitable or not!  From a philosophical standpoint, I believe we have moral obligations to those who come after us in the future, and I also don't believe we have the right to drive other species into extinction! 

NBL suffers from a terrible case of GroupThink. - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groupthink (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groupthink)

In fact, one of the a-holes over there gets obvious joy out of berating anyone who does not see "the obvious"... But I digress.

Yes. The situation is extremely dire, and may well be beyond all hope.  However, we have a number of reasons for exploring possible response directions. 

Some of the problems and issues are technical, scientific.... Others are social.

Some hints at technical aspects (which must be socially contextualized) are found here.:

Terrestrial Carbon Sequestration (TCS)
http://www.doomsteaddiner.net/forum/index.php/topic,3288.0.html (http://www.doomsteaddiner.net/forum/index.php/topic,3288.0.html)
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Petty Tyrant on December 22, 2014, 01:46:27 PM
welcome to DD rtl. "enjoy the decline" is becoming a cliche and we are here to fiddle while Rome burns. Good luck with your preparation, getting back to nature is a good start.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: JRM on December 22, 2014, 02:52:03 PM
"Groupthink is a psychological phenomenon that occurs within a group of people, in which the desire for harmony or conformity in the group results in an irrational or dysfunctional decision-making outcome. Group members try to minimize conflict and reach a consensus decision without critical evaluation of alternative viewpoints, by actively suppressing dissenting viewpoints, and by isolating themselves from outside influences."

Wikipedia, Groupthink

This is NBL to a T.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Petty Tyrant on December 22, 2014, 03:58:32 PM
In the mid 70's the Ingroup vs Outgroup 'Groupthink' explanation was developed in the  wake of the vietnam war loss and nixon watergate administration being so incredibly out of touch with public opinion, even though their lack of accountability now seems normal. Two major facets are absent in the wiki summary that need inclusion. One is the tendency to ignore elephants in the room, simply stay mute on glaring problems in the midst of the ingroup, and the second is stereotyping of and false attribution to the outgroup.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: RE on December 22, 2014, 04:11:35 PM
The end result of climate change could end up worse than the Permian Extinction and take us right back to a microbial world with no plants, animals of any kind left on Earth.  I find the future trainwreck more and more unavoidable.....and I can't see myself ever getting comfortable and enjoying the end of the world.  I don't know how I will deal with it....right now, I mostly carry on with everyday life...but I'll never be at peace with future extinction, even if it happens long after my own life is coming to an end.

:hi: to the Diner RTL!

As I periodically pointed out on NBL, Extinction of all Life on Earth has always been a guaranteed outcome, at max under best case scenario multicellular life has only another 300M years or so left of the 4B years it started out with.  The Sun is fusing Hydrogen to Helium, and as it ages more Helium starts to fuse, and the Sun will get too hot for life on Earth.

(http://media.philly.com/images/life-on-earth-timeline7.jpg)

This is less than 10% of the total lifespan for the planet.  In Human terms, if you call the Human lifespan 100 years, the Earth is equivalent to around a 92 year old person.  It is in its senescence no matter what here.  All you are ever really arguing is timelines, and Guy's latest Timeline of 2030 is ridiculously short.

The deal for those of us currently alive is same as it always was, you live as long as you can, and then you die.  After you die, what's the difference if Life on Earth lasts another 100 years, 1000 years or 1,000,000 years?  It's all just a Blip in Eternity anyhow.

RE
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Surly1 on December 23, 2014, 03:36:05 AM
I find the future trainwreck more and more unavoidable.....and I can't see myself ever getting comfortable and enjoying the end of the world.  I don't know how I will deal with it....right now, I mostly carry on with everyday life...but I'll never be at peace with future extinction, even if it happens long after my own life is coming to an end.

Well, that's my opening rant; I hope it means something to others, and isn't just the ravings of one more lunatic!

Welcome RTL. If such are the ravings of a lunatic, welcome to the asylum.

Most of us are in a similar place, seeing the storm clouds of irrevocable change gather, yet unsure how to proceed. Not everyone can turn their backs on every day life and "go Amish" on a 40 acre farm nestled in the Cumberlands.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: right to left on December 23, 2014, 11:33:02 AM
I think the biggest problem I have with the new theme coming from Guy regarding coming to terms with extinction, is that I CAN'T come to terms with this whether it's inevitable or not!  From a philosophical standpoint, I believe we have moral obligations to those who come after us in the future, and I also don't believe we have the right to drive other species into extinction! 

NBL suffers from a terrible case of GroupThink. - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groupthink (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groupthink)

In fact, one of the a-holes over there gets obvious joy out of berating anyone who does not see "the obvious"... But I digress.


I've heard complaints that NBL has become cult-like, but although I had been following their newsfeed, I never got around to joining and gaining any first-hand knowledge.

About a year ago, I started noticing a shift in theme...from making the case that the world is heading towards NTHE towards some kind of quasi-Buddhism-acceptance and being at peace with approaching extinction.  Followup blog articles started referencing The Five Stages of Grief strategy created by Elizabeth Kubler-Ross, for handling our collective predicament.  No surprise, that a lot of NBL followers either didn't understand, or didn't accept Kubler-Ross's theory as applicable to our present day situation....and I don't think I could accept it either!  Because, after I really started to understand that AGW was a problem that was not going to be fixed by the prescriptions offered up by today's environment advocates, I bypassed stage one and went right to anger....and stayed there!

My objection to grief counseling for the end of the world, is that this is about more than us!  The emphasis on grief and acceptance of extinction comes across as more navel-gazing self-indulgence....something that modern consumer capitalism has already drowned us with and we don't need any more of! 

If we have a diagnosis of terminal cancer (as an example), our death does not cause other people to die also, and we can best help those who will be most impacted by our death by coming to terms with the inevitable, and facing the end with dignity and giving them strength to carry on in our absence.....at least that's how I try to imagine it....real life might be different.

But, in the case of global NTHE, I already find that I can't bear to watch the kind of nature shows that I enjoyed when I was growing up.  If I turn on the TV and see a show about some of the megafauna of the African Savannah, like the lions, hyenas, ostriches, antelopes, elephants, rhino's etc., I already have it the back of my mind that their habitat is being destroyed so rapidly today, that there won't be any of these creatures left by the end of this century! 

And what's worse: those of us who have children, are either in denial, or have a realization that we have lived our lives in the last golden age of Planet Earth, and our children, grandchildren and any future generations, will watch their world spiral down into chaos and calamity................................so, looking at the larger picture from an unprofessional point of view - how am I supposed to accept this?


Quote
Yes. The situation is extremely dire, and may well be beyond all hope.  However, we have a number of reasons for exploring possible response directions. 

Some of the problems and issues are technical, scientific.... Others are social.

Some hints at technical aspects (which must be socially contextualized) are found here.:

Terrestrial Carbon Sequestration (TCS)
http://www.doomsteaddiner.net/forum/index.php/topic,3288.0.html (http://www.doomsteaddiner.net/forum/index.php/topic,3288.0.html)
I started this reply before I clicked on the link and did any reading on geoengineering ideas, but off the top, I have to say I am an extreme skeptic today on how useful these strategies will be, because some of the proposals...even when they are planned out in climate modelling effects, show that they could result in many unexpected and potentially catastrophic outcomes making the situation worse.

The best quick example is one we had here in Canada two years ago on our West Coast, when an American businessman or flim-flam man according to some - named Russel George, convinced a small Haida first nation band on the British Columbia coast to invest 2 million dollars into financing a carbon sequestration scheme (http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/iron-fertilization-project-stirs-west-coast-controversy-1.1172422)he had been trotting around and having no luck finding investors.  George's scheme would work by dumping large quantities of iron oxide off the B.C. coast and based on the limiting effects of iron on phytoplankton, algae would bloom and greatly increase their photosynthesis....thereby lowering carbon levels in the ocean and the atmosphere.  But what really happened?  In brief, the plan backfired when it caused massive algae blooms that lowered oxygen levels and killed fish and other marine life in the areas where they made the dumps....making the situation even worse! 

A lot of the focus on the failure of George's geoengineering plan, focused on the fact that he...is not an engineer, has no scientific background at all, took advantage of an impoverished group of natives who are dependent on salmon and are very alarmed about declining salmon stocks.  But, the scheme also highlights one problem I see with engineering in general: engineers are great at solving linear problems - where there are few variables, and a solution can create a fix that has no negative feedbacks.  But, what engineers really suck at doing, is dealing with complex systems with many variables, which can create many previously unforeseen negative consequences.  And, nothing seems to be as complex and difficult to predict as the biosphere that contains all life on Earth. 

I'll take a look at geoengineering - according to some climate researchers on the fringes - who see huge spikes in methane release coming our way, there is no way to have any kind of future on this planet by cutting carbon emissions...even shutting everything down completely won't be enough to stop the forcing of more sequestered carbon into the atmosphere.  It may be a point where even bad solutions are better than no solutions at all!
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: right to left on December 23, 2014, 11:42:19 AM
Makes sense to me. Welcome to the Diner.
Thanks!  This seems to be about the only forum I've come across that is actually about things I consider important.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: right to left on December 23, 2014, 12:08:57 PM
welcome to DD rtl. "enjoy the decline" is becoming a cliche and we are here to fiddle while Rome burns. Good luck with your preparation, getting back to nature is a good start.
Thank you!
I used to do a lot of camping, and even roughing it in the woods...seeing how far I could go before having to open the rations.  I see these skills as more essential for dealing with sudden disaster situations, than as any long term strategy of living in a hotter, more volatile world.  I'm far from being an expert on wilderness survival, but the vast majority of city-dwellers are completely helpless out in the wood as soon as they lose a cellphone connection.

What keeps me in the city...and I live in a smaller city - Hamilton...a former industrial center of about half a million, which is not best described as de-industrialized satellite community of Toronto...anyway, I have to stay here for the next several years, for job considerations and my wife's general health would not be conducive with 'doomsteading' out in the middle of nowhere. 

In general, I think it's an easy guess that cities will be the worse places to be during an economic collapse that shuts down normal transportation; but picking a place out in the country will be hit and miss, if we experience the kind of collapse that Rome had at the end of the Empire - when shipments of free grain into the City stopped, and hungry, desperate Romans started migrating outward and ravaging the farms and raping and pillaging locals in their path.  Somehow, I think you'll need more than a shotgun and a couple of rounds of ammo, if you live anywhere close to a major city that is experiencing collapse.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: JRM on December 23, 2014, 12:15:08 PM
After you die, what's the difference if Life on Earth lasts another 100 years, 1000 years or 1,000,000 years?  It's all just a Blip in Eternity anyhow.

This line of "reasoning," though very popular (unfortunately), is one of the biggest loads of utter bullshit I've ever encountered. It is more-or-less equivalent to asking, "Why care for human infants at all, knowing that they will eventually grow old and die?"

Repugnant.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: JRM on December 23, 2014, 12:27:18 PM
I'll take a look at geoengineering - according to some climate researchers on the fringes - who see huge spikes in methane release coming our way, there is no way to have any kind of future on this planet by cutting carbon emissions...even shutting everything down completely won't be enough to stop the forcing of more sequestered carbon into the atmosphere.  It may be a point where even bad solutions are better than no solutions at all!

I share your concerns about "geoengineering," and for the same reasons you provided.

That said, I don't think of all forms of Terrestrial Carbon Sequestration (TCS) as examples of "geoengineering," per se.  I think you'll understand what I mean if you'll explore the prospects for significant carbon sequestration in agriculture and horticulture through the application of biochar.

Terrestrial Carbon Sequestration (TCS)
http://www.doomsteaddiner.net/forum/index.php/topic,3288.0.html (http://www.doomsteaddiner.net/forum/index.php/topic,3288.0.html)
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: right to left on December 23, 2014, 12:29:06 PM

This is less than 10% of the total lifespan for the planet.  In Human terms, if you call the Human lifespan 100 years, the Earth is equivalent to around a 92 year old person.  It is in its senescence no matter what here.  All you are ever really arguing is timelines, and Guy's latest Timeline of 2030 is ridiculously short.

The deal for those of us currently alive is same as it always was, you live as long as you can, and then you die.  After you die, what's the difference if Life on Earth lasts another 100 years, 1000 years or 1,000,000 years?  It's all just a Blip in Eternity anyhow.

RE
Even though I only have high school for formal education, I have been such a nerd during my adult life that I was actually aware of our planet's likely life cycle.  Although the time frame I read about most recently - from a book called "Life And Death of Planet Earth" (http://www.amazon.com/The-Life-Death-Planet-Earth/dp/0805075127) by Peter Ward and Donald Brownlee, gave us 500 million years before the carbon cycle would shut down too much to support photosynthesizing plants.

But, whether it's 300 or 500 million years, that's still a very long time!  And I don't feel quite the same about life (or complex life) on Earth ending by natural evolution of the solar system millions of years in the future, as I do about one creature on a suicide march towards extinction!

In philosophy of ethics, there are questions about what our obligations are towards others whom we don't know, but are nevertheless capable of impacting their lives. If our comfortable consumer capitalist economy is dependent on third world slave labour and extracting natural resources from other impoverished states where our leaders have taken the time to install friendly compliant dictators - do we have a share in their suffering...at least by proxy?   I would say so, and I also believe moral obligations to others, not only extend by distance, but also by time. 

So, if we carbonize the atmosphere and deplete most of the essential metals and minerals (as we are now doing), I would say we are left with an indictment on us by future generations whom aren't even born yet!  We would feel the same if the Industrial Revolution had occurred a couple of centuries ahead of schedule, and we inherited the degraded, doomed planet.  We would probably feel that they're all dead and buried and there's nothing we can do about it, but we would be justified in tearing down their statues and cursing their names for what they had done to us.....I wonder if future residents of Planet Earth might feel the same way about us?
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: right to left on December 23, 2014, 12:37:44 PM
I'll take a look at geoengineering - according to some climate researchers on the fringes - who see huge spikes in methane release coming our way, there is no way to have any kind of future on this planet by cutting carbon emissions...even shutting everything down completely won't be enough to stop the forcing of more sequestered carbon into the atmosphere.  It may be a point where even bad solutions are better than no solutions at all!

I share your concerns about "geoengineering," and for the same reasons you provided.

That said, I don't think of all forms of Terrestrial Carbon Sequestration (TCS) as examples of "geoengineering," per se.  I think you'll understand what I mean if you'll explore the prospects for significant carbon sequestration in agriculture and horticulture through the application of biochar.

Terrestrial Carbon Sequestration (TCS)
http://www.doomsteaddiner.net/forum/index.php/topic,3288.0.html (http://www.doomsteaddiner.net/forum/index.php/topic,3288.0.html)
Okay, thanks for that!
I have to leave soon, but before I do another round of posting, I'll do some reading on carbon sequestration.  What I see as the big missing piece in climate discussion is economics-based on growth.  A human population that keeps growing...and an economic system that demands both population growth and increases in resource consumption, are all factors that are incompatible with longterm survival.  If the Gaia hypothesis or theory is on track, a conscious earth goddess would be justified in seeing the human race as a malignant cancerous tumor. 

Anyway, any sort of long term future for us and other life on Earth, will depend on whether or not we change our ways of living into something that can carry on within the natural limits of this planet.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: JRM on December 23, 2014, 12:39:53 PM
I share your ethical moral perspective, right to left.

However, I also believe a sense of ethical or moral "obligation" also has a very limited usefulness. I see "obligation" as moral or ethical "training wheels" for those who have not come to LOVE. Those who love our planet, its ecosystems and biodiversity / species..., and our fellow humanity... do not require a sense of "obligation" to motivate them to care for the same. We do so because we love life, because we love species, because we love others and the planet.... Obligation is irrelevant to us, as are threats of jail time or other forms of punishment. 

Unfortunately, too many of us humans have had our natural and innate capacity to love squelched by our cultural and social conditioning. 

If you want to more fully understand my perspective on this, you might find the writings of Charles Eisenstein useful, as he seems to me to be speaking from a very similar insight.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: JRM on December 23, 2014, 12:45:31 PM
What I see as the big missing piece in climate discussion is economics-based on growth.  A human population that keeps growing...and an economic system that demands both population growth and increases in resource consumption, are all factors that are incompatible with longterm survival.

I agree completely.  The "We must grow the economy!" mantra is a pathological and pathogenic ideology of the worst sort.

I bet you'd enjoy this film (video) and book.

http://sacred-economics.com/ (http://sacred-economics.com/)
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: RE on December 23, 2014, 12:50:07 PM
So, if we carbonize the atmosphere and deplete most of the essential metals and minerals (as we are now doing), I would say we are left with an indictment on us by future generations whom aren't even born yet!  We would feel the same if the Industrial Revolution had occurred a couple of centuries ahead of schedule, and we inherited the degraded, doomed planet.  We would probably feel that they're all dead and buried and there's nothing we can do about it, but we would be justified in tearing down their statues and cursing their names for what they had done to us.....I wonder if future residents of Planet Earth might feel the same way about us?

Thing here is, at some point there won't be anyone around to curse us for shortening up the total lifespan of the planet.

Some generation at some point will be the last one, and they may look back on their predecessors and say "Crap, I wished they had lived Healthier Lives so we could Live Longer!"

Basically this is equivalent to a person who smokes and ends up shortening his life from say 90 potential years to 60, but he would be dead either way in the end.

Difference of course is that in one case you only shorten your OWN life, not the lives of future generations, for so long as they keep generating anyhow.

Had we remained Healthy Living Hunter-Gatherers, we might have lasted a longer time, but collectively we were not, we turned into Heavy Drinking Smokers, Drinking Oil and Burning Coal and pitching out waste everywhere.  We can't go back and change that.

So now the question is at this late stage here, if we stop smoking and drinking, how much longer will that give us?  Not to mention the rest of the creatures that share the planet with us.

It is evident that on a gross global scale we will not Voluntarily Quit, but of course we will have to quit when the Booze & Smokes run out.

I have stopped making value judgements about the path that was taken here, it is what it is.  Mainly I concern myself with how you make the best of a bad situation and prepare for a world which will not be pleasant for quite some time, and which if anyone survives in, will take an even longer time to bring back to health.

RE
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: right to left on December 24, 2014, 12:48:32 PM
So, if we carbonize the atmosphere and deplete most of the essential metals and minerals (as we are now doing), I would say we are left with an indictment on us by future generations whom aren't even born yet!  We would feel the same if the Industrial Revolution had occurred a couple of centuries ahead of schedule, and we inherited the degraded, doomed planet.  We would probably feel that they're all dead and buried and there's nothing we can do about it, but we would be justified in tearing down their statues and cursing their names for what they had done to us.....I wonder if future residents of Planet Earth might feel the same way about us?

Thing here is, at some point there won't be anyone around to curse us for shortening up the total lifespan of the planet.

Some generation at some point will be the last one, and they may look back on their predecessors and say "Crap, I wished they had lived Healthier Lives so we could Live Longer!"

Basically this is equivalent to a person who smokes and ends up shortening his life from say 90 potential years to 60, but he would be dead either way in the end.

Difference of course is that in one case you only shorten your OWN life, not the lives of future generations, for so long as they keep generating anyhow.

Had we remained Healthy Living Hunter-Gatherers, we might have lasted a longer time, but collectively we were not, we turned into Heavy Drinking Smokers, Drinking Oil and Burning Coal and pitching out waste everywhere.  We can't go back and change that.

So now the question is at this late stage here, if we stop smoking and drinking, how much longer will that give us?  Not to mention the rest of the creatures that share the planet with us.

It is evident that on a gross global scale we will not Voluntarily Quit, but of course we will have to quit when the Booze & Smokes run out.

I have stopped making value judgements about the path that was taken here, it is what it is.  Mainly I concern myself with how you make the best of a bad situation and prepare for a world which will not be pleasant for quite some time, and which if anyone survives in, will take an even longer time to bring back to health.

RE
We didn't jump right into subdue, consume and destroy as soon as we transitioned to agriculture way back when.   It has sadly, become a side-focus...usually of feminist writers...but back 150 years ago when the social sciences of anthropology and archaeology were first becoming real science, the pioneers like Bachofen and Henry Louis Morgan, noted that patriarchal organized families and societies were virtually absent in North America, and in prehistoric cultures in Europe and Asia before about 5000 years ago. 

Some anthropologists credit animal agriculture (both herding and keeping livestock) for the change in an historic relatively equal balance of power between men and women in primeval cultures, while others note that the concept of individual paternity of children was unknown, and only very recently acknowledged in cultures that remained organized along matrilineal and matrilocal lines.

The transition to patriarchies 5000 years ago, seemed to start a cascading effect of turning neighbouring societies into warlike patriarchies also....it likely became a situation of imitate their ruthless, warring ideals or become enslaved by patriarchal nomads that swept out from Central Asia during a period of Indo-Aryan invasions 4 to 5000 years ago.  Whatever it was, the values of the patriarchies completely uprooted and destroyed the cultural values of the original hunter/gatherer and horticultural societies.

Evidence for this can be found in the lack of evidence for organized warfare and the fact that the earliest settlements that can be considered 'cities' such as Catalhoyuk and the first settlement at Jericho in Asia Minor, did not have walls or any semblance of fortifications, even though these 'cities' existed for centuries before being abandoned...likely because of changing environmental conditions. 

The patriarchies also instilled us with the typical western conceptions of religion and cosmology: with father sky-gods dominating and subduing the Earth goddess.  Even though they did not have the technological means to do much ecological damage, their mode of thinking...God and Man being separate and above other animals and creatures of this Earth, set the stage for the lack of respect for nature that allowed the inventions that began with the Enlightenment to put us on the brink of extinction today!

Worth noting that, from studies of modern hunter/gatherer societies (our common heritage), hierarchies are rigorously prevented by tactics described by cultural anthropologists as "status-leveling."  Even if a hunter is particularly superior and successful compared to other males of the tribe, he is not allowed to rejoice and revel in his success!  On the contrary, other hunters will joke and criticize him if he tries to set himself as a superior hunter.  And, even more significant - the game that is caught by the hunters is divided up among them, before being brought back to the community and presented to the women, so that they all share in the success of the hunt equally......quite different by damn sight from the cultural values we practice today!

Maybe, if civilization never transitioned to patriarchies and separation from nature, we would have taken a lot longer to develop and may have never developed the kind of technological societies we have today....but, at least it is more likely that the world would be survivable today!
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: right to left on December 24, 2014, 01:01:21 PM
I share your ethical moral perspective, right to left.

However, I also believe a sense of ethical or moral "obligation" also has a very limited usefulness. I see "obligation" as moral or ethical "training wheels" for those who have not come to LOVE. Those who love our planet, its ecosystems and biodiversity / species..., and our fellow humanity... do not require a sense of "obligation" to motivate them to care for the same. We do so because we love life, because we love species, because we love others and the planet.... Obligation is irrelevant to us, as are threats of jail time or other forms of punishment. 

Unfortunately, too many of us humans have had our natural and innate capacity to love squelched by our cultural and social conditioning. 

If you want to more fully understand my perspective on this, you might find the writings of Charles Eisenstein useful, as he seems to me to be speaking from a very similar insight.
I watched the video and started skimming through the writings on that site.  I don't think that any useful transition to a better world can be made without forcing and prodding the transition with incentives and disincentives.  I just don't buy any sort of 'spiritual' transition happening by something as subjective as changing minds.
I noticed in the entry: Chapter 4, “The Trouble with Property” (http://sacred-economics.com/sacred-economics-chapter-4-the-trouble-with-property/), that Charles Eisenstein says this:
Quote
Other thinkers, notably Wilhelm Reich and Genevieve Vaughan, link the origin of property to the emergence of male dominance and patriarchal society. (4) While I believe these arguments have merit, I have chosen not to explore herein the sexual dimensions of money and property, a subject deserving of its own treatise.
I wish he had focused on the 'sexual dimensions' of money and property!  Because as noted in the previous post, the transition from hunter/gatherers to farming and cities, did not have to include dominance hierarchies, warfare and property!  The first cities contained almost identical sized and designed houses...yet few archaeologists comment or speculate on the reasons why!  In the Harappan cities of Harappa and Mohenjo Daro - on the Indus Valley, the houses were identical, there were no palaces or temples...only buildings that were apparently public baths were the only large structures, and the cities had water and sewage waste systems that were centuries ahead of their time.  If civilization continued developing on these lines, we would have escaped a lot of the grief that happened to the human race over the next 6000 years!
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: RE on December 24, 2014, 01:15:09 PM
Maybe, if civilization never transitioned to patriarchies and separation from nature, we would have taken a lot longer to develop and may have never developed the kind of technological societies we have today....but, at least it is more likely that the world would be survivable today!

Maybe, but that isn't how it played out, and we can't go back and change it either.

There are very good thermodynamic arguments for why it played out as it did, which we have discussed at length here periodically.  Basically, living organisms are hardwired to maximize thermodynamic potentials, which means using up whatever energy you have available as fast as you can.

On the upside moving into the future, we have pretty much exhausted high thermodynamic potential material we can extract at a cheap enough price to finance, so moving into the future we will be forced into living a lower per capita energy consumption lifestyle.

It's figuring out that transition and how to negotiate it that is my concern moving forward, not how things that occurred in the past which we cannot change got us here.

RE
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Petty Tyrant on December 24, 2014, 04:58:51 PM
So, if we carbonize the atmosphere and deplete most of the essential metals and minerals (as we are now doing), I would say we are left with an indictment on us by future generations whom aren't even born yet!  We would feel the same if the Industrial Revolution had occurred a couple of centuries ahead of schedule, and we inherited the degraded, doomed planet.  We would probably feel that they're all dead and buried and there's nothing we can do about it, but we would be justified in tearing down their statues and cursing their names for what they had done to us.....I wonder if future residents of Planet Earth might feel the same way about us?

Thing here is, at some point there won't be anyone around to curse us for shortening up the total lifespan of the planet.

Some generation at some point will be the last one, and they may look back on their predecessors and say "Crap, I wished they had lived Healthier Lives so we could Live Longer!"

Basically this is equivalent to a person who smokes and ends up shortening his life from say 90 potential years to 60, but he would be dead either way in the end.

Difference of course is that in one case you only shorten your OWN life, not the lives of future generations, for so long as they keep generating anyhow.

Had we remained Healthy Living Hunter-Gatherers, we might have lasted a longer time, but collectively we were not, we turned into Heavy Drinking Smokers, Drinking Oil and Burning Coal and pitching out waste everywhere.  We can't go back and change that.

So now the question is at this late stage here, if we stop smoking and drinking, how much longer will that give us?  Not to mention the rest of the creatures that share the planet with us.

It is evident that on a gross global scale we will not Voluntarily Quit, but of course we will have to quit when the Booze & Smokes run out.

I have stopped making value judgements about the path that was taken here, it is what it is.  Mainly I concern myself with how you make the best of a bad situation and prepare for a world which will not be pleasant for quite some time, and which if anyone survives in, will take an even longer time to bring back to health.

RE
We didn't jump right into subdue, consume and destroy as soon as we transitioned to agriculture way back when.   It has sadly, become a side-focus...usually of feminist writers...but back 150 years ago when the social sciences of anthropology and archaeology were first becoming real science, the pioneers like Bachofen and Henry Louis Morgan, noted that patriarchal organized families and societies were virtually absent in North America, and in prehistoric cultures in Europe and Asia before about 5000 years ago. 

That is wishful thinking based on nothing but a sexist belief that matriarchy would be utopia. The hindu civilization and texts setting out beliefs and practices are over 5000 years old and are what you would call patriarchal.

5000 years ago homo sap were finishing off neaderthal who had existed for over 200 thousand years. Aggression and conquest and war over resources, were already present. This has always involved conquest of women in conflict where the facts are a matter of history and not speculation. It follows that in prehistoric times this was also the case.



Some anthropologists credit animal agriculture (both herding and keeping livestock) for the change in an historic relatively equal balance of power between men and women in primeval cultures,

Why? No logic is provided. Note I am not suggesting that logic is as diffcult for feminists to follow as math for humanities majors. Heres a hypothesis based on experience, when I bought a herd of 6 goats myself having no previous experience with livestock and I walked the dog barking and trying to get at them past the goats, they would get into a tight pack and the biggest Billy would stand out in front ready to take on the dog if necessary to protect the herd. The rest of the goats always followed him for protection and when given food scraps th would headbutt each other to fight over them as the availability decreased, less left on the ground, but no other goat ever butted the biggest billy. Perhaps the sensitive progressive hipster hunter gatherer suddenly saw the light to become a leader only when he had a herd of livestock.

while others note that the concept of individual paternity of children was unknown, and only very recently acknowledged in cultures that remained organized along matrilineal and matrilocal lines.

 Are you suggesting that the bibles emphasis on long lists of genealogies going back to the first man is a recently invented substitute for a list of begats by mothers? In the indigenous tribes where the recognition that you can be sure of who a mother is but not who a father is, the leaders were still men and women were still offered without choice as gifts and peace offerings or in exchange for baubles etc.



The transition to patriarchies 5000 years ago, seemed to start a cascading effect of turning neighbouring societies into warlike patriarchies also....it likely became a situation of imitate their ruthless, warring ideals or become enslaved by patriarchal nomads that swept out from Central Asia during a period of Indo-Aryan invasions 4 to 5000 years ago.

Thanks for recognising my point that Indo-aryan culture documented in writing that their society was in fact patriachal. This was due to the basic difference between men and women. The same basic difference between men and women existed everywhere else in the world. Homo sap had spread from central africa across to the indus valley. We know that migration happens after competition and confrontation over resources. Leaving sweet spots and venturing into the unknown in search of new sources or resources. It is not a peaceful process.

 If neighboring matriarchal peaceful societies had a choice in not being enslaved they already had adequate weaponry to defend themselves. If you dont already have the technology you can not imitate it to prevent enslavement or being displaced. The fact they were far from africa where they originated tells us the process of war and displacement was nothing new. If they were able to successfuly defend themselves  by imitating ruthless and warlike ways of the Indo-aryans from the indus valley or Mongols from Central Asia (the theory has the two confused) they already had adequate weapons and experience in using them. They had probably already discovered that their men were bigger and stronger and not slowed down by a baby in the belly and another on the breast and therefore better to send to use the weapons. They probably also already discovered that their brains were not slowed down by hormonal fluctuations and able to think strategically in the field. If they could not do that they had to develop the ability because they could not call a truce mid battle to defer to womenfolk on how best to proceed. Critical examination of any feminist theory demonstrates that they are led much more emotion than reason.



 Whatever it was, the values of the patriarchies completely uprooted and destroyed the cultural values of the original hunter/gatherer and horticultural societies.

Horticulture is agriculture which is tending to plants NOT animals which is pastoralism, this was your earlier definition; " Some anthropologists credit animal agriculture (both herding and keeping livestock) " Radical feminists neither understood the meaning of the word 'feminine'.


Evidence for this can be found in the lack of evidence for organized warfare and the fact that the earliest settlements that can be considered 'cities' such as Catalhoyuk and the first settlement at Jericho in Asia Minor, did not have walls or any semblance of fortifications, even though these 'cities' existed for centuries before being abandoned...likely because of changing environmental conditions. 

Have they not heard of the Walls of Jericho? What is known from Catalhoyuk, modern Turkey is also a lot from wall paintings, though these are not fortifying walls. They did discover weapons. Today warlike washington does not have a wall around it either. A city state has always already conquered the hunter gatherers with superior technolgy and the fact of farming and building specialization allows for a professional military specialisation. This has been repeated by empire after empire. City state is only built after being the most successful bully on the block and putting fear into surrounding nomadic tribes. It is only leaving due to environmental reasons as you mentioned that they would not have eventually gone to war with another civilization as always happened.  

The patriarchies also instilled us with the typical western conceptions of religion and cosmology: with father sky-gods dominating and subduing the Earth goddess.

Western religon is Christian and does not mention an Earth goddess. God also originally walked on earth according to the Old Testament.


Even though they did not have the technological means to do much ecological damage, their mode of thinking...God and Man being separate and above other animals and creatures of this Earth, set the stage for the lack of respect for nature that allowed the inventions that began with the Enlightenment to put us on the brink of extinction today!

I agree generally, however there is evidence of species being hunted to extinction pre-civilization.

Worth noting that, from studies of modern hunter/gatherer societies (our common heritage), hierarchies are rigorously prevented by tactics described by cultural anthropologists as "status-leveling."  Even if a hunter is particularly superior and successful compared to other males of the tribe, he is not allowed to rejoice and revel in his success!  On the contrary, other hunters will joke and criticize him if he tries to set himself as a superior hunter.  And, even more significant - the game that is caught by the hunters is divided up among them, before being brought back to the community and presented to the women, so that they all share in the success of the hunt equally......quite different by damn sight from the cultural values we practice today!



The hunter gathere have rites of passage for both males and females. Usually for females no action is required, the first period defines her as a woman no longer a girl. For males during puberty they must demonstrate survival skills alone away from the tribe also demonstarte fighting skills, such as men from their tribe wearing a mask and attacking them. The rights of passage for traditional aboriginals are about as tough as what spartans were put through in the same way at the same age.  Not every male passes and they did not get access to females if they did not pass. eg, in northern australia the men have big scars across the chest to show that they passed that test and can then go on to get moreof these. That is a culture 50 thousand years old. You will see in all the old black and white fotos the chiefs standing there with spears negotiating with the whites were patriarchy, older men with several of the scars as recognition of their superior prowess in hunting and fighting or leadership and the same guys with several scars had several wives while the wimps and wusses got none.

The underlying dynamic today has not changed at all from what it has always been, evidenced by the telling term "presented to the women". There is  no reproduction going on if women are not wooed with demonstrations of competence as providers and/or genetic fitness to reproduce. Women are turned on by big biceps because it signals in the female brain that developed over a million years that the guy can probably throw a spear further and faster than the guy going out of his way to emasculate himself to appease feminists. He looks like he can throw that spear at big game or an enemy threat, to both provide and protect.

Today he presents the women his paycheck. The boss may have divided up the profit to all the emloyees before taking it home too. Being the boss also is an extra turn on and can compensate for being flabby or ugly in presenting a bigger paycheck to the women. Today if he does not present his paycheck in entirety he is guilty of financial abuse and domestic violence and can lose his home and children, if she so chooses.


Maybe, if civilization never transitioned to patriarchies and separation from nature, we would have taken a lot longer to develop and may have never developed the kind of technological societies we have today....but, at least it is more likely that the world would be survivable today!

Catherine the Great, Margaret Thatcher, Angela Merkel or Hillary Clinton, Cristine Lagarde and Janet Yellen do war and destruction as hard as any of the patriarchy. Also I see both men and women being environmental activists, notable early ones being David Suzuki and Al Gore. I also see plenty of female as well as male climate deniers and both  are into hardcore materialistic consumer culture at the expense of the environment. Great progress has been made in recent years to divest the patriarchy of its power privilege (but not to do dirty jobs and die), without it changing the course toward collapse. Patriarchy without technology has been with us since we were naked primates and I have yet to see any feminist theory that bears scrutiny.
Title: Re: Welcome! And Merry Christmas to all the Diners
Post by: Karpatok on December 25, 2014, 12:29:09 AM
Maybe, if civilization never transitioned to patriarchies and separation from nature, we would have taken a lot longer to develop and may have never developed the kind of technological societies we have today....but, at least it is more likely that the world would be survivable today!

Maybe, but that isn't how it played out, and we can't go back and change it either.

There are very good thermodynamic arguments for why it played out as it did, which we have discussed at length here periodically.  Basically, living organisms are hardwired to maximize thermodynamic potentials, which means using up whatever energy you have available as fast as you can.

On the upside moving into the future, we have pretty much exhausted high thermodynamic potential material we can extract at a cheap enough price to finance, so moving into the future we will be forced into living a lower per capita energy consumption lifestyle.

It's figuring out that transition and how to negotiate it that is my concern moving forward, not how things that occurred in the past which we cannot change got us here.

RE
And in regard to that hypothetical transition in light of what has been described as the double helix of the amalgamation of Chinese and Russian situational plans for the Eurasian confrontation and disregard of the Anglo/Zionist unipolar hegemony, I have this to say to the so superior  Patriarchal defendants of the Diner as well as the pissed upon suggestors of ethical and moral decency: True it is that in regard to the repression and dissolution of peoples and their cultures, it is important to keep in mind the apparent hard wiring of the naked male ape and its would be lesbian imitators, so bent on the prevalent patriarchal destruction of neighboring as well as distant tribes and societies in competition for the resources necessary for survival as well as the sexual slaves necessary for progeny.                                       Apparently no religious teachings however deeply God given and inspired have been able to override not only the chest beating but the fathomless inward layers of need to endlessly hate, loathe and wish to demolish all others seen as competitors for those finite resources necessary for all. And at the same time an absolute incapacity for restraining self breeding of new mouths straining to devour what resources of food, energy,land and water that are left. What a noble work is humankind indeed!  Its dismal fate foretold from the beginning in its inability to control its inmost tendencies for raging destruction of self and other. Who could have invented such a being? Now we are coming close to the end of its story which guarantees the abysmal continuation like a serpent devouring its own tail, of continuing destruction until all of its environment including itself is annihilated to utter ash, a speck continuing to rotate around an aging star in a vast and inexplicable universe infinite with such lessons.  Karpatok
Title: Re: Welcome! And Merry Christmas to all the Diners
Post by: RE on December 25, 2014, 12:42:27 AM
Nice 2 C U KK!

Merry Doomy Christmas!


RE
Title: Re: Welcome! And Merry Christmas to all the Diners
Post by: Karpatok on December 25, 2014, 01:03:55 AM
Nice 2 C U KK!

Merry Doomy Christmas!


RE
Thank you and I wish everyone well but I must say that Doom seems imminent from all corners and from all sides. And yes, I do blame human beings, both leaders and apathetic split followers, dumb as rocks but not innocent as sheep by any means. Leaving out babies and children of course. So now we will most probably have two totalitarian Hegemons, one rising and one falling in an Empire of Chaos, as Pepe Escobar says. I do not see one hegemon as preferable to the other. it will still be predator and prey, the war of the many against the many. There now really is no place to hide from this and it is not going to be pretty or pleasant. These rulers in the FSOA are truly insane and I believe will attempt destruction of everything and everybody as they attempt not to go down while tearing each other apart. Does anybody think the former Maoists, the inheritors of the Cultural Revolution will play nice or have compassion? They are already buying this place up. Not to mention that they poisoned my cat in the old lovely neighborhood. As my Serbian friend said, the Russians raped more than anybody else, so what else is new? My hero Vladimir of course doesn.t have to rape anybody. Only the good doctor with sleeping drugs needed to do that. People are all the same. It is innate bloodlust and nothing can stop it until it destroys itself. K
Title: Re: Welcome! And Merry Christmas to all the Diners
Post by: jdwheeler42 on December 25, 2014, 05:31:21 AM
So now we will most probably have two totalitarian Hegemons, one rising and one falling in an Empire of Chaos, as Pepe Escobar says.
Merry Christmas, K!  It's good to see you again!

The only thing I would disagree with you with is the direction of the hegemons, there will be one declining and one plummeting.  Everyone's going down from here, it's just a question of how fast.

And, quite frankly, I'm not sure Putin is sufficiently ruthless to defeat the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.  If he doesn't announce capital controls or a default in the next week, the banksters will suck Russia dry.  About the only other chance he'll have is a mushroom cloud over Washington and/or New York.
Title: Re: Welcome! And Merry Christmas to all the Diners
Post by: Karpatok on December 25, 2014, 06:45:16 AM
So now we will most probably have two totalitarian Hegemons, one rising and one falling in an Empire of Chaos, as Pepe Escobar says.
Merry Christmas, K!  It's good to see you again!

The only thing I would disagree with you with is the direction of the hegemons, there will be one declining and one plummeting.  Everyone's going down from here, it's just a question of how fast.

And, quite frankly, I'm not sure Putin is sufficiently ruthless to defeat the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.  If he doesn't announce capital controls or a default in the next week, the banksters will suck Russia dry.  About the only other chance he'll have is a mushroom cloud over Washington and/or New York.
   Hi JD. Nice to speak with you. I agree from what I've read about VV Putin that so far he has not shown all the ruthlessness that he might have. I have been accused here on DD of over idealizing certain men and/or leaders but I think it's fair to assume Putin would not be where he is without a huge amount of cajones as well as smarts. I think he is holding in a lot as he seems to be a very calculating player as well as very perficient in the martial arts which is probably 70% psychology and 30% muscle. He obviously has both.But he is an Orthodox Christian which means he must have some constraints of conscience on his own ruthlessness capabilities. He's not a common thug though he certainly has had to deal with thugs. And I don't believe he is in this position because power and greed are his highest principles. He loves Russia, he knows its history in and out. He knows how the West has always treated the Rus beginning with the Catholic church's Crusade against the Orthodox. He has Asian blood as well as Viking which puts him in touch with feelings of raprochment with the Muslems in the RF. It may also light the way for the friendship with the Chinese who have the capital to bail him out to a degree, while he has the resources that they need. I think this deal is scaring the shit out of imbeciles like Kerry and McCain. I wish that it let the ugly gas out of that Reptile/Zid Soros. Remember that Putin has Anglo/Zionist Atlanticists implanted in his government opposing him, calling for neoliberalism{HA,HA.HA}traitorous serpents all who were gifts of the Neocons in the first place. Yes, even Medvedev. So he's treading very cautiously and timing everything. I would be very grateful to know of your ideas about the ruthlessness and its characteristics that would be necessary for this task. I think you often have very good insight. The most important thing is that he is not going it alone, and even with the bigAss military, the US cannot defeat Russia and China together unless of course those Jocks and Zids are suicidal which may very well be the case and is at the heart of my previous posts. Karpatok
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: right to left on December 25, 2014, 11:56:54 AM

Maybe, but that isn't how it played out, and we can't go back and change it either.

There are very good thermodynamic arguments for why it played out as it did, which we have discussed at length here periodically.  Basically, living organisms are hardwired to maximize thermodynamic potentials, which means using up whatever energy you have available as fast as you can.

On the upside moving into the future, we have pretty much exhausted high thermodynamic potential material we can extract at a cheap enough price to finance, so moving into the future we will be forced into living a lower per capita energy consumption lifestyle.

It's figuring out that transition and how to negotiate it that is my concern moving forward, not how things that occurred in the past which we cannot change got us here.

RE
There is no way to figure out how to make a transition without defining what sort of creatures we are in the first place. 
Are we savage apes being made peaceful and egalitarian by modern civilization...as presented by the evolutionary psychologists like Stephen Pinker and game theorists like Robert Wright?
Or, are we noble savages, who spent 99% of our 200,000 years as modern humans, living in egalitarian hunter/gatherer bands, which rarely felt competitive pressures for food and resources, to generate warfare with other tribal groups?

Off hand, I would say the noble savage...though it might exaggerate the great variation in living and quality of life, of hunter/gatherers, this is closer to what is natural for humans than the modern capitalist techno-myth concocted by Pinker and others!  There are a lot of people with money and influence who want to promote the modern myth of the wonders of globalized capitalism and new technology towards utopia, but the Garden of Eden myth better describes the human predicament: leaving behind an idyllic beginning, and forced to toil the fields for long hours, usually in the service to lords and patriarchs.

So, maybe it's impossible to get back to a way of living that would support half a billion people at most, on this planet, but we should still know where we came from, and understand the reasons why hierarchies are harmful and why they need to be limited or removed in human societies; and why it is important to re-establish true equality between the sexes, which was also part of our primordial past, and was preserved early on in agricultural societies, along with apparent limits on hierarchy (Mohenjo Daro).   

And the problems of thermodynamic potential are only problems for cultures that insist on constant growth and increased exploitation of nature!  Societies that are prepared to live within nature's limits, will accept whatever sustainable energy sources are available, and not extract beyond carrying capacity.

So, if our transition includes an understanding that we are not by nature - violent, misogynistic, materialistic and hierarchical, then we can transition towards a sustainable set of communities; but if we transition to libertarian anarcho-capitalism, there will just be a repeat of all the same old crap that happened before!
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Surly1 on December 25, 2014, 12:12:44 PM
So, maybe it's impossible to get back to a way of living that would support half a billion people at most, on this planet, but we should still know where we came from, and understand the reasons why hierarchies are harmful and why they need to be limited or removed in human societies; and why it is important to re-establish true equality between the sexes, which was also part of our primordial past, and was preserved early on in agricultural societies, along with apparent limits on hierarchy (Mohenjo Daro).   

And the problems of thermodynamic potential are only problems for cultures that insist on constant growth and increased exploitation of nature!  Societies that are prepared to live within nature's limits, will accept whatever sustainable energy sources are available, and not extract beyond carrying capacity.

So, if our transition includes an understanding that we are not by nature - violent, misogynistic, materialistic and hierarchical, then we can transition towards a sustainable set of communities; but if we transition to libertarian anarcho-capitalism, there will just be a repeat of all the same old crap that happened before!

Excellent insights. Glad you have found this board.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: right to left on December 25, 2014, 01:39:11 PM

That is wishful thinking based on nothing but a sexist belief that matriarchy would be utopia. The hindu civilization and texts setting out beliefs and practices are over 5000 years old and are what you would call patriarchal.

5000 years ago homo sap were finishing off neaderthal who had existed for over 200 thousand years. Aggression and conquest and war over resources, were already present. This has always involved conquest of women in conflict where the facts are a matter of history and not speculation. It follows that in prehistoric times this was also the case.
First; we have no idea what happened to the Neanderthals! There is some evidence that Neanderthals and modern humans lived in the same general regions during the same time periods, but their population densities were very low, and actual contact was likely very infrequent.  The reasons why they died out appear to be more closely tied to being unable to adapt to the changes brought about at the end of the last ice age.

Define "matriarchy."  Because patriarchal ancient Greek and Roman writers spun nightmarish stories of Amazon warriors cutting off the genitalia of captured men....likely mostly inspired by battlefield writings of their generals while off on distant military campaigns against nomadic Sarmatian And Scythian tribes in the Ukraine and the Caucasus.  According to the battlefield reports, the camps were mostly guarded and protected by sword and bow-wielding women, and even on the battlefields, Greek and Roman soldiers reported women warriors among the men...especially as archers...although the legend that Sarmation female archers burned off or cut off their right breasts to enhance their shooting ability has never been confirmed in any archaeological evidence.  Considering the dismal existence of women of all classes in Greece and Rome, some historians have wondered aloud over the years, if all of their emoting about amazons, may have arisen from some fears that their own women would rise up against them and act like these barbarian foreign women!

In more modern times, European explorers and colonists who arrived on North America's shores, described all of the horticultural "longhouse" natives as matriarchies, because the usual setup for family life was a long house under the headship of a clan mother - who was usually a grandmother, who's younger sisters and their husbands, as well as their daughters and their husbands, and all of their children collectively made up the common household.  The Euro's were also no doubt alarmed that any man who was considered disruptive, could be summarily 'divorced' if his wife gathered up his belongings and dumped them outside of the longhouse.  But no societies described by western writers as 'matriarchies'...including the natives of the "Amazon" Valley, were ever matriarchal in some sort of mirror image of patriarchal dominance.  What they represented was a balance of power between men and women - where men had control of certain functions, such as managing the hunts, dealing with other tribes...including decisions regarding warfare/ while women ran village life, growing food, snaring small game etc..  Many functions were shared, depending on cultural traditions, and larger - horticultural societies had more complex organization than small "immediate return" hunter/gatherer bands which had to move frequently.  But, the takeaway remains that any society that was matrilineal and matrilocal, ends up being called a matriarchy regardless of the internal dynamics of the society.

The Hindu sandskrit writings you reference, may have been patriarchal...but that's because they were written long after the first Harappan cities were established along the Indus River Valley.  We have no idea what the residents of Mohenjo Daro believed or felt about any of these issues, because their hieroglyphic writings have never been decyphered and interpreted!  What we do know about them comes from inference:
- identical houses indicate a lack or more likely a prevention against the creation of hierarchies, the lack of palaces would also be an indicator
- based on statues and other artwork, personal adornement may have been the only means to determine social status
- the planned design, including a waste removal sewer system, indicates a high level of planning in the creation of the City
- recent genetic evidence from archaelogical digs, tell us that women had greater genetic similarities than men - which would indicate that the men were marrying into their wive's households and living with their wife's relatives/ the opposite of modern patriarchal norms in the region.  That would be as much evidence as needed, that it was a matrilocal society.

In summary, I would go with the conclusion of many anthropologists today, that you don't have the rise of patriarchies and patriarchal family organization until:
- men have the opportunity to control food production and distribution on their own without the input of women, and
- there is a realization of some theory of individual paternity.  It seems like a no-brainer today, but it wasn't until no more than 5000 years ago, that any culture had a concept of individual paternity of children.  Prior to that, the common belief is called Partible Paternity - a belief that the child contains some essence of every man a woman has had sex with.  An expectation of partible paternity removes the option of ownership of progeny and the rise of patriarchs and warlords that afflicted later civilization.
Quote
Are you suggesting that the bibles emphasis on long lists of genealogies going back to the first man is a recently invented substitute for a list of begats by mothers? In the indigenous tribes where the recognition that you can be sure of who a mother is but not who a father is, the leaders were still men and women were still offered without choice as gifts and peace offerings or in exchange for baubles etc.
Do you believe any portion of biblical chronologies is based in fact?  The geneologies of Matthew and Luke don't even match up!


Have they not heard of the Walls of Jericho? [/quote]
Several cities of Jericho were built over the same area as previous abandoned and destroyed cities. The first settlements did not have walls...like Catalhoyuk....and the later story mentioned in the Bible is based on mythology, not archaeological evidence.
Quote
Western religon is Christian and does not mention an Earth goddess. God also originally walked on earth according to the Old Testament.
An ancient statue discovered in Palestine, contains a reference to "Yahweh and his queen "Asheroth."  Asheroth was the supreme goddess of that era - a story completely excised from the Judaic writings afterwards.  The fact that Judeochristian tradition could have a divine father, with no mother, tells us that the religion transitioned to a state where the mother goddess was completely removed, but was part of the original religions.
Quote
I agree generally, however there is evidence of species being hunted to extinction pre-civilization.
Actually,  no there isn't!  Because the claims that some megafauna of North America were hunted to the extinction by the Amerindians was based on coincidence and little else.  Modern paleontologists believe disease and changing environment caused these extinctions, rather than the move of hunters across the Plains.  The Mastodons are the latest example of new evidence revising prior narratives, as it is now realized that the mastodons were not contemporaries of the mammoths, and died out during the last ice age of the Pleistocene/ whereas the mammoths had become so highly specialized for ice age conditions that they went extinct after the rapid warmup of the Holocene.

Considering what the new arrivals to the Americas had for weapons, it's laughable that they could have killed off some of these creatures...such as the Giant Ground Sloths of South America: picture a giant squirrel about 20 feet tall that literally eats trees! and that is the giant sloth.  Now, imagine a bunch of guys with spears trying to go up and take him down! That would have been a more formidable challenge than the Wooly Mammoth...which could be stampeded and didn't have hands to grasp with or throw large projectiles.  Disease and a shortage of trees, would have been the only concerns for the giant sloth!  There would have been no predators, including saber-tooth cats and human hunters, who would have been equipped to take them on!
Quote
The underlying dynamic today has not changed at all from what it has always been, evidenced by the telling term "presented to the women". There is  no reproduction going on if women are not wooed with demonstrations of competence as providers and/or genetic fitness to reproduce. Women are turned on by big biceps because it signals in the female brain that developed over a million years that the guy can probably throw a spear further and faster than the guy going out of his way to emasculate himself to appease feminists. He looks like he can throw that spear at big game or an enemy threat, to both provide and protect.

Today he presents the women his paycheck. The boss may have divided up the profit to all the emloyees before taking it home too. Being the boss also is an extra turn on and can compensate for being flabby or ugly in presenting a bigger paycheck to the women. Today if he does not present his paycheck in entirety he is guilty of financial abuse and domestic violence and can lose his home and children, if she so chooses. [/color]
What you are describing here is a presentation of ancient cultures following modern cultural thinking....something anthropologist - Christopher Ryan calls the "Flintstonization" of prehistory.  This is, in a nutshell, his primary criticism of evolutionary psychology: they take modern norms and expectations, and then look for evolutionary origins of these behaviours.  Ryan and many other researchers who spent time studying modern hunter/gatherers that still remained relatively uncontaminated by modern culture and understandings, still carried the belief in "partible" paternity I mentioned earlier.  So, all of this talk of the "man with the biggest muscles" or the "biggest paycheques" whatever, are traditions that are based on adaptive human behaviours NOT any sort of hardwired evolutionary behaviours we would all have in common!

Quick evidence could be found in recent sociology articles about how younger professional women are pairing off with men who are either their age or younger, and NOT with older men.  The reasons are obvious: a young woman who has her own income, is not completely dependent on the income of her future husband, which had been the cultural norm until recently.

When it comes to things like "muscles," some women like guys with big muscles/others don't.  The introduction of porn in modern culture has also led to some young women using penis size as one of the major determining factors for choosing a mate...and that one likely has a lot of guys nervous and insecure these days!

The Yanomami tribal women of Southern Venezuela in the Amazon Valley...who have that concept of partible paternity, deliberately seek out a number of different sexual partners for all sorts of different qualities they appreciate and want to provide for the child they are trying to conceive....that sexual strategy could better explain the biological fact that women take a lot longer to reach orgasm than men, and have multiple orgasms....which we don't obviously....so, monogamy itself, looks like a recent adaptation that we have had to make because of modern culture.

Quote
Catherine the Great, Margaret Thatcher, Angela Merkel or Hillary Clinton, Cristine Lagarde and Janet Yellen do war and destruction as hard as any of the patriarchy.

All these bitches you list here, are women who have/or had come to power in a man's world, and learn how to play by men's rules!  As a result, these women are more aggressive and more dangerous than the surrounding men who they see as possible competitors, because they have to show themselves as more masculine than any man....may they all burn in hell!

A truly gender-equal society would have equal representation from men and women (something the Iroquois tribes were close to) in all levels of society - politics and economic leadership.  At that point, the style of government of a female leader might be better representative of women in government.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: right to left on December 25, 2014, 01:45:14 PM

Excellent insights. Glad you have found this board.
Me too!  There doesn't seem to be any other place around quite like it.

Have a Merry Christmas today also....company is coming over now, and I've got to run and help my wife finish getting dinner ready and everything set up.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: JoeP on December 25, 2014, 02:46:18 PM

There doesn't seem to be any other place around quite like it.


Welcome to the Diner RTL.  THAT is quite an understatement IMO.  Stay long enough, and I think you'll agree.  :icon_mrgreen:   Few have the endurance for this.  :icon_scratch:
 
 
 
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Petty Tyrant on December 25, 2014, 03:36:25 PM

Maybe, but that isn't how it played out, and we can't go back and change it either.

There are very good thermodynamic arguments for why it played out as it did, which we have discussed at length here periodically.  Basically, living organisms are hardwired to maximize thermodynamic potentials, which means using up whatever energy you have available as fast as you can.

On the upside moving into the future, we have pretty much exhausted high thermodynamic potential material we can extract at a cheap enough price to finance, so moving into the future we will be forced into living a lower per capita energy consumption lifestyle.

It's figuring out that transition and how to negotiate it that is my concern moving forward, not how things that occurred in the past which we cannot change got us here.

RE
There is no way to figure out how to make a transition without defining what sort of creatures we are in the first place. 
Are we savage apes being made peaceful and egalitarian by modern civilization...as presented by the evolutionary psychologists like Stephen Pinker and game theorists like Robert Wright?
Or, are we noble savages, who spent 99% of our 200,000 years as modern humans, living in egalitarian hunter/gatherer bands, which rarely felt competitive pressures for food and resources, to generate warfare with other tribal groups?

Off hand, I would say the noble savage...though it might exaggerate the great variation in living and quality of life, of hunter/gatherers, this is closer to what is natural for humans than the modern capitalist techno-myth concocted by Pinker and others!  There are a lot of people with money and influence who want to promote the modern myth of the wonders of globalized capitalism and new technology towards utopia, but the Garden of Eden myth better describes the human predicament: leaving behind an idyllic beginning, and forced to toil the fields for long hours, usually in the service to lords and patriarchs.

So, maybe it's impossible to get back to a way of living that would support half a billion people at most, on this planet, but we should still know where we came from, and understand the reasons why hierarchies are harmful and why they need to be limited or removed in human societies; and why it is important to re-establish true equality between the sexes, which was also part of our primordial past, and was preserved early on in agricultural societies, along with apparent limits on hierarchy (Mohenjo Daro).   

And the problems of thermodynamic potential are only problems for cultures that insist on constant growth and increased exploitation of nature!  Societies that are prepared to live within nature's limits, will accept whatever sustainable energy sources are available, and not extract beyond carrying capacity.

So, if our transition includes an understanding that we are not by nature - violent, misogynistic, materialistic and hierarchical, then we can transition towards a sustainable set of communities; but if we transition to libertarian anarcho-capitalism, there will just be a repeat of all the same old crap that happened before!

As long as people were migratory moving to follow game and resources or warm weather with the seasons they could not be too materialistic as they could only keep what they could carry. As soon as people settle in one place the leaders have much more of everything. Those who were migratory on first contact with whites took beads and shiny things and incorporated them into body adornment. worn around the neck or in a head-dress. They still needed their hands free to carry hunting and fighting spears and arrows.

Who got to have the big head-dress? The chiefs. There is no evidence of being egalitarian by nature. Leaders naturally emerge in any random group thrown together. Everyone can have an equal say to start with but very soon someone with more force of personality  making more sense gets listened to more. A leadership group rather than a single leader is normal to emerge. 80% of  females passed down their genes and only 20% of males. I suggest this is due to at least as much if not almost wholly to females choice and not the males at the top of the hierarchy enforcing it. It would be far too difficult for the few chiefs to prevent the females who fall in love with the rank and file eloping or 'cheating'. Evidence for this is available today, most college grads now are women and most new hiring now is also of women. There is not availability of equal numbers of college educated men. women do not accept the lower status men as marriageable therefore we have a rapid decline in marriage and a cliche of "where are all the good men, and why wont they commit?" While there are just as many men available as there ever were in the  western world, there are fewer keeping up with women in school, graduating university or gaining employment. They are still interested in women but it seems the women aspire to having males high in the hierarchy. The celibacy vs harem dichotomy appears to be the choice of the females.

They reproduced without contraception mostly, although the australian aborigines had vasectomies by flint knife. It seems unlikely that contraception was known and that they had any ability to limit their own numbers to not stretch resources except by infanticide.  To not overstretch resources in a modern transition would require big pharma to provide contraceptives. Calendar contraception doesnt work in my experience, whether there are herbs that can be used I dont really know. Then there is the question of size advantage in competition and the next question of cohesion, splintering and factions.

We are successful at reproducing because it is an innate instinct and the only thing which causes a decline or stabilization of population and birth rate is a hierarchy directing and enforcing such a China's 1 child policy or hedonism/materialism evident in Japan and the developed western worlds enlightened segment. Immigrants and our underclass have high birth rates and in the US there are also christian conservatives with at least a replacement rate. It is mainly career women who are not having children and this is not always by choice, as Karpatok pointed out people are selfish and want to reproduce despite the overpopulation problem.

Mohenjo-Daro that you mentioned is the  best we can hope for but is cyclical. That is the same Indo-Aryan civilization that you say provided us with patriarchy being the motivator for war in our history. Keep in mind that it corresponds with the Golden Age of King Janaka, which is analogous to the western ideal of  The Golden Age of King Arthur. The King was the top of a hierarchy.

The ancients of that civilazation already knew of the rise and fall of civilazations, detailing cycles (as karpatok also makes mention of) of Kali Yuga etc where the lessons are learned then forgotten then collapses. Muslim and Judaeo-Christian text also details the nature of the cycle from the tower of babel, Noah and the deluge, and predicted end times again. Most adherents of that religion associate our present predicament with 'end times'.

Just as King Arthur had the knights of the round table, Sir Gallahad and a Queen upheld as the ideal to aspire to, and these had  emphasis on excellence in moral obligation, the same is true for the Harrapan and Golden age of King Janaka etc. The brahmin caste was the highest (if u can call a caste system egalitarian) being the priest, yogi and philosopher occupation. This was the highest above warrior or businessman. Moral prescription was taken very seriously. This society was also patriarchal but with pair-bonding enshrined as ideal. The practices of treating women as chattel like cattle which the hunter-gatherers practiced was naturally eliminated. Hunter-gatherers always traded women for beads and bottles of booze when they came into contact with whites. Carrying off each others tribes women is aprt of their oral tradition of history. The Tasmanian aborigines were decimated by STD not war with white settlers and this was spread by the white whalers long before any settlers arrived.

Whether the big successful religions of the world including hinduism, christianity, and judaism reveal universal truths or are just a means of control is an open question. I believe the answer is both are true. What is notable is that when the Isrealites were still nomadic they were still committing genocide of rival tribes but enslaving the women, and in the case of midianites or where there was widespread STD keeping only virgin girls. I cant speak for what women can cope with, but I can safely say for myself at least I would rather die along with the rest of my tribe.

When civilizations formed from settling in a place where there were abundant resources and permanent dwellings were built we see that the religions prescribed pairbonding marriages  for the rank and file, and usually also the elite such as christianity and hinduism, but some also allowed polygamy for the wealthy eg islam. People now had to work a lot harder than previously spending whole days toiling wheras they had only spent 2 hrs a day 'working' to secure food as hunter gatherers. The prescription by religion and societal convention of monogamous marriage made a motivated male workforce, with women having plenty to do as well. People with plenty to eat also able to pass on their progeny which had previously been a privilege of only the patriarchy made a compliant society where many specializations flourished, from framers to soldiers to traders to tradesmen. Fornication was frowned on and adultery was as serious as murder. Males to females, youngers to elders etc all had strong obligations of rules and respect.

I dont think the writers of the bible or Koran or Hindu Vedas needed to be psychic or have divine revelation to write down what they saw as the trajectory of human civilization which they described as coming collapse, describing our present status. They dont spell out the role of debt dollar tyranny and fractional reserve banking necessitating exponential growth and consumerism but they did describe unrestrained hedonism featuring heavily in the end of our age before the fall of civilization as it went down the same well worn path in sodom, babel, babylon and rome. If we brought back vomiting with our orgies we could beat obesity and the bachelor tax to break the male marriage strike.







Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: right to left on December 26, 2014, 01:05:09 PM
As long as people were migratory moving to follow game and resources or warm weather with the seasons they could not be too materialistic as they could only keep what they could carry.
This is why anthropologists divide the category - hunter/gatherer between immediate return and delayed return hunter/gatherers.  Immediate return means that local resources are sparse and far between, so people have to be always ready to pack up and move to a new camp.  The burden of having to pick up and move frequently, would limit that desire to accumulate possessions.  But, even among groups that lived in areas with more abundant resources - like the Amazon Valley, where they stayed longer and traveled less distances, there still exists a strong social pressure towards conforming to group expectations.  There is a wide variety among human societies which had to adapt to wide ranges of climate, terrain, types and availability of food, and the study of modern hunter/gatherers is contaminated by the obvious facts that they all have had contact with modern people...mostly negative contact, and have been forced off of lands by farmers and others looking for resources. 

Quote
Who got to have the big head-dress? The chiefs. There is no evidence of being egalitarian by nature. Leaders naturally emerge in any random group thrown together. Everyone can have an equal say to start with but very soon someone with more force of personality  making more sense gets listened to more.
You are doing that Flintstonization of Prehistory I mentioned previously.  The "big head dress" is already an artifact not found in the cultures I am referring to -- the kinds of human societies that existed throughout the longest period of human history.  Even in the transition to highly organized, matrilocal horticultural societies like "Long House" natives of this continent, chiefs did not have the opportunity to become autocratic rulers, like the pharoes and assorted god-kings of Egypt and Sumeria!  Among the Iroquois tribes of upstate New York during the time of early American writers like Lewis Henry Morgan, he provided a detailed account of the political organization of the five tribes of the Confederacy.  Chiefs were selected for various tasks...they didn't have one chief in charge of everything, as the Europeans expected.  It is likely that the clan mothers of the tribe had more power than the chiefs, since they could remove a chief and select a new one.  Some North American nations may have had powerful hereditary leaders...like the Aztecs of Mexico..but that was the exception to the normal pattern of life before the European Conquest.

Leaders "naturally emerging" and dictating terms to others, is conflating the way we, or any similar modern highly hierarchical society functions, with the way people naturally function, who live in hunter/gatherer societies.  Let's just say, if our ancestors acted like the people in the "Survivor" episodes or similar "reality" TV shows, the human race would have gone extinct long ago!
Quote
They reproduced without contraception mostly, although the australian aborigines had vasectomies by flint knife. It seems unlikely that contraception was known and that they had any ability to limit their own numbers to not stretch resources except by infanticide.

Among modern hunter/gatherers, like the Yanomamo of the Amazon I mentioned previously,  the primary form of contraception is women refusing sex when they do not want to have more children.  It's not until we get to patriarchal societies, we end up with the extremely high fertility rates....because women have no say in the issue, and can be killed if they drink some abortifacient potion without their husband's permission! 

But, among matrilocal/matrilineal societies, women have fewer children than later agrarian societies!  Which proves that it's when men gain absolute power over women and control of when and who they will have sex with, that we end up with these problems of too many children to support!  The dismal Malthusian view of humanity is based on the expectation that patriarchal agrarian society is the norm.....and fortunately it is not!  But, what we have today is a conflict between "traditionalists" who are trying to restore patriarchy, and modern industrial society, which indirectly (I don't believe deliberately) liberated women from the demands of high fertility for other economic reasons...not any genuine concern for the wellbeing of the female half of the population.  But, it's better than Saudi Arabia....or the typical Mormon compound...take your pick!

Quote
Mohenjo-Daro that you mentioned is the  best we can hope for but is cyclical. That is the same Indo-Aryan civilization that you say provided us with patriarchy being the motivator for war in our history. Keep in mind that it corresponds with the Golden Age of King Janaka, which is analogous to the western ideal of  The Golden Age of King Arthur. The King was the top of a hierarchy.
We don't know how Mohenjo Daro was organized politically, let alone whether or not they had kings and queens!  There's no palace or statues of any figure that might have been a king...similar to what was dug up in Sumer or Egypt.  We assume they had some form of political organization during the early Bronze Age period when these vibrant trading cities flourished along the Indus Valley, but we have no idea how it was done! How or why they had a uniform design for: houses, city streets, statues and other art work, even the bricks used for construction were all of equal size and design....but, how they did it will remain a mystery until someone finds something similar to the Rosetta Stone that translated Egyptian hieroglyphs into ancient Greek.

But, the beginnings of human history...from what we can discern about paleo-hunter-gatherers to pre-patriarchal agrarian societies, are what I am trying to focus on, because we know how the patriarchs and their slave-based civilizations and all-consuming materialism paved the way for the perfect storm of disasters we are heading into today.  But, I want to know how much of the mess is rooted in real human behaviour, and how much is a product of human adaptation to the kinds of societies and ways of living we've been stuck with since the early barbarian invasions.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Petty Tyrant on December 26, 2014, 06:16:12 PM

That is wishful thinking based on nothing but a sexist belief that matriarchy would be utopia. The hindu civilization and texts setting out beliefs and practices are over 5000 years old and are what you would call patriarchal.

5000 years ago homo sap were finishing off neaderthal who had existed for over 200 thousand years. Aggression and conquest and war over resources, were already present. This has always involved conquest of women in conflict where the facts are a matter of history and not speculation. It follows that in prehistoric times this was also the case.
First; we have no idea what happened to the Neanderthals! There is some evidence that Neanderthals and modern humans lived in the same general regions during the same time periods, but their population densities were very low, and actual contact was likely very infrequent.  The reasons why they died out appear to be more closely tied to being unable to adapt to the changes brought about at the end of the last ice age.

It is generally accepted they were wiped out by homos sap, if that happened at the end of the last ice age when changes made survival harder and competition for resources made humans do what they still do now, and have done throughout history, kill rival groups. Then we know that humans can be peaceful and not endanger themselves fighting unnecesarily but will do what they need to in order to survive. If homo sap could adapt to the changes  at the end of the ice age so could neanderthal.

Define "matriarchy."  Because patriarchal ancient Greek and Roman writers spun nightmarish stories of Amazon warriors cutting off the genitalia of captured men....likely mostly inspired by battlefield writings of their generals while off on distant military campaigns against nomadic Sarmatian And Scythian tribes in the Ukraine and the Caucasus.  According to the battlefield reports, the camps were mostly guarded and protected by sword and bow-wielding women, and even on the battlefields, Greek and Roman soldiers reported women warriors among the men...especially as archers...although the legend that Sarmation female archers burned off or cut off their right breasts to enhance their shooting ability has never been confirmed in any archaeological evidence.  Considering the dismal existence of women of all classes in Greece and Rome, some historians have wondered aloud over the years, if all of their emoting about amazons, may have arisen from some fears that their own women would rise up against them and act like these barbarian foreign women!

In more modern times, European explorers and colonists who arrived on North America's shores, described all of the horticultural "longhouse" natives as matriarchies, because the usual setup for family life was a long house under the headship of a clan mother - who was usually a grandmother, who's younger sisters and their husbands, as well as their daughters and their husbands, and all of their children collectively made up the common household.  The Euro's were also no doubt alarmed that any man who was considered disruptive, could be summarily 'divorced' if his wife gathered up his belongings and dumped them outside of the longhouse.  But no societies described by western writers as 'matriarchies'...including the natives of the "Amazon" Valley, were ever matriarchal in some sort of mirror image of patriarchal dominance.  What they represented was a balance of power between men and women - where men had control of certain functions, such as managing the hunts, dealing with other tribes...including decisions regarding warfare/ while women ran village life, growing food, snaring small game etc..  Many functions were shared, depending on cultural traditions, and larger - horticultural societies had more complex organization than small "immediate return" hunter/gatherer bands which had to move frequently.  But, the takeaway remains that any society that was matrilineal and matrilocal, ends up being called a matriarchy regardless of the internal dynamics of the society.

You have summed up what I mean by matriarchal, ie There are no matriarchal societies, the amazons are a myth although there are plenty of instances of female fighters especially when men are running short, and we use matriarchal to refer to tribes that have male chiefs but trace genealogy along maternal descent. You can be sure of who your mother is, I doubt they understood that mitochondrial DNA which is the energy source of every cell in our bodies is inherited from the mother only. We have a feminized society but that is different from matriarchal. People see Hillary Clinton as matriarchal because she stood by Bill through the sex scandal before she was a politician herself, that is her role model as a matriarch. This recaptures a lot of the moderate middle ground that is otherwise being driven toward the right by radical feminisms association with the Left. Where people stand on her politics and policies is another matter.


The Hindu sandskrit writings you reference, may have been patriarchal...but that's because they were written long after the first Harappan cities were established along the Indus River Valley.  We have no idea what the residents of Mohenjo Daro believed or felt about any of these issues, because their hieroglyphic writings have never been decyphered and interpreted!  What we do know about them comes from inference:
- identical houses indicate a lack or more likely a prevention against the creation of hierarchies, the lack of palaces would also be an indicator
- based on statues and other artwork, personal adornement may have been the only means to determine social status
- the planned design, including a waste removal sewer system, indicates a high level of planning in the creation of the City
- recent genetic evidence from archaelogical digs, tell us that women had greater genetic similarities than men - which would indicate that the men were marrying into their wive's households and living with their wife's relatives/ the opposite of modern patriarchal norms in the region.  That would be as much evidence as needed, that it was a matrilocal society.

Prison cells, barracks are all identical dwellings as are tenement 'projects', It is wrong to come from outside and use this as evidence of egalitarian ordering of society. Indians are as sure of that society being their golden age as americans are sure they know what Alcatraz was.

We know who the harappans were and still are. The indians-hindus. We know the religion describes as far back as the first Man.

What you say about women having greater genetic similarity does not make sense. It can only suggest that in a household a man had a lot of daughters. It has been a feature of Hindu civilization that the daughter leaves her parents house exactly as prescribed in the bible. This idea of marrying into a wifes household ends with the next generation anyway.


In summary, I would go with the conclusion of many anthropologists today, that you don't have the rise of patriarchies and patriarchal family organization until:
- men have the opportunity to control food production and distribution on their own without the input of women, and

Why was this not the case for hunter gatherers? Men did the hunting. Women also worked in fields in agriculture. In both cases men can  only control food by being bigger and stronger. They were already bigger and stronger before they began agriculture.


- there is a realization of some theory of individual paternity.  It seems like a no-brainer today, but it wasn't until no more than 5000 years ago, that any culture had a concept of individual paternity of children.  Prior to that, the common belief is called Partible Paternity - a belief that the child contains some essence of every man a woman has had sex with.  An expectation of partible paternity removes the option of ownership of progeny and the rise of patriarchs and warlords that afflicted later civilization.

We do not know what people thought 5000 years ago. Aboriginal culture is 50'000 years old and we know they understood paternity. Even other animals seem to understand it, when a Lion takes over a pride he kills all the cubs not being his own. We have most 35-45 year old single or couples with career women spending a fortune on IVF instead of adopting because they want their own genetic legacy, nothing has changed.
Quote

 Are you suggesting that the bibles emphasis on long lists of genealogies going back to the first man is a recently invented substitute for a list of begats by mothers? In the indigenous tribes where the recognition that you can be sure of who a mother is but not who a father is, the leaders were still men and women were still offered without choice as gifts and peace offerings or in exchange for baubles etc.
Do you believe any portion of biblical chronologies is based in fact?  The geneologies of Matthew and Luke don't even match up!

I was talking about the Old Testament long lists of genealogies. I dont know what discrepancy thee is in Mathew and Luke. The point is they focussed on paternity very carefully, mate guarding like my goat. Swinging only happened for some monkeys swinging from trees.


Have they not heard of the Walls of Jericho?
Several cities of Jericho were built over the same area as previous abandoned and destroyed cities. The first settlements did not have walls...like Catalhoyuk....and the later story mentioned in the Bible is based on mythology, not archaeological evidence.
Quote
Western religon is Christian and does not mention an Earth goddess. God also originally walked on earth according to the Old Testament.
An ancient statue discovered in Palestine, contains a reference to "Yahweh and his queen "Asheroth."  Asheroth was the supreme goddess of that era - a story completely excised from the Judaic writings afterwards.  The fact that Judeochristian tradition could have a divine father, with no mother, tells us that the religion transitioned to a state where the mother goddess was completely removed, but was part of the original religions.
Quote

From that one piece of evidence we dont know if yahweh might have taken a human woman for a queen. Is it a statue of the queen Asheroth as well and does she appear human? The problem is the framing is patriarchal again making it sound as though she were subordinate.

I do find it strange that only homo saps have evolved far far above any other animal in intelligence except perhaps dolphins and whales but we dont know really what they know. We know that our development has taken sudden leaps and not slowl evolved. The best explanation to me for the fact we dont have super dogs or cats keeping monkeys as pets and inventing things is that we are genetically engineered. This has all been carefully studied by people who include Yahweh as another name for Marduk or Quetzcoatl, one of two rival gods who handed us civilization, built the pyramids etc. An open question IMO

I agree generally, however there is evidence of species being hunted to extinction pre-civilization.
Actually,  no there isn't!  Because the claims that some megafauna of North America were hunted to the extinction by the Amerindians was based on coincidence and little else.  Modern paleontologists believe disease and changing environment caused these extinctions, rather than the move of hunters across the Plains.  The Mastodons are the latest example of new evidence revising prior narratives, as it is now realized that the mastodons were not contemporaries of the mammoths, and died out during the last ice age of the Pleistocene/ whereas the mammoths had become so highly specialized for ice age conditions that they went extinct after the rapid warmup of the Holocene.

Considering what the new arrivals to the Americas had for weapons, it's laughable that they could have killed off some of these creatures...such as the Giant Ground Sloths of South America: picture a giant squirrel about 20 feet tall that literally eats trees! and that is the giant sloth.  Now, imagine a bunch of guys with spears trying to go up and take him down! That would have been a more formidable challenge than the Wooly Mammoth...which could be stampeded and didn't have hands to grasp with or throw large projectiles.  Disease and a shortage of trees, would have been the only concerns for the giant sloth!  There would have been no predators, including saber-tooth cats and human hunters, who would have been equipped to take them on!
Quote

That makes sense. I was almost killed by stampeding elephants in Kenya knockin over trees as they gathered momentum running alongside the car until we got away, and I doubt any early humans really tried to take on the wooly mammoth or other same size megafauna.


The underlying dynamic today has not changed at all from what it has always been, evidenced by the telling term "presented to the women". There is  no reproduction going on if women are not wooed with demonstrations of competence as providers and/or genetic fitness to reproduce. Women are turned on by big biceps because it signals in the female brain that developed over a million years that the guy can probably throw a spear further and faster than the guy going out of his way to emasculate himself to appease feminists. He looks like he can throw that spear at big game or an enemy threat, to both provide and protect.

Today he presents the women his paycheck. The boss may have divided up the profit to all the emloyees before taking it home too. Being the boss also is an extra turn on and can compensate for being flabby or ugly in presenting a bigger paycheck to the women. Today if he does not present his paycheck in entirety he is guilty of financial abuse and domestic violence and can lose his home and children, if she so chooses. [/color]
What you are describing here is a presentation of ancient cultures following modern cultural thinking....something anthropologist - Christopher Ryan calls the "Flintstonization" of prehistory.  This is, in a nutshell, his primary criticism of evolutionary psychology: they take modern norms and expectations, and then look for evolutionary origins of these behaviours.  Ryan and many other researchers who spent time studying modern hunter/gatherers that still remained relatively uncontaminated by modern culture and understandings, still carried the belief in "partible" paternity I mentioned earlier.  So, all of this talk of the "man with the biggest muscles" or the "biggest paycheques" whatever, are traditions that are based on adaptive human behaviours NOT any sort of hardwired evolutionary behaviours we would all have in common!

 There is no reason NOT to look for modern behavior and see why it is advantageous and developed. The modern cultural conditioning is the fat acceptance movement. there have been 70% of american males obese or overweight for long enough for the entire younger generation to accept that as the norm now haveing never seen a time when most people being slim. BBW (which I guess stands for Big Beautiful Women) remains only a fringe fetish. The stripper at the bucks party has a hip to waist ratio advantageuos to successful reproduction. The stripper at the hens night has big muscles that signal ability to provide and protect over the last million years. Now protection is a function of the state, the job of the police and provision is financial not food directly. Yet the arousal triggered by physical attributes conducive to survival pre-modern sedentary wage slavery remain. Marrying money is a modern behavior.

Belief in partible paternity in some tribes does not tell us anything about attraction. I take it the chiefs of these tribes are male and are treating the women like prostitutes who must take all comers. This is good in the sense that unnatractive men in the tribe are not sex starved. Now Im going to flinstonize for real and suggest that today gang rape is considered a traumatic experience for women and even criminal for good reason and this is no ideal. soe tasmanian aboriginal women definitely didnt like it because they waited until the white men she had to have sex with were asleep then stole all their guns and took them back to her tribe and taught them how to use them, then led the massacre of the whites.

It gets even worse when you consider that cuckolding is self-reported as a worse possibility for men than rape. I have heard it reported that the hippies of free love fame failed and gave up the communes largely because of sexual jealousies. Women release oxytocin promoting pair-bonding post coital for a reason.







Quick evidence could be found in recent sociology articles about how younger professional women are pairing off with men who are either their age or younger, and NOT with older men.  The reasons are obvious: a young woman who has her own income, is not completely dependent on the income of her future husband, which had been the cultural norm until recently.

I hope the sociology articles are not huffington post or jezebel etc, which are always talking about women as though they are all high flyers and ignore that many are cashiers and store clerks, delivery drivers, waitresses etc. The data from dating websites shows that men of all ages send a lot of messages to the youngest women 18-25 and women consistently message men 10 years older than themselves. Is it a coincidence that women are most reproductively fertile when younger but men can reproduce much later and usually can provide better and be more mature and stable as they get older too?

Also I think its been quite normal for people to pair off if we are talking about long term and not just hooking up with people around their own age. Older men with younger won has been a lot more common than the opposite I admit, but not to the point that its not normal for people around the same age which I think is the most common.  I wonder if many of these men who are significantly younger than the already young professional women are in the military which is one of the last steady sources of employment for high school grads. They are notorious for proposing marriage with women they met a month ago before being deployed.







When it comes to things like "muscles," some women like guys with big muscles/others don't.  The introduction of porn in modern culture has also led to some young women using penis size as one of the major determining factors for choosing a mate...and that one likely has a lot of guys nervous and insecure these days!

The Yanomami tribal women of Southern Venezuela in the Amazon Valley...who have that concept of partible paternity, deliberately seek out a number of different sexual partners for all sorts of different qualities they appreciate and want to provide for the child they are trying to conceive....that sexual strategy could better explain the biological fact that women take a lot longer to reach orgasm than men, and have multiple orgasms....which we don't obviously....so, monogamy itself, looks like a recent adaptation that we have had to make because of modern culture.

This would not help if she sleeps with different men on different nights but only if it is in succession. At least here it is her own choice.

Quote
Catherine the Great, Margaret Thatcher, Angela Merkel or Hillary Clinton, Cristine Lagarde and Janet Yellen do war and destruction as hard as any of the patriarchy.

All these bitches you list here, are women who have/or had come to power in a man's world, and learn how to play by men's rules!  As a result, these women are more aggressive and more dangerous than the surrounding men who they see as possible competitors, because they have to show themselves as more masculine than any man....may they all burn in hell!

A truly gender-equal society would have equal representation from men and women (something the Iroquois tribes were close to) in all levels of society - politics and economic leadership.  At that point, the style of government of a female leader might be better representative of women in government.

[/quote]
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: JRM on December 27, 2014, 09:00:25 AM
There are very good thermodynamic arguments for why it played out as it did, which we have discussed at length here periodically.  Basically, living organisms are hardwired to maximize thermodynamic potentials, which means using up whatever energy you have available as fast as you can.
RE

The relevant "living organisms" here are Homo sapiens sapiens, a.k.a., modern humans -- for it is only the modern human which has initiated the enormous biospheric disruptions which we call the Anthropocene epoch. -  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropocene (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropocene) - Almost all of the significant disruptions of the Anthropocene have occurred since the advent of industrialism - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industrial_Revolution (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industrial_Revolution) -, with the worst part of it occurring over the last century.

It may or may not be true that other-than-human animals are compelled rather deterministically to "maximise thermodynamic potentials,"  due to their probable lack of capacity to make deliberate and conscious choices about their energy use.  But humans, both individually and collectively, can make choices. We are not  automatons - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automaton (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automaton) - at least not until we've been subjected to the "education" (schooling) and media (propaganda) of the industrial system. 

The Ascent of Humanity
Charles Eisenstein
Chapter V: The World under Control
Molding Minds
http://www.ascentofhumanity.com/chapter5-6.php (http://www.ascentofhumanity.com/chapter5-6.php)


 - - - - - - - - - -


"Thermodynamic determinism" is just the sort of belief the Machine / System would have us embrace as if it were a natural fact as basic and unalterable as Newton's laws of motion.  - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton%27s_laws_of_motion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton%27s_laws_of_motion)

Thermodynamic determinism is also very handy as an excuse for living 60-80 miles from where you work, and commuting both directions each weekday. It is as good an excuse for why you must fly off to vacations in Tahiti and Paris, or dwell in a five thousand square foot house.  You can't help it. It's in your nature as a biological organism.

Go to sleep. It's alriight. Go back to sleep.

https://www.google.com/search?q=%22barcode%22+neck+tattoo&biw=1280&bih=679&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=x_OeVLHGD9DdoAS4j4KoAw&ved=0CCAQsAQ (https://www.google.com/search?q=%22barcode%22+neck+tattoo&biw=1280&bih=679&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=x_OeVLHGD9DdoAS4j4KoAw&ved=0CCAQsAQ)

Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: JRM on December 27, 2014, 09:58:44 AM
I don't think that any useful transition to a better world can be made without forcing and prodding the transition with incentives and disincentives.  I just don't buy any sort of 'spiritual' transition happening by something as subjective as changing minds.

Socially/culturally proscribed and prescribed "incentives" and "disincentives" presently do have some marginal positive influence (a minor and ultimately irrelevant one) on the rate at which modern industrial humanity is devouring and destroying the biosphere in pursuit of "wealth," and this approach has been advocated and employed (marginally) for decades.  I would diagnose this basic failure as I diagnose all failures of modern politics: We simply do not have an informed and engaged citizenry; instead we have a majority population who have been "educated" -- i.e., propagandized, enculturated to conformity ["well adjusted"] to the automaton of industrial "civilization". 

This automaton is a kind of superorganism - http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/superorganism (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/superorganism) - which has been living parasitically on humanity and the biosphere.  It controls our social and political life, not us. It will allow us to place only a few minor and ultimately irrelevant incentives and disincentives in place, for the purpose of mollifying any significant resistance to its unconscious, mechanical agenda: to consume everything in the pursuit of more and more money-power; to maximize "economic 'productivity'".... Just as this Machine finds it most effective and useful to its purposes to engender in its "citizens" a false belief that it's nation states are "democratic," it prefers us to believe that our desires and "needs" arise from within our own human nature -- our free will, our own breasts. For as soon as we realize we are prisoners of its agenda, not our own, we would rebel, resist, renew....

It is unconscious, this Machine, yes. And it feeds on our human unconsciousness. It cannot live in our awakeness, which is its only toxic enemy.


It wants us to "force" and "prod," because it needs us to doubt our own human freedom and goodness.

It needs our sleep.


 - - - - - -

For some of the back story on why I say so, see:

The Ascent of Humanity
Charles Eisenstein
Chapter V: The World under Control
http://ascentofhumanity.com/chapter5-0.php (http://ascentofhumanity.com/chapter5-0.php)
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: monsta666 on December 27, 2014, 10:08:44 AM
I prefer not see this type of issue as thermodynamic potential maximization as using such terms makes the topic too abstract and not accessible to a lot of people. The way I understand how this idea can be held to be true is if we focus on what man's main drives are. To me the two chief goals of man (like all animals) is to reproduce AND to increase prosperity. To increase prosperity tends to mean following a hedonistic model where a person minimises the amount of work/pain they undertake while at the same time maximising the amount pleasure they receive in life. Now I understand I am making a generalisation here as not all people follow those prerogatives but I feel it is safe to say the majority of people exercise those primal urges.

When we reproduce we require more resources and energy to support a growing population and to increase prosperity we limit the amount of energy we expend internally while maximizing our pleasure. To do these things we have externalised as much of our energy costs as possible. First it was animals now it is machines. In either case the same principle applies that the burden of physical labour has been shifted to other entities and this would be the main argument I would make in support of this idea.

Now none of this reasoning can justify wasteful use of energy but I do think it is important to understand the behavioural underpinnings that cause people to consume energy in copious amounts and why we tend to maximise the energy we have available. At the end of the day capitalism is just a means of enabling our behaviours to maximise consumption and it has persisted because it is the system that allows to do it most efficiently. Matters of fairness or conservation come second to our primary desires.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: JRM on December 27, 2014, 10:45:19 AM
To me the two chief goals of man (like all animals) is to reproduce AND to increase prosperity. To increase prosperity tends to mean following a hedonistic model where a person minimises the amount of work/pain they undertake while at the same time maximising the amount pleasure they receive in life. Now I understand I am making a generalisation here as not all people follow those prerogatives but I feel it is safe to say the majority of people exercise those primal urges.

My view is that much of what folks these days are calling "human nature" is in fact human nature under the influence of social and cultural processes.  Too often, folks tend to think that how we are now is mostly as a direct result of our human DNA (or our biology, more generally), while ever so much of what we are and how we are is as a result of social, cultural and historical processes--"nurture" more than "nature".

I'm not all that stuck on Maslow's hierarchy of needs (see attached image) as a "model," but something like this model is at play in the events of our culture. That is, one should properly expect that those "needs" which a culture recognize and honor as crucial and important will be well attended to, while those it finds less crucially important will be subsumed in some way by other "needs" which the culture emphasizes more.  - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow%27s_hierarchy_of_needs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow%27s_hierarchy_of_needs)

The hedonistic motivational system which you (monsta666) appeal to as descriptive of a genrealized human nature might be seen as included yet modified and  transcended when the third rung of Maslow's hierarchy of needs is fully integrated by a person and/or society/culture.

Belonging / "belongingness" needs can be attended to in various ways. One can achieve belonging through blind conformity to social norms and conventions (partially, insufficiently), in which one subsumes one's individuality.  But this is not TRUE belonging, and "self actualization" will be calling one to transcend (grow, evolve) -- and this will be a calling for the whole society / culture. In a healthier, more wholesome culture, "self actualization" (or something like it) will be acknowledged and honored. And so the third rung (belongingness)  will be less cheapend by pressures to conform to mere selfish and hedonistic "needs," or lesser (or lower) stages of personal development.

A society or culture evolves with its people. Its people evolve with the culture.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: JRM on December 27, 2014, 11:12:54 AM
Maybe, if civilization never transitioned to patriarchies and separation from nature, we would have taken a lot longer to develop and may have never developed the kind of technological societies we have today....but, at least it is more likely that the world would be survivable today!

What does this word, "develop," refer to here?

I can't read or hear words like "development," "progress," "success," or "wealth" without wondering what the speaker or writer has in mind as descriptive of these terms' intended meaning.

Before it became increasingly apparent that the mid-twentieth century's dominant paradigm of  "development," "progress," "success," or "wealth" was both bankrupt and obsolete, we were all expected to have a kind of GeeWhiz--The Future picture of what these terms mean. Now we have to radically revise what these terms refer to, or play Make Believe or Pretend.

Gee Whiz--The Future!
http://www.ascentofhumanity.com/chapter1-1.php (http://www.ascentofhumanity.com/chapter1-1.php)

http://www.youtube.com/v/2wviYuKDlKs?feature=player_embedded
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Petty Tyrant on December 27, 2014, 02:18:22 PM


My view is that much of what folks these days are calling "human nature" is in fact human nature under the influence of social and cultural processes.  Too often, folks tend to think that how we are now is mostly as a direct result of our human DNA (or our biology, more generally), while ever so much of what we are and how we are is as a result of social, cultural and historical processes--"nurture" more than "nature".

Can you explain why we have majority obesity yet it is still repulsive for reproduction?

Also Maslows hierarchy only applies fully to the type of people that know of it. The type of people who never look into self actualization have no need for it, monstas rule applies to almost everyone while maslows applies fully to the few. Rule 1 is not to try and understand other peoples behavior through your own motivation.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: JRM on December 27, 2014, 02:48:06 PM


My view is that much of what folks these days are calling "human nature" is in fact human nature under the influence of social and cultural processes.  Too often, folks tend to think that how we are now is mostly as a direct result of our human DNA (or our biology, more generally), while ever so much of what we are and how we are is as a result of social, cultural and historical processes--"nurture" more than "nature".

Can you explain why we have majority obesity yet it is still repulsive for reproduction?

Increased access to, and consumption of, energy-dense foods combined with institutionally and cultural-historiclally driven declines in physical activity -- i.e., "couch potato effect".

Also Maslows hierarchy only applies fully to the type of people that know of it. The type of people who never look into self actualization have no need for it, monstas rule applies to almost everyone while maslows applies fully to the few. Rule 1 is not to try and understand other peoples behavior through your own motivation.

Alternatively, we could say that intrinsic or innate impulses ("psychic energy") toward self-actualization, along with other items higher up Maslow's hierarchy, are often redirected into motivations lower down the hierarchy as a result of a pervasive cultural story line which favors interpretations of human motivation which situate all human motivation at the base of Maslow's chart.  In other words, the impulse to self-actualization can be re-directed away from self-actualization by cultural and social conditions which do not favor or reward self-actualization and other "higher" needs on that chart.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: RE on December 27, 2014, 02:53:37 PM
It may or may not be true that other-than-human animals are compelled rather deterministically to "maximise thermodynamic potentials,"  due to their probable lack of capacity to make deliberate and conscious choices about their energy use.  But humans, both individually and collectively, can make choices. We are not  automatons - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automaton (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automaton) - at least not until we've been subjected to the "education" (schooling) and media (propaganda) of the industrial system. 

There are two types of intelligence at work here, the intelligence of the individual, and the intelligence of the network of individuals.  They aren't the same thing.

For instance, in the case of Honey Bees, the individual Bee has just about Zero intelligence by typical definition of the word, but the Hive of Bees as a whole has very identifiable intelligence operating through the network of Bees, in that case the network intelligence is greater than the individual intelligence.

In the case of HomoSap, the network only functions intelligently up to a certain size, about Dunbar's Number of 150.  After this, the larger the network, the less intelligently it operates.  Our societies grew in size because that is how you best could continue to reproduce, the smaller societies got wiped out.  However, once they started getting bigger, they got Dumb & Dumber.  Collectively, we have about NO CHOICES now, and even our so-called "Leaders" don't have choices, they are constrained by other parts of the network that limit their ability to change the direction of where we are going.

This doesn't mean you as an individual can't make choices and operate intelligently outside the network, you are not a Honey Bee.  It does mean though that at least until the network collapses, it is not possible for any individual to make a change in how the network makes decisions.

Is this a deterministic model?  Yes.  It reflects how the population of HomoSap grew so large, and why now collectively we operate with the network intelligence no greater than Yeast in a Vat of Sugar, metabolizing all the energy available until it is available no more.

RE
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Petty Tyrant on December 27, 2014, 04:39:00 PM


My view is that much of what folks these days are calling "human nature" is in fact human nature under the influence of social and cultural processes.  Too often, folks tend to think that how we are now is mostly as a direct result of our human DNA (or our biology, more generally), while ever so much of what we are and how we are is as a result of social, cultural and historical processes--"nurture" more than "nature".

Can you explain why we have majority obesity yet it is still repulsive for reproduction?

Increased access to, and consumption of, energy-dense foods combined with institutionally and cultural-historiclally driven declines in physical activity -- i.e., "couch potato effect".

In other words monsters pleasure principle at work, but I was asking why if you attribute cultural conditioning as the cause of all our behavior why when obesity is the norm roughly 70% of adult population, it is still repulsive for reproductive purposes.

Also Maslows hierarchy only applies fully to the type of people that know of it. The type of people who never look into self actualization have no need for it, monstas rule applies to almost everyone while maslows applies fully to the few. Rule 1 is not to try and understand other peoples behavior through your own motivation.

Alternatively, we could say that intrinsic or innate impulses ("psychic energy") toward self-actualization, along with other items higher up Maslow's hierarchy, are often redirected into motivations lower down the hierarchy as a result of a pervasive cultural story line which favors interpretations of human motivation which situate all human motivation at the base of Maslow's chart.  In other words, the impulse to self-actualization can be re-directed away from self-actualization by cultural and social conditions which do not favor or reward self-actualization and other "higher" needs on that chart.

That is a rejection of maslows theory. You are saying people have lower needs fully satiated and do not NEED to self actualize. They have access to maslows theory and monasteries as well as junk food and junk entertainment. They google what they are interested in which might be more shies and clothes to add to a collection or more horsepower for an engine they have nowhere to use. The self help section in the bookstore is as culturally accessible as the cookbooks and collectors handbook of classic cars.

Tell people who avoid any intellectual and spiritual pursuit they have 6 months to live or their family died in a car crash and a good many will suddenly take an interest they never had before in whats it REALLY all about? Start spouting philosophical observations they never cared for before, but the culture around them never changed.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: monsta666 on December 27, 2014, 04:40:29 PM
My view is that much of what folks these days are calling "human nature" is in fact human nature under the influence of social and cultural processes.  Too often, folks tend to think that how we are now is mostly as a direct result of our human DNA (or our biology, more generally), while ever so much of what we are and how we are is as a result of social, cultural and historical processes--"nurture" more than "nature".

I would agree that what we think of as human nature are often just cultural norms influencing us. What we tend to think of absolutes in terms of human behaviour is likely much more malleable than what we like to admit and our perceptions are highly influenced by society. The example that springs to mind when it comes to basic instincts is that of attraction. Much is said about thin people or larger breasts and the general standards of beauty. These beliefs are often rationalised further by stating that our perception of beauty/lust is primal yet those things are, to a great extent, artefacts to what our culture tells us is attractive.
 
So in summary I take your point that what we consider as human nature may not be necessarily so. However what my explanation tried to cover is the thermodynamic argument that all animals tend to maximise energy gradients. To me the behaviour I described would offer a decent explanation for this phenomenon (assuming the phenomenon is true). The area of human nature that is most likely to be malleable is the desire for prosperity. In western society I feel much of our thoughts and beliefs to what is prosperity, happiness and success are is largely determined by our capacity to consume. For example to be a successful and functioning member of society one must generally strive to have a high income. The more society is earning on the whole the more developed it is or so the saying goes. If incomes are not rising then it is deemed that on some level society is failing. That is the general wisdom and it has prevailed for so long that these ideas are cemented in our collective psyche.

However this idea of prosperity is not the only way of achieving satisfaction and it is very possible we can obtain happiness more effectively through means that does not involve maximising consumption. We could for example achieve happiness if a greater emphasis was placed on forming long-standing relationships with people and only worked the minimum amount to cover our basic needs. Produce goods more efficiently and only produce what you strictly need rather than what we want. The rest of our time would be allocated to achieving our other higher needs.

With that said, I do think people show a tendency for hedonism regardless of what paradigm we follow. There will be an element where people wish to maximise pleasure and minimise suffering. This idea can be directed so as not to maximise consumption but on some level it needs to be managed. Also our desire to find suitable partners means it is highly possible there will be some conspicuous consumption. Again this behaviour can be managed or even discouraged. The issue with our society however is greed is not discouraged rather it is actively encouraged and this has created problems.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: monsta666 on December 27, 2014, 04:57:32 PM
That is a rejection of maslows theory. You are saying people have lower needs fully satiated and do not NEED to self actualize. They have access to maslows theory and monasteries as well as junk food and junk entertainment. They google what they are interested in which might be more shies and clothes to add to a collection or more horsepower for an engine they have nowhere to use. The self help section in the bookstore is as culturally accessible as the cookbooks and collectors handbook of classic cars.

That is not what JRM is saying or at least that is not how I took it to mean. I believe what is happening is the messages given by society causes individuals to not pursue self-actualisation as the message is to consume. Instead of spending time finding out needs that keep you really happy you are continually told to consume items that you do not need. Thus you over indulge in your lower order needs at the expense of higher needs and never achieve happiness. If society then sends the message a little more consumption will lead to happiness then you will keep fulfilling your lower needs even if it does nothing to your overall well-being. If we had a society that made a bigger thing for self-actualisation then people would be more happy. That I believe is the argument JRM makes.

As for my personal opinion I am not sure if people need self-actualisation to gain happiness but I feel strong social networks with a large support group is something a lot of people need to lead a fulfilling life. Off course we cannot say this is needed for everyone but I feel the majority of people would be happier under such a setting. The group needs to be big enough to form numerous relationships but not so big that achieving meaningful relationships becomes overly difficult.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Petty Tyrant on December 27, 2014, 05:07:09 PM


I would agree that what we think of as human nature are often just cultural norms influencing us. What we tend to think of absolutes in terms of human behaviour is likely much more malleable than what we like to admit and our perceptions are highly influenced by society. The example that springs to mind when it comes to basic instincts is that of attraction. Much is said about thin people or larger breasts and the general standards of beauty. These beliefs are often rationalised further by stating that our perception of beauty/lust is primal yet those things are, to a great extent, artefacts to what our culture tells us is attractive.
 

The fashion industry promotes stick thin women. We have a failed fat acceptance movement. Womens magazines yearly have their decided most beautiful woman who is always about 45.

These cultural do not influence what the majority of males are attracted to which is a rejection of all of those. Mens magazines take polls and the votes always come in highly in favour of figures like J-Lo and Kim K. These are the all important fertility factors. The same principles hold true for females attraction, the members of Manpower demonstrate a value which is useless in todays culture except for maybe opening jars but gave the best chances for reproductive success  over the past million years. The Full Monty is fantasy.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Petty Tyrant on December 27, 2014, 05:25:30 PM
That is a rejection of maslows theory. You are saying people have lower needs fully satiated and do not NEED to self actualize. They have access to maslows theory and monasteries as well as junk food and junk entertainment. They google what they are interested in which might be more shies and clothes to add to a collection or more horsepower for an engine they have nowhere to use. The self help section in the bookstore is as culturally accessible as the cookbooks and collectors handbook of classic cars.

That is not what JRM is saying or at least that is not how I took it to mean. I believe what is happening is the messages given by society causes individuals to not pursue self-actualisation as the message is to consume. Instead of spending time finding out needs that keep you really happy you are continually told to consume items that you do not need. Thus you over indulge in your lower order needs at the expense of higher needs and never achieve happiness. If society then sends the message a little more consumption will lead to happiness then you will keep fulfilling your lower needs even if it does nothing to your overall well-being. If we had a society that made a bigger thing for self-actualisation then people would be more happy. That I believe is the argument JRM makes.

As for my personal opinion I am not sure if people need self-actualisation to gain happiness but I feel strong social networks with a large support group is something a lot of people need to lead a fulfilling life. Off course we cannot say this is needed for everyone but I feel the majority of people would be happier under such a setting. The group needs to be big enough to form numerous relationships but not so big that achieving meaningful relationships becomes overly difficult.

Yes, that is a rejection of Maslows theory. Find food, good I got food. Next find fuck, good I got a fuck. Next, find God. 

Abraham maslow developed his theory at the height of consumer culture without any caveats. A small ninority of people are interested in self actualization. As I said the self-help section is as accesible as any other interest. Self atualization becomes a best selling cult in te  middle of consumer culture if you present it as a means to get more comfortable with less work hence a zillion books and CD sets of Rhinda Byrnes The Secret sold.

Meanwhile in communist countries where christianity carries heavy penalties the absolute unquenchable need to self actualise in a few people forces them to read bibles when they could be sent to siberia for it.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: JoeP on December 27, 2014, 05:27:53 PM

The fashion industry promotes stick thin women. We have a failed fat acceptance movement. Womens magazines yearly have their decided most beautiful woman who is always about 45.

These cultural do not influence what the majority of males are attracted to which is a rejection of all of those. Mens magazines take polls and the votes always come in highly in favour of figures like J-Lo and Kim K. These are the all important fertility factors.


There are many benefits to a "weightier" woman. I would normally use the description "curvy", but to be more on point  - I chose "weightier". Better designed for love pats?  Something to hold onto? Versus bone? 
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Petty Tyrant on December 27, 2014, 05:54:07 PM

The fashion industry promotes stick thin women. We have a failed fat acceptance movement. Womens magazines yearly have their decided most beautiful woman who is always about 45.

These cultural do not influence what the majority of males are attracted to which is a rejection of all of those. Mens magazines take polls and the votes always come in highly in favour of figures like J-Lo and Kim K. These are the all important fertility factors.


There are many benefits to a "weightier" woman. I would normally use the description "curvy", but to be more on point  - I chose "weightier". Better designed for love pats?  Something to hold onto? Versus bone?

Because its the best pot to plant your seed in. Pregnancy draws on all the reserve tissues on a womans body, that is why a womans healthy bodyfat about 25% is double that of men. In boxing u will see that the guy who struggles to make the weight and is very lean struggles in the late rounds compared to someone like muhammed ali who carried a nice 12-13% bodyfat and could keep going hard in the 12th, 13th by drawing on that energy reserve.

Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: JoeP on December 27, 2014, 06:03:51 PM

The fashion industry promotes stick thin women. We have a failed fat acceptance movement. Womens magazines yearly have their decided most beautiful woman who is always about 45.

These cultural do not influence what the majority of males are attracted to which is a rejection of all of those. Mens magazines take polls and the votes always come in highly in favour of figures like J-Lo and Kim K. These are the all important fertility factors.


There are many benefits to a "weightier" woman. I would normally use the description "curvy", but to be more on point  - I chose "weightier". Better designed for love pats?  Something to hold onto? Versus bone?

Because its the best pot to plant your seed in. Pregnancy draws on all the reserve tissues on a womans body, that is why a womans healthy bodyfat about 25% is double that of men. In boxing u will see that the guy who struggles to make the weight and is very lean struggles in the late rounds compared to someone like muhammed ali who carried a nice 10-11% bodyfat and could keep going hard in the 12th, 13th by drawing on that energy reserve.

You are SPOT ON in regard to Ali.  I saw all his fights on TV as a kid.  Didn't know a part of his success was due to having the complete super peak package in high performance mode at exactly FIGHT TIME. I think you're correct.
 
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: right to left on December 27, 2014, 11:10:59 PM

Because its the best pot to plant your seed in. Pregnancy draws on all the reserve tissues on a womans body, that is why a womans healthy bodyfat about 25% is double that of men. In boxing u will see that the guy who struggles to make the weight and is very lean struggles in the late rounds compared to someone like muhammed ali who carried a nice 10-11% bodyfat and could keep going hard in the 12th, 13th by drawing on that energy reserve.

You are SPOT ON in regard to Ali.  I saw all his fights on TV as a kid.  Didn't know a part of his success was due to having the complete super peak package in high performance mode at exactly FIGHT TIME. I think you're correct.
This might be hairsplitting - but the only time in his boxing career that Ali may have had 10% body fat, would have been during the 60's, when he was in his prime.   The Ali who came back after refusing the Vietnam War in the 70's, did not train diligently and kept gaining weight, and getting slower....and getting hit...always taking more punches than he threw in return.  His game plan in those later fights was to dog it through the first 2 minutes of each round, and try to win the last minute of each round....because that's all the judges and the fans would remember.  It worked most of the time, until the age, too many punches, and too much weight, started taking their toll on him.

From a physiology perspective, you're likely right on about the reasons for women having more body fat than men being related to pregnancy.  A quick point of reference would be the numbers of female athletes in endurance sports: distance running, triathalons etc., who stop having their periods during their competitive careers, and have to stop training and gain weight if they want to get pregnant later on in life.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: right to left on December 28, 2014, 02:18:54 AM
What you say about women having greater genetic similarity does not make sense. It can only suggest that in a household a man had a lot of daughters. It has been a feature of Hindu civilization that the daughter leaves her parents house exactly as prescribed in the bible. This idea of marrying into a wifes household ends with the next generation anyway.
I looked it up, and the testing was done by examining the chemical composition of teeth of skeletons found in cemeteries of the ancient City of Harappa.  From a National Geographic article (http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2013/13/130425-indus-civilization-discoveries-harappa-archaeology-science/) commenting on two different recently published research articles:
Most likely the newcomers came to Harappa from elsewhere in the far-flung Indus area, perhaps for trade. But they may also have come to cut another kind of deal—marriage. Many of the outsiders, surprisingly, are men buried near women native to Harappa. The findings are preliminary, but they suggest men moved in with their brides, even though in South Asia women traditionally move to their husband's homes. Confirmation of these early results, says lead author Mark Kenoyer of the University of Wisconsin–Madison, would point to a "system where women were powerful."

The new study is pioneering, says Indus expert James Shaffer of Case Western Reserve University, and offers "one of the few real insights we have" into the structure of Harappan society. If the study is correct, Harappa's unusual gender roles could mean that social structure in the Indus region was radically different from that of other ancient cultures, Shaffer says. In Mesopotamia, for instance, ancient texts show that women were usually subordinate to men.



Why was this not the case for hunter gatherers? Men did the hunting. Women also worked in fields in agriculture. In both cases men can  only control food by being bigger and stronger. They were already bigger and stronger before they began agriculture.

It's only been in relatively recent history that anthropologists have tried to remove their prejudiced expectations from their work.  When a chemical analysis of teeth is done which can determine a lot about the subject's diet, they find that vegetation makes up much higher amounts of daily diet than meat consumption.  And even here, much of the "meat" consumed is insects and snaring small game.  Going out on hunts with the boys gets the focus of visiting anthropologists, and is given much greater significance than what the men actually bring back to camp in caloric value! When a carefully detailed set of records are kept, with regards to who provides the food for the community, it is invariably discovered that the women provide much more food than the men bring home....though bringing back big game is obviously more celebrated and given greater prestige. 

The men of most hunter/gatherer societies didn't have the luxury of creating a patriarchal tyranny even if they desired to.  A balance of power is maintained by the simple fact that the women are too important to ignore or disregard their desires.


We do not know what people thought 5000 years ago. Aboriginal culture is 50'000 years old and we know they understood paternity.
I doubt it!  I don't know how much their oral histories can tell us of what they thought about 50,000 years ago, but I doubt that they any clearer understanding of the fertilization process than any other pre-modern group.
Even other animals seem to understand it, when a Lion takes over a pride he kills all the cubs not being his own.
We are not lions!  And the male lion is just behaving according to instinct at an unconscious level....not thinking to himself 'I need to kill those cubs so I can have sex with her and have my own cubs.

 Are you suggesting that the bibles emphasis on long lists of genealogies going back to the first man is a recently invented substitute for a list of begats by mothers? In the indigenous tribes where the recognition that you can be sure of who a mother is but not who a father is, the leaders were still men and women were still offered without choice as gifts and peace offerings or in exchange for baubles etc.
Nothing in the Hebrew books was written down before the Exile and return from Babylon! What happened prior to that is mostly the subject of myth and flights of fancy.

A few legitimate Israeli archaeologists, such as Israel Finkelstein, created a storm of controversy that is ongoing, for making a real, objective analysis of the Flight to Egypt and return across the Sinai Desert (never happened), the Conquest of Canaan (never happened),  and declaring that most of the patriarchs mentioned in the Bible have no supporting evidence and are likely mythical creations.....no surprise that Finkelstein is considering ending his life's work as a professor of archeology in Israel and leaving the country for his own and his family's safety.

I was talking about the Old Testament long lists of genealogies. I dont know what discrepancy thee is in Mathew and Luke. The point is they focussed on paternity very carefully, mate guarding like my goat. Swinging only happened for some monkeys swinging from trees.
Like I've said many times already -- by the time we get to these bible stories, we are already talking about nomadic patriarchal societies that lived by raiding and plundering their neighbours.  I don't consider any books of the Bible - new or old, to be of much value when it comes to how people should live!  If I go to books like Numbers ch.33, I find passages describing rules regarding taking young girls from defeated tribes as concubines....the same bloody thing that all the Neocons are crapping about as they foam at the mouth about ISIS and what the Muslims are doing etc..  Where do you think they got the ideas from in the first place?

The Bible doesn't describe the kind of human societies that existed throughout most of human history, and those early hunter/gatherers are the kinds of societies we need to study and learn about, if we want to understand what is truly human nature, rather than what we do as a result of adaptive behaviours.


 There is no reason NOT to look for modern behavior and see why it is advantageous and developed. The modern cultural conditioning is the fat acceptance movement. there have been 70% of american males obese or overweight for long enough for the entire younger generation to accept that as the norm now haveing never seen a time when most people being slim. BBW (which I guess stands for Big Beautiful Women) remains only a fringe fetish. The stripper at the bucks party has a hip to waist ratio advantageuos to successful reproduction. The stripper at the hens night has big muscles that signal ability to provide and protect over the last million years. Now protection is a function of the state, the job of the police and provision is financial not food directly. Yet the arousal triggered by physical attributes conducive to survival pre-modern sedentary wage slavery remain. Marrying money is a modern behavior.

Belief in partible paternity in some tribes does not tell us anything about attraction. I take it the chiefs of these tribes are male and are treating the women like prostitutes who must take all comers. This is good in the sense that unnatractive men in the tribe are not sex starved. Now Im going to flinstonize for real and suggest that today gang rape is considered a traumatic experience for women and even criminal for good reason and this is no ideal. soe tasmanian aboriginal women definitely didnt like it because they waited until the white men she had to have sex with were asleep then stole all their guns and took them back to her tribe and taught them how to use them, then led the massacre of the whites.

It gets even worse when you consider that cuckolding is self-reported as a worse possibility for men than rape. I have heard it reported that the hippies of free love fame failed and gave up the communes largely because of sexual jealousies. Women release oxytocin promoting pair-bonding post coital for a reason.


There's so many apples and oranges jumbled up together here that I don't know where to begin!  There are aspects of sexual attraction that are hardwired into us because we unconsciously realize them to be signs of fertility: the 'hourglass' figure in women tells us about her fertility and her capabilities for birthing children; full lips - signifying higher estrogen levels; blonde hair - again higher estrogen levels because natural blondeness is often a secondary trait of a gene linked to higher estrogen production that first appeared 11,000 years ago.................and so far, I'm just talking about things men look for in women...............if we had a few women contributing here, we could get some feedback from the other side on what women find attractive in a man.   

When it comes to the details regarding body fat, there is a lot of variation here......some men prefer women who are thinner/others heavier, and the changes in depictions of females in artwork and photos and advertising in modern times, tell us that what is idealized is skewed by cultural expectations.  By today's standards, the Marilyn Monroe who posed for Playboy back in the 50's, would be considered too fat today by a lot of men.  Not only are the idealized females of today thinner, but they are also more muscular - having muscle definition....something you would never see before a number of female athletes of different sports started their lucrative sideline modelling careers!

Re: partible paternity - I never said this concept told us anything about attraction.  There is at least one conservative anthropologist....I forget the name...I think he's from Rutgers University...who claims that polyandry...which has also been much more widespread than previously acknowledged in anthropology literature....is a form of prostitution.  I don't know if he offers up much in evidence to back up a claim that would have to apply to cultures on every continent,  but without knowing, it's hard to determine beforehand how much of women having sex with large numbers of men wasn't some equivalent of gang rape......it would take some field work to determine the issue of consent...just like modern sexual relations!  The problem here is that primitive anthropology is fast becoming part of the science of archaeology, as hunter/gatherers are either facing extinction or being forced to abandon traditional ways of living.  It could end up as a subject that can no longer be definitively answered.   

What can be nailed down for certain is:

primitive hunter/gatherer societies were egalitarian to an extreme degree....actively preventing anyone from gaining advantage over others.

no patriarchal societies can be proven to have existed in archaeological records prior to 4000 years ago. 

patriarchy arises out of local economic conditions where men are able to take control of food production or food supplies.  The only hunter/gatherer groups that could fall under the category of enabling patriarchy would be those of the Far North, where almost all food had to be procured by men out on the hunt.  Even among the Inuit of the north, the men seemed to have to do some negotiating with the women, and did not wield the kind of power to buy women and sell daughters as we see in the Middle East or find in our Old Testament origins.

patriarchies are more aggressive and dependent on warfare to settle disputes with neighbouring tribes and nations, than the more egalitarian matrilocal societies that preceeded them.  Much of the reason may simply be because men see great risk, but great rewards from warfare, while women see too much risk and too little benefit for them.  In patriarchal societies, where women have little if any input into political decision-making, warfare becomes foreign policy!  In the Americas, at the arrival of the first Europeans,  many of the tribal nations that survived the diseases brought over from Europe....like the Iroquois...wee considered bloodthirsty and warlike by European writers.  But, the Iroquois warriors were limited to the degree that they could carry on their battles by the women's councils, who could/and often did order them to stop and return home.  That sure as hell is something we could use today, as the U.S. goes stumbling and bumbling its way towards starting a full scale war with the other country that has thousands of nuclear warheads.

We may not be able to realize the primitive communism of hunter/gatherers (something Frederich Engels tried to emulate when he read about Henry Louis Morgan's research),  but we have compiled enough sociological data to correlate equality with all of the positive personal and social indicators, while the increase in inequality makes for greater anxiety and unhappiness and declining social cohesion.  To me, that would indicate working towards a more equal society should be the goal, and all of the social darwinist crap we have absorbed from fans of unrestricted capitalism should be tossed in the scrap heap!

I hope the sociology articles are not huffington post or jezebel etc, which are always talking about women as though they are all high flyers and ignore that many are cashiers and store clerks, delivery drivers, waitresses etc. The data from dating websites shows that men of all ages send a lot of messages to the youngest women 18-25 and women consistently message men 10 years older than themselves. Is it a coincidence that women are most reproductively fertile when younger but men can reproduce much later and usually can provide better and be more mature and stable as they get older too?

Also I think its been quite normal for people to pair off if we are talking about long term and not just hooking up with people around their own age. Older men with younger won has been a lot more common than the opposite I admit, but not to the point that its not normal for people around the same age which I think is the most common.  I wonder if many of these men who are significantly younger than the already young professional women are in the military which is one of the last steady sources of employment for high school grads. They are notorious for proposing marriage with women they met a month ago before being deployed.

I can't find the original story I was looking for, but something similar - a study taken from data collected from online dating tells a similar picture....though much of their results are coming from those old cougars....who are likely financially secure, and are evaluating men on much the same basis than men do - sexual attraction:

Online Dating: Women Want Younger Men
(http://healthland.time.com/2013/06/13/online-dating-women-want-younger-men/)
When it comes to dating, there’s an unscientific, but prevailing opinion that older men want younger women and vice versa. Turns out, the opposite may be true for women on the online dating scene. Numbers culled from various dating sites have consistently shown both sexes prefer to date down the age spectrum rather than up.

AYI pulled data from its 68 million downloads and 20 million Facebook profiles to see which subscribers are making successful matches. It focused in on the 1 million recommended pairings in a specific population of 35,942 users ages 30 to 49. The surprising finding: a woman was  five times more likely to show interest in a man was five years her junior that one who was five years older. If only the men would catch on. Among the 26,434 men ages 30 to 49, 42% wouldn’t even consider a woman if she was older than him. However, if contacted by an older woman, men wouldn’t necessarily turn her down. The data shows that a man is only 22% less likely to respond to an older woman than a younger woman if she initiates contact.

What are some of the reasons for this? AYI analysts suspect that younger women are inundated by requests from older men and while that might once have had some appeal—in a marrying-for-wealth sort of way— it simply doesn’t anymore. A 2008 study published in the journal Psychology of Women Quarterly found that women who are 10 or more years older than their partner report more satisfaction and relationship commitment compared to women who are the same age or younger than their partner.




Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Surly1 on December 28, 2014, 05:52:46 AM

You are SPOT ON in regard to Ali.  I saw all his fights on TV as a kid.  Didn't know a part of his success was due to having the complete super peak package in high performance mode at exactly FIGHT TIME. I think you're correct.
This might be hairsplitting - but the only time in his boxing career that Ali may have had 10% body fat, would have been during the 60's, when he was in his prime.   The Ali who came back after refusing the Vietnam War in the 70's, did not train diligently and kept gaining weight, and getting slower....and getting hit...always taking more punches than he threw in return.  His game plan in those later fights was to dog it through the first 2 minutes of each round, and try to win the last minute of each round....because that's all the judges and the fans would remember.  It worked most of the time, until the age, too many punches, and too much weight, started taking their toll on him.

One of the great pleasures of my life is to have come of age at the time of the great heavyweights.  I distinctly remember listening to the first Ali Liston fight on the radio (!) as a kid in February, 1964.  their names resonate like those of ancient giants: Patterson, Archie Moore, Ken Norton, Joe Frazier, Ernie shavers, Cleveland Williams, Jerry Quarry, the colossal George Foreman… and at the head of the pack, the incomparable Ali.

 Many fine writers have been drawn to boxing.  Norman Mailer famously wrote about the fight in Zaire between Ali and Foreman which, having also engendered a concert and a film, has become the stuff of legend.  Author Joyce Carol Oates has written a remarkable book, "On Boxing," in which she brings a great subtlety to an analysis not only of Ali's style, but also to the meaning of his career in its social context...

Quote from: Oates
Other title defenses of Ali's, however, were hard-fought and legitimately won by the champion; brilliant displays of boxing to reach their zenith in November 1966 in a match with the veteran Cleveland Williams, as Ali, ever in motion, ever flicking his unerring left jab at his frustrated opponent, moving head and shoulders with the seemingly casual aplomb of a dancer, unleashing the Ali shuffle, knocked Williams down several times with multiple punches before knocking him out in the third round. What deadly grace, what lethal beauty in motion! And what a mystery Ali's quicksilver ring style would have been without slow-motion replays! In great displays of boxing, as in few other sports, the unaided eye is simply inadequate to catch, let alone register and interpret, crucial moves. If there is a single fight of Ali's that best exhibits his "float like a butterfly, sting like a bee" style, it's this fight with Cleveland Williams. And, unlike the great fights to come in the 1970s, this fight is short.

As to the change in Ali's style that RTL observes, there is this, as Oates observes the post-Vietnam-induction-refusal-and-internal-exile Ali:

After three and a half years of not boxing, though only twenty-nine, Ali was conspicuously slower and knew better than to dance away from his opponent; he would have to compensate for his lost agility with sheerly boxing (and punching) technique; he would have to train to take, and not exclusively give, punishment. That this was a deliberate strategy is important to note. As Ali said in an interview in 1975:

Quote from: Ali
I don't train like other boxers. For instance, I let my sparring partners try to beat up on me about eighty percent of the time. I go on the defense and take a couple of hits to the head and the body, which is good: You gotta condition your body and brain to take those shots, 'cause you're gonna get hit hard a couple of times in every fight. Meanwhile, I'm not gonna beat up on my sparring partners ... If I kill myself punching at them, it'll take too much out of me. When you're fightin' as much as I have lately, you're supposed to be boxin' and doin' something every day, but I can't dance and move every day like I should, because my body won't let me. So I have to stall my way through.

 If this sounds like a recipe for disaster it was also, for Ali, in thc short run at least, a recipe for success. Indeed, it is the game-plan for the remainder of Ali's career, the strategy that would win him two of his epic fights with Joe Frazier and the legendary Foreman fight in which, miraculously, or so it seems, the younger, stronger and seemingly more dangerous Foreman would punch himself out on Ali's stubborn body in eight rounds, to relinquish the heavyweight title another time to Ali. As Ali's doctor at that time, Ferdie Pacheco, said:

Quote from: Pacheco
Ali discovered something which was both very good and very bad. Very bad in that it led to the physical damage he suffered later in his career; very good in that it eventually got him back the championship. He discovered that he could take a punch.
And take punches Ali did, for the next six years.

RE used to post a  a short clip of George Foreman knocking down Joe Frazier with Cosell's immortal call, "Down Goes Fraziah!" I'll  leave you with this piece of video, showing Ali slipping 21 punches in 10 seconds during an exhibition fight staged during his three-year period of exile and banishment from boxing, imposed by the state in its fury for his refusal to fight Vietcong who as Ali said, "never called me "nigger:"

http://www.youtube.com/v/ezXbEL4hB7A
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: RE on December 28, 2014, 06:13:07 AM
Well, if we are going to get into fighting metaphors, I will go with James J. Braddock, the CINDERELLA MAN over Muhammed Ali.

http://www.youtube.com/v/G-ZJbAdw1Rw?feature=player_detailpage

Of course, that is the Hollywood version of this fight, but nevertheless, what Jim Braddock pulled off in the depths of the Great Depression is simply incredible.

RE
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: JRM on December 28, 2014, 10:40:08 AM

Yes, that is a rejection of Maslows theory. Find food, good I got food. Next find fuck, good I got a fuck. Next, find God. 

Abraham maslow developed his theory at the height of consumer culture without any caveats. A small minority of people are interested in self actualization.

I'm far from expert on Abraham Maslow's thought. But I'm pretty sure he believed that self actualization needs influenced people's lives--to some degree, or on some level--even before they have fully secured the various needs on the lower rungs. 

But as I said, I'm not stuck on Maslow's model or theory, but am only alluding to it as something which is in some way kindred to my own thought. I referenced Maslow only to convey my own idea, which is that (a) self-actualization need not be a conscious and deliberate pursuit in order for the innate human impulse toward it to be manifest in one's life to some degree or another. And (b) one need not fully secure those needs lower on Maslow's hierarchy before the needs higher on the hierarchy can be developed, unfolded and manifested in one's life.

(See End Note.)

However, (c) when one is thwarted, discouraged or unsupported socially / culturally in the pursuit of those needs higher up the hierarchy, it is perfectly conceivable that one may sometimes react by denying the reality or value of those "higher" needs. (I think people very often pursue surrogate or substitute "needs" when so thwarted and unsupported, thus seeking the more self-centered and hedonistic pleasures as a kind of balm for the wound of not being able to be supported and rewarded in the pursuit of the more altruistic and giving needs (Yes, needs. We do have a need to give and be altruistic, though our society has long tended to pretend otherwise).

Likewise, (d) if one's society rewards only the pursuit of "lower" needs while discouraging the "higher" needs, one may be consciously or unconsciously manipulated into conformity with the cultural norm.

To my own way of thinking about these needs, the topmost needs can often only be realized or met through a process of rejection of various social norms and expectations, rewards and punishments, prescriptions and proscriptions. This is MOST especially true of "self-actualization," which requires the embodiment of "morality, creativity, spontaneity..." in a manner which is fully authentic and individuated. Rote and unreflective acceptance and repetition of social norms and expectations must generally be abandoned in self-actualization, thus the inclusion of folks like M. Gandhi and Martin Luther King in lists of people generally agreed to have self-actualized. These are people whose creative and moral commitments required them to buck social norms and expectations, along with the reward and punishment system which keeps it in place.

Safety, esteem and belongingness--even physiological--needs are modified as the innate impulse to self-realization unfolds into realization, moving up the rungs. One may at first seek to gain esteem or belonging by way of blind conformity, but later reject this approach in favor of "higher" needs, which reframe the "lower" ones.

I see this unfoldment as potentially existing both within individuals and communities (i.e., societies, cultures).

Self-actualization
Esteem
Love/Belonging
Safety
Physiological
[/b]

(End Note):

Quote
Worth noting in this context is this.: "The concept was brought most fully to prominence in Abraham Maslow's hierarchy of needs theory as the final level of psychological development that can be achieved when all basic and mental needs are essentially fulfilled and the "actualization" of the full personal potential takes place,[3] although he adapted this viewpoint later on in life, and saw it more flexibly".[4]  - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-actualization (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-actualization)




Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: right to left on December 28, 2014, 11:46:17 AM
One of the great pleasures of my life is to have come of age at the time of the great heavyweights.  I distinctly remember listening to the first Ali Liston fight on the radio (!) as a kid in February, 1964.  their names resonate like those of ancient giants: Patterson, Archie Moore, Ken Norton, Joe Frazier, Ernie shavers, Cleveland Williams, Jerry Quarry, the colossal George Foreman… and at the head of the pack, the incomparable Ali.
That reminds me that nearly all of Ali's 60's era title fights were distributed via closed circuit to movie theaters, and most fans were stuck with listening to the play by play on the radio.  Most of them were never shown later on TV...such as ABC's Wide World of Sports later, like other big fights were.  The suspicion at the time was that if Ali lost the championship, then the fight would be rebroadcast...otherwise it was never on TV.

For whatever reasons - the Ali of the 60's is noticeably faster and in better condition than the Ali of the 70's.  And it may have been a gradual physical decline, since he appears to have quicker hand-speed in the first fight against Joe Frazier than in the two later fights.  The fact is that, in a sport like boxing, each fighter has to be judged in respects to the quality of their competition; and Ali is somewhat fortunate that the quality at the top of the heavyweight division had declined substantially in the 70's.  Some of his later competition, like Ken Norton and Earnie Shavers were so telegraphic and one-dimensional, they  wouldn't have even been ranked in the 60's heavyweight lineup.  On the flipside, Ali's "bum of the month club" were great boxers....they just couldn't deal with Ali's speed and quick footwork. If you happen to watch his last fight prior to losing his boxing license, against Zora Foley - Foley is much better than boxing writers and fans gave him credit for!   
Quote
As to the change in Ali's style that RTL observes, there is this, as Oates observes the post-Vietnam-induction-refusal-and-internal-exile Ali:

After three and a half years of not boxing, though only twenty-nine, Ali was conspicuously slower and knew better than to dance away from his opponent; he would have to compensate for his lost agility with sheerly boxing (and punching) technique; he would have to train to take, and not exclusively give, punishment. That this was a deliberate strategy is important to note. As Ali said in an interview in 1975:
The general theory today is that Ali's Parkinson's Disease is a result of head trauma suffered in the ring.  But, thinking back over all the fights, and watching that gradual progression of decline in speed and agility - I don't think getting hit in the head too many times, explains his sickness completely!  His 3.5 year absence from boxing is given as the reason for his slowness in the 70's, but again, in that first fight with Frazier he is much faster than in the 2nd and especially the 3rd - the celebrated Thrilla in Manila, which he would admit later, he shouldn't have won, but was just willing to risk death or permanent disability to come up with a win on that hot night in the Philippines!  He wasted the time he should have spent training, hobnobbing with  Ferdinand Marcos and partying every night, while Frazier was spending long grueling days in a training camp. His win was just a matter of will/not skill.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: right to left on December 28, 2014, 12:07:21 PM

I'm far from expert on Abraham Maslow's thought. But I'm pretty sure he believed that self actualization needs influenced people's lives--to some degree, or on some level--even before they have fully secured the various needs on the lower rungs. 

But as I said, I'm not stuck on Maslow's model or theory, but am only alluding to it as something which is in some way kindred to my own thought. I referenced Maslow only to convey my own idea, which is that (a) self-actualization need not be a conscious and deliberate pursuit in order for the innate human impulse toward it to be manifest in one's life to some degree or another. And (b) one need not fully secure those needs lower on Maslow's hierarchy before the needs higher on the hierarchy can be developed, unfolded and manifested in one's life.
The problem I have with this insertion of Maslow and hierarchy of needs here, is that Maslow's theory doesn't explain why people living in abject poverty often start giving up on dealing with problems in this world, and start focusing on the fantasy world to come!   

So, they plunge in to fundamentalist religion and its promises of a better world in an imaginary heaven after death/or a better world to come after a messiah magically fixes all the crap going on down here.   In many cases, these are people who don't have adequate food, but rather than focusing on getting enough to eat, they'll spend more time praying and even wasting food and the meager possessions they own as sacrifices to appease their deities.

What I fear most about our present clusterfuck of a predicament, is that it is so difficult to get a handle on what is wrong with civilization; how do we fix the flaws in present politics and economics; how do we possibly deal with approaching environmental catastrophe if we can't convince enough people to rally around a set of real solutions, with a majority have their senses dulled by hedonism inspired by the constant brainwashing of consumer capitalism? 

To me, there are too many people at the top of Maslow's pyramid trying to "self-actualize" themselves through delusion and denial, as they live mostly in fantasyland!
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: JRM on December 28, 2014, 12:24:52 PM
The point of introducing Maslow's hierarchy of needs along with his notion of self-actualization was merely to provide some basis for discussing a much broader theme in an open-ended way.

Still, I wonder whether the list of items provided here, descriptive of self-actualization needs, might provide you with a frame (or food for thought, anyway) for your complaint about the fantasy world of religion?

In the provided graphic, below, we see these terms in the category of "self-actualization" needs.:

morality, creativity, spontaneity, problem solving, lack of prejudice, acceptance of facts.


Aren't these qualities you favor over blind religious belief and clinging to mere fantasy and wishful thinking?
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: right to left on December 28, 2014, 12:52:41 PM
The point of introducing Maslow's hierarchy of needs along with his notion of self-actualization was merely to provide some basis for discussing a much broader theme in an open-ended way.

Still, I wonder whether the list of items provided here, descriptive of self-actualization needs, might provide you with a frame (or food for thought, anyway) for your complaint about the fantasy world of religion?

In the provided graphic, below, we see these terms in the category of "self-actualization" needs.:

morality, creativity, spontaneity, problem solving, lack of prejudice, acceptance of facts.


Aren't these qualities you favor over blind religious belief and clinging to mere fantasy and wishful thinking?

I don't object to Maslow's hierarchy of needs; it's just that I see too many examples of fanatics denying themselves those first levels and reaching for some mystical belief that will provide them a sense of self-importance and destiny, and a better future to come in some divine netherworld.

If we are really going to focus on: morality, creativity, spontaneity, problem solving, lack of prejudice, acceptance of facts etc., it's not going to achieved by most people through some sort of self-improvement system, if their minds are cluttered with infotainment brainwashing and social networking BS.  Any worthwhile effort to realize Maslow's goals cannot be separated from a grassroots challenge to present day business-as-usual. 
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: agelbert on December 28, 2014, 03:16:02 PM
The importance of Homo SAPs is WAY over rated.

This is not hard.

The LIFE of the autotrophic (mostly phototrophic - nutrition from solar photons) biomass is essential, indispensable and vital to our existence.

NO PHOTOTROPHS = NO HOMO SAPS

A small percentage of Homo SAPS (the conscience free ambitious assholes with gigantic carbon footprints from war to mining to whatever) are DEGRADING (i.e. poisoning, over heating, etc.) the autotrophic biomass. This is STUPID. :emthdown:

No life, no Maslow's hierarchy to discuss. So we should concentrate on avoiding species extinction, NOT as a moral imperative or self actualization achievement, but as COMMON FUCKING SENSE.

I repeat: This is NOT hard.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Petty Tyrant on December 28, 2014, 05:18:40 PM

Yes, that is a rejection of Maslows theory. Find food, good I got food. Next find fuck, good I got a fuck. Next, find God. 

Abraham maslow developed his theory at the height of consumer culture without any caveats. A small minority of people are interested in self actualization.

I'm far from expert on Abraham Maslow's thought. But I'm pretty sure he believed that self actualization needs influenced people's lives--to some degree, or on some level--even before they have fully secured the various needs on the lower rungs. 

But as I said, I'm not stuck on Maslow's model or theory, but am only alluding to it as something which is in some way kindred to my own thought. I referenced Maslow only to convey my own idea, which is that (a) self-actualization need not be a conscious and deliberate pursuit in order for the innate human impulse toward it to be manifest in one's life to some degree or another. And (b) one need not fully secure those needs lower on Maslow's hierarchy before the needs higher on the hierarchy can be developed, unfolded and manifested in one's life.

(See End Note.)

However, (c) when one is thwarted, discouraged or unsupported socially / culturally in the pursuit of those needs higher up the hierarchy, it is perfectly conceivable that one may sometimes react by denying the reality or value of those "higher" needs. (I think people very often pursue surrogate or substitute "needs" when so thwarted and unsupported, thus seeking the more self-centered and hedonistic pleasures as a kind of balm for the wound of not being able to be supported and rewarded in the pursuit of the more altruistic and giving needs (Yes, needs. We do have a need to give and be altruistic, though our society has long tended to pretend otherwise).

Likewise, (d) if one's society rewards only the pursuit of "lower" needs while discouraging the "higher" needs, one may be consciously or unconsciously manipulated into conformity with the cultural norm.

To my own way of thinking about these needs, the topmost needs can often only be realized or met through a process of rejection of various social norms and expectations, rewards and punishments, prescriptions and proscriptions. This is MOST especially true of "self-actualization," which requires the embodiment of "morality, creativity, spontaneity..." in a manner which is fully authentic and individuated. Rote and unreflective acceptance and repetition of social norms and expectations must generally be abandoned in self-actualization, thus the inclusion of folks like M. Gandhi and Martin Luther King in lists of people generally agreed to have self-actualized. These are people whose creative and moral commitments required them to buck social norms and expectations, along with the reward and punishment system which keeps it in place.

Safety, esteem and belongingness--even physiological--needs are modified as the innate impulse to self-realization unfolds into realization, moving up the rungs. One may at first seek to gain esteem or belonging by way of blind conformity, but later reject this approach in favor of "higher" needs, which reframe the "lower" ones.

I see this unfoldment as potentially existing both within individuals and communities (i.e., societies, cultures).

Self-actualization
Esteem
Love/Belonging
Safety
Physiological
[/b]

(End Note):

Quote
Worth noting in this context is this.: "The concept was brought most fully to prominence in Abraham Maslow's hierarchy of needs theory as the final level of psychological development that can be achieved when all basic and mental needs are essentially fulfilled and the "actualization" of the full personal potential takes place,[3] although he adapted this viewpoint later on in life, and saw it more flexibly".[4]  - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-actualization (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-actualization)

Your blaming society for thwarting actualizaton of higher needs does not hold water. Maslow was wrong and admitted it. You are wrong for the same reason, committing cardinal mistake number one;dont try and make sense of others behavior through your own motivational lens.

People have always had access to cultural/societal influences toward self-actualization at least as much as distraction or temptation away from it. It is their choice and their individual need. If people focussed on self realizationafter all needs were met power would not corrupt and we would not be bitching about the people at the top creating the conditions that thwart the rest of us becoming angels. MLK was killed before he was most likely corrupted like every other successful freedom fighter eg pol pot. Ghandi demonstrates my prior point that to avoid becoming corrupted and fully self actualise people actually renounce comforts. He was a lawyer wearing a suit before the loin cloth and sleeping on the floor. 

There are people who will lie, cheat and steal when they have no need to, hey have no interest in self-actualization. There are people who have an interest in it and will cling to psychology 101 textbooks or bibles despite being thrown to the lions or sent to siberia, this is their primary drive. I know you think the church and religions are only a societal impediment to all people being capable of and interested in self actualizing through systems thinking, but that is itself blind faith. We are doomed because society and religion stand in the way of people becoming peaceful and intelligent just like the ones who rose above it all already in spite of societal and religious influence.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: agelbert on December 28, 2014, 05:46:52 PM
UB,
Autotrophs don't DO psychology. They either live or they die. If they die, so do we, period. This is about our STUPIDITY, not primary, secondary tertiary (and so on) psychological drives.

Are you claiming you CANNOT reason with a believer in any magical bit of baloney from religion to Darwinism to creative destruction to torture is good to humans are governed by sex instead of condition reflex to whatever? Fuck that!

If you take some Hindu with all kinds of mind over matter power or a Christian that says "God Bless you" while a nail is hammered into his head (as happens regulaly in Africa) as EXAMPLES of common human psychology, you are REACHING for the 95th percentile outlier to justify condemning the whole species. Fuck that!

This is NOT hard. Humans are not that stupid. They just need to SEE the connection between the DEATH of autotrophs and the death of Homo SAP.

Suicidal blind ass cults exist. They are an outlier. They certainly do NOT represent humanity.

The one percent, though they may be classified as suicidal, still don't KNOW they are a suicidal cult. But they are. They TOO are an outlier. They have just been successful liars. It is our job to reveal their abysmal stupidity.

Pointing fingers at people who, for you, ILLOGICALLY, are willing to die for their beliefs as the proximate cause of our near term extinction is unscientific, inaccurate and beneath you.

Los justos pagan por los pecadores (the innocent get blamed for what the guilty are doing  :emthdown:), as usual.

No Phototrophs = no humans, period!
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Petty Tyrant on December 28, 2014, 07:43:06 PM
UB,
Autotrophs don't DO psychology. They either live or they die. If they die, so do we, period. This is about our STUPIDITY, not primary, secondary tertiary (and so on) psychological drives.

my best interpretation of what u are saying is a full scale nuclear war would destroy even the autotrophs, brougt about by our stupidity. I myself dont own that. I have no choice in it or influence over that event if it happens.

Are you claiming you CANNOT reason with a believer in any magical bit of baloney from religion to Darwinism to creative destruction to torture is good to humans are governed by sex instead of condition reflex to whatever? Fuck that!

Not at all. I would not be reasoning with JRM and RTL at this point if I didnt think I could at least get them thinking. There are some people that cannot be reasoned with though, who act on emotion and back rationalise their behavior however, and/or understand only one language which is the threat of deterrance

If you take some Hindu with all kinds of mind over matter power or a Christian that says "God Bless you" while a nail is hammered into his head (as happens regulaly in Africa) as EXAMPLES of common human psychology, you are REACHING for the 95th percentile outlier to justify condemning the whole species. Fuck that!

I think I know what you are saying here. Anyone that selfless and forgiving is a lot less frequent than five in a hundred, they are far better than me anyway so condemning anyone lesser would be condemning myself too. Still I think the bible talks about seperating the sheep from the goats and I like to think Im good enough to  be a goat.



This is NOT hard. Humans are not that stupid. They just need to SEE the connection between the DEATH of autotrophs and the death of Homo SAP.

I dont know much about microbiology but I guess theres good and bad ones for us such as gut bacteria vs ebola, if I even have it right and an autotroph requires a host which Im not even sure of. the death of the former would finish us and the death of the latter would save a lot of lives.

The wider point is this; Yourself, JRM and LTR and some others believe in trying to get the whole world to see the light and then they will all change course. The same light u can clearly see yet right here there is not even any agreement, this thread alone is a tower of babel. For me I subscribe to the quote azozeo posted on being a thought criminal; something like  "I am not writing to convince anyone else, just to let others like me know they are not alone". I believe all "we need to's" are a waste of time and "I need to" is all I or we can do.


Suicidal blind ass cults exist. They are an outlier. They certainly do NOT represent humanity.

The one percent, though they may be classified as suicidal, still don't KNOW they are a suicidal cult. But they are. They TOO are an outlier. They have just been successful liars. It is our job to reveal their abysmal stupidity.

I do not know whether their agenda is to trigger a nuclear war and disappear into their bunkers for a thousand years, or create a new world order with half a billion people left in order to save us from extinction as set out on the georgia guidestones, or both. They dont think its suicide for themselves, those at the very top in control. If you literally mean fully one percent 1% of people, ie if u know 100 people which u do, at least one of your aquaintances is involved then yes I agree totally with you. having just had xmas when I call up or get a call from friends and family who I havent heard from for a while, I see how all these people think they are fine and even if they do get made redundant which they doubt will happen any time soon, they have plenty of pension and will get a good package and if things got worse they would have a gated lifetyle safe from riff raff. The problem is I think it doesnt matter what you show them, they would rather die than give up their lifestyle so yes it is a suicide cult.

Pointing fingers at people who, for you, ILLOGICALLY, are willing to die for their beliefs as the proximate cause of our near term extinction is unscientific, inaccurate and beneath you.

I have pointed fingers at people willing to die for their beliefs only to show that the need for self actualization has nothing to do with society or cultural influence. I dont discount the possibility that posting diss a dent thoughts on the diner could attract a swat team raid and I am not someone at the end of my life anyway but still have 3 kids to provide for.

Los justos pagan por los pecadores (the innocent get blamed for what the guilty are doing  :emthdown:), as usual.

Grapes of Gods Wrath if you believe the bible.

No Phototrophs = no humans, period!

Yep

 
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Petty Tyrant on December 28, 2014, 07:57:01 PM

The general theory today is that Ali's Parkinson's Disease is a result of head trauma suffered in the ring.  But, thinking back over all the fights, and watching that gradual progression of decline in speed and agility - I don't think getting hit in the head too many times, explains his sickness completely!  His 3.5 year absence from boxing is given as the reason for his slowness in the 70's, but again, in that first fight with Frazier he is much faster than in the 2nd and especially the 3rd - the celebrated Thrilla in Manila, which he would admit later, he shouldn't have won, but was just willing to risk death or permanent disability to come up with a win on that hot night in the Philippines!  He wasted the time he should have spent training, hobnobbing with  Ferdinand Marcos and partying every night, while Frazier was spending long grueling days in a training camp. His win was just a matter of will/not skill.

Agreed, if  u look at the vid surly posted of ali ducking all those punches while rope-a-doping, (his words not mine) u see the big pad he started wearing under his waistband after the frazier fight. Frazier worked his kidneys so that ali pissed blood for weeks. He said he did that to slow ali down. In the last frazier ali fight ali was asking right at the end to cut off the gloves because he could not take any more, refusing to come out again when fraziers corner threw in the towel. Many experts say he should have quit retired permanently after that because he was really badly damaged by the 3rd frazier fight. The parkinsons is almost certainly a result  of the head punches in the rest of his career because he could no longer avoid them.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: agelbert on December 28, 2014, 10:36:28 PM
UB,
Autotrophs don't DO psychology. They either live or they die. If they die, so do we, period. This is about our STUPIDITY, not primary, secondary tertiary (and so on) psychological drives.

my best interpretation of what u are saying is a full scale nuclear war would destroy even the autotrophs, brougt about by our stupidity. I myself dont own that. I have no choice in it or influence over that event if it happens.

Are you claiming you CANNOT reason with a believer in any magical bit of baloney from religion to Darwinism to creative destruction to torture is good to humans are governed by sex instead of condition reflex to whatever? Fuck that!

Not at all. I would not be reasoning with JRM and RTL at this point if I didnt think I could at least get them thinking. There are some people that cannot be reasoned with though, who act on emotion and back rationalise their behavior however, and/or understand only one language which is the threat of deterrance

If you take some Hindu with all kinds of mind over matter power or a Christian that says "God Bless you" while a nail is hammered into his head (as happens regulaly in Africa) as EXAMPLES of common human psychology, you are REACHING for the 95th percentile outlier to justify condemning the whole species. Fuck that!

I think I know what you are saying here. Anyone that selfless and forgiving is a lot less frequent than five in a hundred, they are far better than me anyway so condemning anyone lesser would be condemning myself too. Still I think the bible talks about seperating the sheep from the goats and I like to think Im good enough to  be a goat.



This is NOT hard. Humans are not that stupid. They just need to SEE the connection between the DEATH of autotrophs and the death of Homo SAP.

I dont know much about microbiology but I guess theres good and bad ones for us such as gut bacteria vs ebola, if I even have it right and an autotroph requires a host which Im not even sure of. the death of the former would finish us and the death of the latter would save a lot of lives.

The wider point is this; Yourself, JRM and LTR and some others believe in trying to get the whole world to see the light and then they will all change course. The same light u can clearly see yet right here there is not even any agreement, this thread alone is a tower of babel. For me I subscribe to the quote azozeo posted on being a thought criminal; something like  "I am not writing to convince anyone else, just to let others like me know they are not alone". I believe all "we need to's" are a waste of time and "I need to" is all I or we can do.


Suicidal blind ass cults exist. They are an outlier. They certainly do NOT represent humanity.

The one percent, though they may be classified as suicidal, still don't KNOW they are a suicidal cult. But they are. They TOO are an outlier. They have just been successful liars. It is our job to reveal their abysmal stupidity.

I do not know whether their agenda is to trigger a nuclear war and disappear into their bunkers for a thousand years, or create a new world order with half a billion people left in order to save us from extinction as set out on the georgia guidestones, or both. They dont think its suicide for themselves, those at the very top in control. If you literally mean fully one percent 1% of people, ie if u know 100 people which u do, at least one of your aquaintances is involved then yes I agree totally with you. having just had xmas when I call up or get a call from friends and family who I havent heard from for a while, I see how all these people think they are fine and even if they do get made redundant which they doubt will happen any time soon, they have plenty of pension and will get a good package and if things got worse they would have a gated lifetyle safe from riff raff. The problem is I think it doesnt matter what you show them, they would rather die than give up their lifestyle so yes it is a suicide cult.

Pointing fingers at people who, for you, ILLOGICALLY, are willing to die for their beliefs as the proximate cause of our near term extinction is unscientific, inaccurate and beneath you.

I have pointed fingers at people willing to die for their beliefs only to show that the need for self actualization has nothing to do with society or cultural influence. I dont discount the possibility that posting diss a dent thoughts on the diner could attract a swat team raid and I am not someone at the end of my life anyway but still have 3 kids to provide for.

Los justos pagan por los pecadores (the innocent get blamed for what the guilty are doing  :emthdown:), as usual.

Grapes of Gods Wrath if you believe the bible.

No Phototrophs = no humans, period!

Yep



UB,
 :emthup: :emthup: :emthup: Great answer!

I am not all that concerned with people seeing the light, so to speak; I am more concerned with getting people to do the biosphere math.

I don't know about this nuclear war thing. My point about the Autotrophic biomass, that basically "eats" sunlight and is several orders of magnitude greater in biomass than the trophic levels above it (this is necessary because, as efficient thermodynamically as biological systems are, a certain amount of energy  is lost when the next  level up eats the level below it), will be so degraded from global warming (photosynthesis is severely hampered by high temperatures and humidity, regardless of the added CO2 that plants, in theory, would be happy campers with) that the trophic pyramid autotrophic BASE would NOT be able to support "higher" life forms.

The round numbers I have read about claim that the autotrophic biomass has to be at least 10 times larger than the next one up and so on. Global warming, whether there is a nuclear war or not, is radically harming this indispensable food chain.

I don't think the 1% (yes, I'm using a generic term for the main piggies and it's probably a lot less than that) get that. If they think they are "in charge", they are wrong. their bunkers won't save them if the autotrophic biomass is severely depleted. Do you think they understand that? I don't.  :(   
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: right to left on December 28, 2014, 11:51:50 PM

The general theory today is that Ali's Parkinson's Disease is a result of head trauma suffered in the ring.  But, thinking back over all the fights, and watching that gradual progression of decline in speed and agility - I don't think getting hit in the head too many times, explains his sickness completely!  His 3.5 year absence from boxing is given as the reason for his slowness in the 70's, but again, in that first fight with Frazier he is much faster than in the 2nd and especially the 3rd - the celebrated Thrilla in Manila, which he would admit later, he shouldn't have won, but was just willing to risk death or permanent disability to come up with a win on that hot night in the Philippines!  He wasted the time he should have spent training, hobnobbing with  Ferdinand Marcos and partying every night, while Frazier was spending long grueling days in a training camp. His win was just a matter of will/not skill.

Agreed, if  u look at the vid surly posted of ali ducking all those punches while rope-a-doping, (his words not mine) u see the big pad he started wearing under his waistband after the frazier fight. Frazier worked his kidneys so that ali pissed blood for weeks. He said he did that to slow ali down. In the last frazier ali fight ali was asking right at the end to cut off the gloves because he could not take any more, refusing to come out again when fraziers corner threw in the towel. Many experts say he should have quit retired permanently after that because he was really badly damaged by the 3rd frazier fight. The parkinsons is almost certainly a result  of the head punches in the rest of his career because he could no longer avoid them.
I'm sure getting hit in the head too many times doesn't help someone with Parkinson's Disease.  But I notice that the Ali of the 60's, was almost superhuman in his speed and ability to move around the ring.  These guys like Liston, Patterson, Cleveland Williams, Thad Spencer, George Chuvalo (now there's a guy who couldn't be hurt by a punch), Zora Foley, all knew they had to try to cut down escape routes and trap Ali in the corner....but he was so fast and agile, he could move either left or right...throwing a couple of jabs and be back in the middle of the ring.  He just looked so much slower in the 70's...even in the earlier fights which occurred before he took all the damage.  Ali still looked pretty fast in that first fight with Frazier in 1970 (no rope-a-dope in that one), but his slowing down, and reliance on toughness and taking punches was not something he had to do in the first half of his boxing career.  So, the takeaway for me, is that when boxing fans gather around over a few beers and argue about who was the greatest boxer of all time - most of them never saw those Ali fights from the 1960's, when he was actually in his prime!

One of Ali's personal physicians said recently in an interview (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/boxing/article-2817592/No-proof-Muhammad-Ali-s-Parkinson-s-Disease-caused-boxing.html) - that he didn't believe the head trauma from those later fights played a major factor in Ali's Parkinson's symptoms.  The disease may have been affecting his reflexes and coordination throughout the 70's, but was undiagnosed.  While today, at 72, his physical decline isn't atypical for someone who has been diagnosed with Parkinsons for more than 30 years.

Regarding the competition....I was too young to make any educated evaluations of the 60's heavyweight division, but my older brothers never held Frazier or Ali protege - Jimmy Ellis in high regard....because they took their time working their way up the rankings....seeming to wait for some of the older ranked fighters to retire....this is the same knock that Larry Holmes got tagged with a decade later.  Frazier turned pro in 1965, but fought few of the top ranked fighters until he won a split decision against Oscar Bonavena. His only impressive outing against the top of the division prior to winning the Heavyweight Title was winning a 4 round TKO against George Chuvalo....because of a cut, but nevertheless, he became the only other boxer besides George Foreman many years later, who was able to stop Chuvalo in the ring. 

All in all, the quality of the competition in boxing had probably been dropping off from the late 50's, as participation in the sport began falling off, and never really recovered in America.  From the 70's on, Latin America filled the gap in the lighter divisions, and more recently we have Russians and other Eastern Europeans taking over many of the championships.  But, back in the 60's, Ali was so far ahead of the competition, that he would make up silly little poems predicting the round he would knock out his opponent....and do it!  That was not something he was capable of doing in the 70's, when he was slower....and appeared to be a mere mortal!
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Karpatok on December 29, 2014, 03:35:30 AM
UB,
Autotrophs don't DO psychology. They either live or they die. If they die, so do we, period. This is about our STUPIDITY, not primary, secondary tertiary (and so on) psychological drives.

my best interpretation of what u are saying is a full scale nuclear war would destroy even the autotrophs, brougt about by our stupidity. I myself dont own that. I have no choice in it or influence over that event if it happens.

Are you claiming you CANNOT reason with a believer in any magical bit of baloney from religion to Darwinism to creative destruction to torture is good to humans are governed by sex instead of condition reflex to whatever? Fuck that!

Not at all. I would not be reasoning with JRM and RTL at this point if I didnt think I could at least get them thinking. There are some people that cannot be reasoned with though, who act on emotion and back rationalise their behavior however, and/or understand only one language which is the threat of deterrance

If you take some Hindu with all kinds of mind over matter power or a Christian that says "God Bless you" while a nail is hammered into his head (as happens regulaly in Africa) as EXAMPLES of common human psychology, you are REACHING for the 95th percentile outlier to justify condemning the whole species. Fuck that!

I think I know what you are saying here. Anyone that selfless and forgiving is a lot less frequent than five in a hundred, they are far better than me anyway so condemning anyone lesser would be condemning myself too. Still I think the bible talks about seperating the sheep from the goats and I like to think Im good enough to  be a goat.



This is NOT hard. Humans are not that stupid. They just need to SEE the connection between the DEATH of autotrophs and the death of Homo SAP.

I dont know much about microbiology but I guess theres good and bad ones for us such as gut bacteria vs ebola, if I even have it right and an autotroph requires a host which Im not even sure of. the death of the former would finish us and the death of the latter would save a lot of lives.

The wider point is this; Yourself, JRM and LTR and some others believe in trying to get the whole world to see the light and then they will all change course. The same light u can clearly see yet right here there is not even any agreement, this thread alone is a tower of babel. For me I subscribe to the quote azozeo posted on being a thought criminal; something like  "I am not writing to convince anyone else, just to let others like me know they are not alone". I believe all "we need to's" are a waste of time and "I need to" is all I or we can do.


Suicidal blind ass cults exist. They are an outlier. They certainly do NOT represent humanity.

The one percent, though they may be classified as suicidal, still don't KNOW they are a suicidal cult. But they are. They TOO are an outlier. They have just been successful liars. It is our job to reveal their abysmal stupidity.

I do not know whether their agenda is to trigger a nuclear war and disappear into their bunkers for a thousand years, or create a new world order with half a billion people left in order to save us from extinction as set out on the georgia guidestones, or both. They dont think its suicide for themselves, those at the very top in control. If you literally mean fully one percent 1% of people, ie if u know 100 people which u do, at least one of your aquaintances is involved then yes I agree totally with you. having just had xmas when I call up or get a call from friends and family who I havent heard from for a while, I see how all these people think they are fine and even if they do get made redundant which they doubt will happen any time soon, they have plenty of pension and will get a good package and if things got worse they would have a gated lifetyle safe from riff raff. The problem is I think it doesnt matter what you show them, they would rather die than give up their lifestyle so yes it is a suicide cult.

Pointing fingers at people who, for you, ILLOGICALLY, are willing to die for their beliefs as the proximate cause of our near term extinction is unscientific, inaccurate and beneath you.

I have pointed fingers at people willing to die for their beliefs only to show that the need for self actualization has nothing to do with society or cultural influence. I dont discount the possibility that posting diss a dent thoughts on the diner could attract a swat team raid and I am not someone at the end of my life anyway but still have 3 kids to provide for.

Los justos pagan por los pecadores (the innocent get blamed for what the guilty are doing  :emthdown:), as usual.

Grapes of Gods Wrath if you believe the bible.

No Phototrophs = no humans, period!

Yep
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Petty Tyrant on December 29, 2014, 06:16:22 AM
I'm sure getting hit in the head too many times doesn't help someone with Parkinson's Disease.  But I notice that the Ali of the 60's, was almost superhuman in his speed and ability to move around the ring.  These guys like Liston, Patterson, Cleveland Williams, Thad Spencer, George Chuvalo (now there's a guy who couldn't be hurt by a punch), Zora Foley, all knew they had to try to cut down escape routes and trap Ali in the corner....but he was so fast and agile, he could move either left or right...throwing a couple of jabs and be back in the middle of the ring.  He just looked so much slower in the 70's...even in the earlier fights which occurred before he took all the damage.  Ali still looked pretty fast in that first fight with Frazier in 1970 (no rope-a-dope in that one), but his slowing down, and reliance on toughness and taking punches was not something he had to do in the first half of his boxing career.  So, the takeaway for me, is that when boxing fans gather around over a few beers and argue about who was the greatest boxer of all time - most of them never saw those Ali fights from the 1960's, when he was actually in his prime!

One of Ali's personal physicians said recently in an interview (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/boxing/article-2817592/No-proof-Muhammad-Ali-s-Parkinson-s-Disease-caused-boxing.html) - that he didn't believe the head trauma from those later fights played a major factor in Ali's Parkinson's symptoms.  The disease may have been affecting his reflexes and coordination throughout the 70's, but was undiagnosed.  While today, at 72, his physical decline isn't atypical for someone who has been diagnosed with Parkinsons for more than 30 years.

Regarding the competition....I was too young to make any educated evaluations of the 60's heavyweight division, but my older brothers never held Frazier or Ali protege - Jimmy Ellis in high regard....because they took their time working their way up the rankings....seeming to wait for some of the older ranked fighters to retire....this is the same knock that Larry Holmes got tagged with a decade later.  Frazier turned pro in 1965, but fought few of the top ranked fighters until he won a split decision against Oscar Bonavena. His only impressive outing against the top of the division prior to winning the Heavyweight Title was winning a 4 round TKO against George Chuvalo....because of a cut, but nevertheless, he became the only other boxer besides George Foreman many years later, who was able to stop Chuvalo in the ring. 

All in all, the quality of the competition in boxing had probably been dropping off from the late 50's, as participation in the sport began falling off, and never really recovered in America.  From the 70's on, Latin America filled the gap in the lighter divisions, and more recently we have Russians and other Eastern Europeans taking over many of the championships.  But, back in the 60's, Ali was so far ahead of the competition, that he would make up silly little poems predicting the round he would knock out his opponent....and do it!  That was not something he was capable of doing in the 70's, when he was slower....and appeared to be a mere mortal!

I will take your word for all that as I couldnt stand to see so much violence...brought on by the patriarchal society you were brought up in, not your bloodthirsty natural human nature Im sure.... Meanwhile I was watching mainly Meg Ryan movies  ;)
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: JRM on December 29, 2014, 09:53:16 AM
If we are really going to focus on: morality, creativity, spontaneity, problem solving, lack of prejudice, acceptance of facts etc., it's not going to achieved by most people through some sort of self-improvement system, if their minds are cluttered with infotainment brainwashing and social networking BS.  Any worthwhile effort to realize Maslow's goals cannot be separated from a grassroots challenge to present day business-as-usual.

I'm in complete agreement.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: right to left on December 29, 2014, 12:28:22 PM
I will take your word for all that as I couldnt stand to see so much violence...brought on by the patriarchal society you were brought up in, not your bloodthirsty natural human nature Im sure.... Meanwhile I was watching mainly Meg Ryan movies  ;)
Well, thanks for finding a way out of the wilderness and back to the general theme we were talking about before!  The primary difference for women in general, that makes patriarchy so oppressive and potentially lethal, starts with the change in how the primary household is organized.  In the small hunter/gatherer bands, everyone's living together in close proximity, but if a particular man becomes violent and/or abusive to one woman, he quickly finds himself confronted by a group of women!  The same dynamic seemed to be in play in the matrilocal longhouses, where a man who was a problem, would quickly have to square off against his wife and her sisters....and his belongings would be dumped outside, and in Iroquois societies, he would end up living in a men's longhouse if no other women invited him in to their houses.  So, it's all a matter of having numbers behind you, since any domestic incident under crowded conditions with no privacy, were quickly community issues! 

Circumstances change drastically for the quality of life for women when we get to the transition to patriarchies - where men control food and organize households around themselves.  They take/or buy wives, and take them away from their families, and to live among complete strangers.  It's often noted in the articles about the miserable conditions for women in rural Afghanistan or similar polygamous societies, that often, the worst abuse a young teenage girl married off to an older man faces, comes not from her new husband...but from her mother-in-law, and other women of the household!  To them, she is a threat to their status and wellbeing; so the women of the patriarchal household may outnumber the men, but they are set against each other as enemies, and have no status outside the home whatsoever!  As mentioned, the opposite is the case, in the matrilocal household, where the bonds between females are stronger than the bonds between men on many issues...especially living arrangements. 

So, for me, my impression of feminism in all its forms, is that these are movements created by women to organize themselves and work for common benefit, instead of fighting and competing with each other for status in a man's world!  In this regard, feminism isn't something new or radical, nor is it a threat to REAL traditions.  Instead, it is a reaching back to the original ways men and women lived together in our primeval past, before the natural balance between male and female became skewed toward male domination....and after the slavery, the wars of conquest, the over-exploitation of nature, all carried out under the watchful eye of man-gods, I can't see why there would be any objections to returning back to some semblance of gender equality, and seeing if our future prospects could improve......they certainly couldn't get worse!

Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Surly1 on December 30, 2014, 10:58:04 AM

The general theory today is that Ali's Parkinson's Disease is a result of head trauma suffered in the ring.  But, thinking back over all the fights, and watching that gradual progression of decline in speed and agility - I don't think getting hit in the head too many times, explains his sickness completely!  His 3.5 year absence from boxing is given as the reason for his slowness in the 70's, but again, in that first fight with Frazier he is much faster than in the 2nd and especially the 3rd - the celebrated Thrilla in Manila, which he would admit later, he shouldn't have won, but was just willing to risk death or permanent disability to come up with a win on that hot night in the Philippines!  He wasted the time he should have spent training, hobnobbing with  Ferdinand Marcos and partying every night, while Frazier was spending long grueling days in a training camp. His win was just a matter of will/not skill.

Agreed, if  u look at the vid surly posted of ali ducking all those punches while rope-a-doping, (his words not mine) u see the big pad he started wearing under his waistband after the frazier fight. Frazier worked his kidneys so that ali pissed blood for weeks. He said he did that to slow ali down. In the last frazier ali fight ali was asking right at the end to cut off the gloves because he could not take any more, refusing to come out again when fraziers corner threw in the towel. Many experts say he should have quit retired permanently after that because he was really badly damaged by the 3rd frazier fight. The parkinsons is almost certainly a result  of the head punches in the rest of his career because he could no longer avoid them.
I'm sure getting hit in the head too many times doesn't help someone with Parkinson's Disease.  But I notice that the Ali of the 60's, was almost superhuman in his speed and ability to move around the ring.  These guys like Liston, Patterson, Cleveland Williams, Thad Spencer, George Chuvalo (now there's a guy who couldn't be hurt by a punch), Zora Foley, all knew they had to try to cut down escape routes and trap Ali in the corner....but he was so fast and agile, he could move either left or right...throwing a couple of jabs and be back in the middle of the ring.  He just looked so much slower in the 70's...even in the earlier fights which occurred before he took all the damage.  Ali still looked pretty fast in that first fight with Frazier in 1970 (no rope-a-dope in that one), but his slowing down, and reliance on toughness and taking punches was not something he had to do in the first half of his boxing career.  So, the takeaway for me, is that when boxing fans gather around over a few beers and argue about who was the greatest boxer of all time - most of them never saw those Ali fights from the 1960's, when he was actually in his prime!

One of Ali's personal physicians said recently in an interview (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/boxing/article-2817592/No-proof-Muhammad-Ali-s-Parkinson-s-Disease-caused-boxing.html) - that he didn't believe the head trauma from those later fights played a major factor in Ali's Parkinson's symptoms.  The disease may have been affecting his reflexes and coordination throughout the 70's, but was undiagnosed.  While today, at 72, his physical decline isn't atypical for someone who has been diagnosed with Parkinsons for more than 30 years.

Regarding the competition....I was too young to make any educated evaluations of the 60's heavyweight division, but my older brothers never held Frazier or Ali protege - Jimmy Ellis in high regard....because they took their time working their way up the rankings....seeming to wait for some of the older ranked fighters to retire....this is the same knock that Larry Holmes got tagged with a decade later.  Frazier turned pro in 1965, but fought few of the top ranked fighters until he won a split decision against Oscar Bonavena. His only impressive outing against the top of the division prior to winning the Heavyweight Title was winning a 4 round TKO against George Chuvalo....because of a cut, but nevertheless, he became the only other boxer besides George Foreman many years later, who was able to stop Chuvalo in the ring. 

All in all, the quality of the competition in boxing had probably been dropping off from the late 50's, as participation in the sport began falling off, and never really recovered in America.  From the 70's on, Latin America filled the gap in the lighter divisions, and more recently we have Russians and other Eastern Europeans taking over many of the championships.  But, back in the 60's, Ali was so far ahead of the competition, that he would make up silly little poems predicting the round he would knock out his opponent....and do it!  That was not something he was capable of doing in the 70's, when he was slower....and appeared to be a mere mortal!

Came across this today while looking for something else. Thought you worthies might enjoy it. This is Ali-Shavers from 1977 in Madison Square Garden. I remember seeing this on TV, and the memory remains fresh. (Even back then, big fights were on PPV, so I'm wondering if this was a rebroadcast...)

Shavers was a serious hitter. Many observers say he was the hardest puncher in boxing history, with dozens of KOs inside three rounds, and many inside the first round. Shavers' one-punch knockout power could turn any fight around in a second, witness knockout wins over Jimmy Ellis, Ken Norton and Joe Bugner. Both Ali and Larry Holmes would say that Shavers hit them harder than any other fighter.

You'll do well to speed forward to @56:00 , and watch the last three rounds of this 15-rounder. Ali was ahead on points, and the commentators had it that Shavers would need to win the last three to eke out a decision.

Shavers won 13 and 14. And he was on course to win 15-- he rocked Ali, who then slipped-- an honest call, IMO-- and then Ali, fighting on nothing but courage, muscle memory and adrenaline, put together a flurry of combinations in the last 30 seconds that won the round, the fight, and which almost put Shavers down. One of the most unbelievable acts of will and courage I ever witnessed.

http://www.youtube.com/v/XV03JMLXgQY

After the fight, Dr. Ferdie Pacheco urged to Ali to retire, noting the damage Ali had absorbed against Shavers. Ali failed to listen.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: right to left on December 30, 2014, 12:10:58 PM
Came across this today while looking for something else. Thought you worthies might enjoy it. This is Ali-Shavers from 1977 in Madison Square Garden. I remember seeing this on TV, and the memory remains fresh. (Even back then, big fights were on PPV, so I'm wondering if this was a rebroadcast...)

Shavers was a serious hitter. Many observers say he was the hardest puncher in boxing history, with dozens of KOs inside three rounds, and many inside the first round. Shavers' one-punch knockout power could turn any fight around in a second, witness knockout wins over Jimmy Ellis, Ken Norton and Joe Bugner. Both Ali and Larry Holmes would say that Shavers hit them harder than any other fighter.

You'll do well to speed forward to @56:00 , and watch the last three rounds of this 15-rounder. Ali was ahead on points, and the commentators had it that Shavers would need to win the last three to eke out a decision.


Shavers won 13 and 14. And he was on course to win 15-- he rocked Ali, who then slipped-- an honest call, IMO-- and then Ali, fighting on nothing but courage, muscle memory and adrenaline, put together a flurry of combinations in the last 30 seconds that won the round, the fight, and which almost put Shavers down. One of the most unbelievable acts of will and courage I ever witnessed.

http://www.youtube.com/v/XV03JMLXgQY

After the fight, Dr. Ferdie Pacheco urged to Ali to retire, noting the damage Ali had absorbed against Shavers. Ali failed to listen.
Thanks for the memories!   But, again I have to ask: would Earnie Shavers have been able to hit Ali or even trap him in the corners back in the 60's?  That was Shavers's greatest fight, and it still seems obvious that he was mostly a one-note charlie - all he had was that looping overhand right!  Against most competition, Shavers reached a point where he wasn't able to land it against most top-ranked opponents....though he knocked out everyone else he hit with that punch!

It comes off as a great fight; but that's because Ali had slowed enough to become a mere mortal, and had to rely on toughness to win those exciting fights.  In his heyday, Ali would have dispatched Shavers in whatever round he picked for a rhyme back when he was calling the best the Heavyweight Division had to offer as "The Bum Of The Month" club. 

Worth noting that Shavers also would have been a much better boxer than he was, if he had discovered boxing as a teenager....instead of well into his late - 20's.  And it wasn't until he was ranked that he was getting decent coaching from experts who could teach him how to throw more than an overhand right and be more effective in the ring!  Sadly, Shavers was reaching his prime as a boxer when he was turning 40.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Golden Oxen on February 07, 2015, 09:04:25 PM
Welcome to the Diner Stpaulygirl.

Your desire for respectful communication already shows itself, and I thank you for pointing out that Geezer is considered a derogatory word by Mr. Webster.  :emthup: :emthup:  It's a pleasure having you aboard.  Welcome, and thanks for braving a mostly boy's club. GO  :hello:
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Fredrik on June 20, 2016, 02:53:57 AM
Hi everyone.

I'm a new one here. I used to post at LATOC and peakoil.com. Will be looking at decline-related topics (peak oil, cc, economic collapse) with interest.

Greetings from Finland,

Fredrik
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: RE on June 20, 2016, 09:31:48 AM
Hi everyone.

I'm a new one here. I used to post at LATOC and peakoil.com. Will be looking at decline-related topics (peak oil, cc, economic collapse) with interest.

Greetings from Finland,

Fredrik

:hi: to the Diner Fredrik!

Just to let you know, while you are a Rookie your posts are moderated.  After 10 posts as long as you remain a member in good standing there is no moderation.

RE
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Eddie on June 20, 2016, 10:56:40 AM
Welcome, Fredrik!
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: K-Dog on June 20, 2016, 01:12:12 PM
Hi everyone.

I'm a new one here. I used to post at LATOC and peakoil.com. Will be looking at decline-related topics (peak oil, cc, economic collapse) with interest.

Greetings from Finland,

Fredrik

Welcome Fredrik,

We'd love to have another intelligent contributor that is not afraid to type!  Don't let 'intelligent' scare you too much here.  That only means you can think, be authentic, and are not a hired gun for the opposition.  An opposition which sadly we have.

 :hello:

Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: luciddreams on December 10, 2016, 10:07:28 AM
A belated welcome to the Diner. 

Why haven't you posted anything?   :icon_scratch:

You should join in on the fun. 
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: roy on April 09, 2017, 11:30:27 AM
Hello, Doomsteaders - Thanks for having me on your forum. I'm here, in part, as a survivor of Peter Offerman's previous websites...the latest at present looking like it will be going down soon.

Has Peter left the planet? I noticed what I thought were some posts of his here, and the poster was "guest"...assuming he deleted his account. Was there a disagreement? Anyone have any word on him? I hope this doesn't cause any friction.

I have briefly met a few of you, through those other forums...so "howdy". Not sure I have much to offer, these days, but we'll see what unfolds in the days ahead.

Again - Thanks for having me on.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: RE on April 09, 2017, 01:36:27 PM
Hello, Doomsteaders - Thanks for having me on your forum. I'm here, in part, as a survivor of Peter Offerman's previous websites...the latest at present looking like it will be going down soon.

Has Peter left the planet? I noticed what I thought were some posts of his here, and the poster was "guest"...assuming he deleted his account. Was there a disagreement? Anyone have any word on him? I hope this doesn't cause any friction.

I have briefly met a few of you, through those other forums...so "howdy". Not sure I have much to offer, these days, but we'll see what unfolds in the days ahead.

Again - Thanks for having me on.

Peter hasn't dropped in to the Diner for a long time, but he's an Admin here, not a Guest.  That's an artifact of the mapping from the WP Blog to the SMF Forum.

Far as I know he is still doing fine living in BC.

Feel free to join up and chat with us.

RE
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: roy on April 09, 2017, 03:17:59 PM
Many thanks, RE.

I know he was working on that remote cabin, and only had internet access when he was in Ocean Falls.

I really miss the forums...Halfway, Halfpast, and Towards A Better World. But I am one to embrace change...and letting go.

Onward it is!   :emthup:
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Surly1 on April 09, 2017, 04:09:26 PM
Welcome, Roy! There is a great deal of residual affection and respect for Peter on this forum.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Eddie on April 09, 2017, 04:10:17 PM
Hi Roy. Sorry I lost touch with you. Glad you dropped in. You're always welcome as far as I'm concerned I hope you've been well.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: roy on April 09, 2017, 06:25:31 PM
Welcome, Roy! There is a great deal of residual affection and respect for Peter on this forum.

I'm glad to hear that. I have a high esteem for him as well. I've learned a lot from him over the years.

Quote
Hi Roy. Sorry I lost touch with you. Glad you dropped in. You're always welcome as far as I'm concerned I hope you've been well.

Happy to see you alive and well, Eddy! No need for apologies - life happens and we roll with it.

Just for the record, I'd like to make it clear that I have no qualms being a rookie dishwasher. In fact, it's a refreshing break from the social status others strive for.

And for anyone who cares, I just celebrated 9 years sober. Woo hoo!
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: RE on April 09, 2017, 08:30:26 PM
Welcome, Roy! There is a great deal of residual affection and respect for Peter on this forum.

I'm glad to hear that. I have a high esteem for him as well. I've learned a lot from him over the years.

Quote
Hi Roy. Sorry I lost touch with you. Glad you dropped in. You're always welcome as far as I'm concerned I hope you've been well.

Happy to see you alive and well, Eddy! No need for apologies - life happens and we roll with it.

Just for the record, I'd like to make it clear that I have no qualms being a rookie dishwasher. In fact, it's a refreshing break from the social status others strive for.

And for anyone who cares, I just celebrated 9 years sober. Woo hoo!

Just to let you know Roy, after you graduate from Dishwasher (10 posts), the moderation comes off and your posts will go up immediately.

RE
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: roy on April 10, 2017, 10:09:36 AM
Thanks, RE. I don't mind washing dishes for a while. However, someone keeps getting lipstick on the coffee mugs, and I have to scour them by hand.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: right to left on August 05, 2017, 01:13:20 AM
I think the biggest problem I have with the new theme coming from Guy regarding coming to terms with extinction, is that I CAN'T come to terms with this whether it's inevitable or not!  From a philosophical standpoint, I believe we have moral obligations to those who come after us in the future, and I also don't believe we have the right to drive other species into extinction! 

NBL suffers from a terrible case of GroupThink. - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groupthink (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groupthink)

In fact, one of the a-holes over there gets obvious joy out of berating anyone who does not see "the obvious"... But I digress.


I've heard complaints that NBL has become cult-like, but although I had been following their newsfeed, I never got around to joining and gaining any first-hand knowledge.

About a year ago, I started noticing a shift in theme...from making the case that the world is heading towards NTHE towards some kind of quasi-Buddhism-acceptance and being at peace with approaching extinction.  Followup blog articles started referencing The Five Stages of Grief strategy created by Elizabeth Kubler-Ross, for handling our collective predicament.  No surprise, that a lot of NBL followers either didn't understand, or didn't accept Kubler-Ross's theory as applicable to our present day situation....and I don't think I could accept it either!  Because, after I really started to understand that AGW was a problem that was not going to be fixed by the prescriptions offered up by today's environment advocates, I bypassed stage one and went right to anger....and stayed there!

My objection to grief counseling for the end of the world, is that this is about more than us!  The emphasis on grief and acceptance of extinction comes across as more navel-gazing self-indulgence....something that modern consumer capitalism has already drowned us with and we don't need any more of! 

If we have a diagnosis of terminal cancer (as an example), our death does not cause other people to die also, and we can best help those who will be most impacted by our death by coming to terms with the inevitable, and facing the end with dignity and giving them strength to carry on in our absence.....at least that's how I try to imagine it....real life might be different.

But, in the case of global NTHE, I already find that I can't bear to watch the kind of nature shows that I enjoyed when I was growing up.  If I turn on the TV and see a show about some of the megafauna of the African Savannah, like the lions, hyenas, ostriches, antelopes, elephants, rhino's etc., I already have it the back of my mind that their habitat is being destroyed so rapidly today, that there won't be any of these creatures left by the end of this century! 

And what's worse: those of us who have children, are either in denial, or have a realization that we have lived our lives in the last golden age of Planet Earth, and our children, grandchildren and any future generations, will watch their world spiral down into chaos and calamity................................so, looking at the larger picture from an unprofessional point of view - how am I supposed to accept this?


Quote
Yes. The situation is extremely dire, and may well be beyond all hope.  However, we have a number of reasons for exploring possible response directions. 

Some of the problems and issues are technical, scientific.... Others are social.

Some hints at technical aspects (which must be socially contextualized) are found here.:

Terrestrial Carbon Sequestration (TCS)
http://www.doomsteaddiner.net/forum/index.php/topic,3288.0.html (http://www.doomsteaddiner.net/forum/index.php/topic,3288.0.html)
I started this reply before I clicked on the link and did any reading on geoengineering ideas, but off the top, I have to say I am an extreme skeptic today on how useful these strategies will be, because some of the proposals...even when they are planned out in climate modelling effects, show that they could result in many unexpected and potentially catastrophic outcomes making the situation worse.

The best quick example is one we had here in Canada two years ago on our West Coast, when an American businessman or flim-flam man according to some - named Russel George, convinced a small Haida first nation band on the British Columbia coast to invest 2 million dollars into financing a carbon sequestration scheme (http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/iron-fertilization-project-stirs-west-coast-controversy-1.1172422)he had been trotting around and having no luck finding investors.  George's scheme would work by dumping large quantities of iron oxide off the B.C. coast and based on the limiting effects of iron on phytoplankton, algae would bloom and greatly increase their photosynthesis....thereby lowering carbon levels in the ocean and the atmosphere.  But what really happened?  In brief, the plan backfired when it caused massive algae blooms that lowered oxygen levels and killed fish and other marine life in the areas where they made the dumps....making the situation even worse! 

A lot of the focus on the failure of George's geoengineering plan, focused on the fact that he...is not an engineer, has no scientific background at all, took advantage of an impoverished group of natives who are dependent on salmon and are very alarmed about declining salmon stocks.  But, the scheme also highlights one problem I see with engineering in general: engineers are great at solving linear problems - where there are few variables, and a solution can create a fix that has no negative feedbacks.  But, what engineers really suck at doing, is dealing with complex systems with many variables, which can create many previously unforeseen negative consequences.  And, nothing seems to be as complex and difficult to predict as the biosphere that contains all life on Earth. 

I'll take a look at geoengineering - according to some climate researchers on the fringes - who see huge spikes in methane release coming our way, there is no way to have any kind of future on this planet by cutting carbon emissions...even shutting everything down completely won't be enough to stop the forcing of more sequestered carbon into the atmosphere.  It may be a point where even bad solutions are better than no solutions at all!
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: John of Wallan on August 05, 2017, 03:32:54 AM
Hello Folks. I hope all are well.

Am i the only person on this forum who is a NBL fan?
I listen to Guy's talks, hear the evidence as he presents it, and hope to hell he is wrong. Trouble is every time I try and investigate and look for facts I come to similar conclusions: Were fucked!

I dont think NBL is promoting nihalism by telling what he belives is the truth. I really do hope Guy is wrong, even though I fear what he says is real, and I do what I can to mitigate the situation and be what I consider a good moral and ethical human being. (Note: I said what I consider not what other tell me I must do!) 

The acceptance thing on NBL is interesting. I dont accept my own demise ever though I rationally know I am a mere mortal. I really picture myself as an RE like immortal Demi-god who will live forever in Valhalla! (Cue Wagner: Ride of the Valkyries and sweeping shot of me flying off into the sunset on the back of a white winged unicorn brandishing a sword.. And perhaps a glass of Merlot in the other hand  if you want to have some authenticity:)

It is hard as a parent to even contemplate the premature demise of my children, even though I know they are going to face hardships me and my parents did not; after all this is the whole modus operandi of the Doomstead Diner: We are comingto the end of the current industrial civilisation and all its perks.... Including Merlot! Damn.

Some of NBL ideas I agree with:
1. We are all going to die. Nothing new or controversial in that statement.
2. We are all going to die soon. Nope, still nothing new. If I live to 100 its still not that far off in geological time frames.
3. We are screwing up the environment. Hmm, pretty obvious here in Oz, let alone what I saw last time I was in mid west Merika we are screwing up the environment and destroying habitat.
4. Screwing up the environment is going to lead to people dying. Happening now. Plenty of foods, fires, droughts and famines. Wait until we see an ice free arctic and lets see what effect this has on Northern Hemisphere weather patterns and food production....
5. If we screw up the environment enough it can and will lead to human extinction. Just a matter of how much we screw it up.

Guy just asserts we have got to the last step already. I fear we have too, but am working on the premise that we haven't, mainly through denial, and the perhaps futile belief I can make a difference for the next generation. After all I did actually bring some of them into the world and I believe I have a moral obligations to try and see them survive.
 
I did enjoyed the Mad Max movies, but would prefer if I could actually avoid the scenarios in real life... (Watch the first one, it is actually the best IMHO, and a lot of the scenes were filmed not far from where I live. Also a  Ford 1977 XB Falcon was my first car, although it was not a V8 or a 2 doorlike those that appear in the film.)

Geo- Engineering is about as logical as a Mars settlements as an answer to the habitat problem we will face.
If we cant live sustainably on a planet we are tailor made for  how the fuck are we going to live in an alien hostile environment!

Geo-engineering i the cause of our problems not the cure...

Clean coal, or indeed clean energy is an oxy-moron. Solar panels don't spontaneously assembly in virgin forests...

Guns and Span wont save humanity either for all you survivalist types. Just leads to holes and constipation in lots of dying people.

The way I see it we really only have 2 possible options:

1. Pain followed by death.
Or
2. Pain followed by death sooner.

Why sweat the details.

Enjoy.
Now where did I leave that bottle..

JOW
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: RE on August 05, 2017, 05:17:13 AM
Hello Folks. I hope all are well.

Am i the only person on this forum who is a NBL fan?
I listen to Guy's talks, hear the evidence as he presents it, and hope to hell he is wrong. Trouble is every time I try and investigate and look for facts I come to similar conclusions: Were fucked!

I can't speak for anyone else here, but I certainly am not a fan of Dr. McStinksion and his spin.

First off, the timeline is absurd.  There is no way 100% of Homo Saps will be all DEAD inside 10 years.

Second, he advocates for giving up all HOPE, and calls anyone who has hope delusional.  HTF is that helpful?

Look, this is a bad situation, no doubt there.  But Dr. McStinksion makes it worse than it already is because he says it is already GAME OVER  and there is nothing you can do anymore.  I disagree.  There is still MUCH you can do.

(http://izquotes.com/quotes-pictures/quote-when-the-going-gets-weird-the-weird-turn-pro-hunter-s-thompson-184502.jpg)

RE
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Eddie on August 05, 2017, 11:46:28 AM
Hello Folks. I hope all are well.

Am i the only person on this forum who is a NBL fan?
I listen to Guy's talks, hear the evidence as he presents it, and hope to hell he is wrong. Trouble is every time I try and investigate and look for facts I come to similar conclusions: Were fucked!

I dont think NBL is promoting nihalism by telling what he belives is the truth. I really do hope Guy is wrong, even though I fear what he says is real, and I do what I can to mitigate the situation and be what I consider a good moral and ethical human being. (Note: I said what I consider not what other tell me I must do!) 

The acceptance thing on NBL is interesting. I dont accept my own demise ever though I rationally know I am a mere mortal. I really picture myself as an RE like immortal Demi-god who will live forever in Valhalla! (Cue Wagner: Ride of the Valkyries and sweeping shot of me flying off into the sunset on the back of a white winged unicorn brandishing a sword.. And perhaps a glass of Merlot in the other hand  if you want to have some authenticity:)

It is hard as a parent to even contemplate the premature demise of my children, even though I know they are going to face hardships me and my parents did not; after all this is the whole modus operandi of the Doomstead Diner: We are comingto the end of the current industrial civilisation and all its perks.... Including Merlot! Damn.

Some of NBL ideas I agree with:
1. We are all going to die. Nothing new or controversial in that statement.
2. We are all going to die soon. Nope, still nothing new. If I live to 100 its still not that far off in geological time frames.
3. We are screwing up the environment. Hmm, pretty obvious here in Oz, let alone what I saw last time I was in mid west Merika we are screwing up the environment and destroying habitat.
4. Screwing up the environment is going to lead to people dying. Happening now. Plenty of foods, fires, droughts and famines. Wait until we see an ice free arctic and lets see what effect this has on Northern Hemisphere weather patterns and food production....
5. If we screw up the environment enough it can and will lead to human extinction. Just a matter of how much we screw it up.

Guy just asserts we have got to the last step already. I fear we have too, but am working on the premise that we haven't, mainly through denial, and the perhaps futile belief I can make a difference for the next generation. After all I did actually bring some of them into the world and I believe I have a moral obligations to try and see them survive.
 
I did enjoyed the Mad Max movies, but would prefer if I could actually avoid the scenarios in real life... (Watch the first one, it is actually the best IMHO, and a lot of the scenes were filmed not far from where I live. Also a  Ford 1977 XB Falcon was my first car, although it was not a V8 or a 2 doorlike those that appear in the film.)

Geo- Engineering is about as logical as a Mars settlements as an answer to the habitat problem we will face.
If we cant live sustainably on a planet we are tailor made for  how the fuck are we going to live in an alien hostile environment!

Geo-engineering i the cause of our problems not the cure...

Clean coal, or indeed clean energy is an oxy-moron. Solar panels don't spontaneously assembly in virgin forests...

Guns and Span wont save humanity either for all you survivalist types. Just leads to holes and constipation in lots of dying people.

The way I see it we really only have 2 possible options:

1. Pain followed by death.
Or
2. Pain followed by death sooner.

Why sweat the details.

Enjoy.
Now where did I leave that bottle..

JOW

There was time most of us were NBL fans, or at least a fan of Guy and what trying to get across in his writing and speeches. The real issue became the tone of the angry people who sought out the blog and used the comments section there to promote hating the human race. Mostly pissed-off burnouts from various environmental movements and animal rights groups who gathered daily to viciously attack well-meaning people who dropped by the blog to weigh in Guy's posts. I haven't checked out NBL in many months, maybe a year or two now.

I have exactly the same POV on NBL as Dr. Geoffrey Chia, whom RE cross-posts from time to time. Collapse is something to be planned for and anticipated, so that you can weather the vicissitudes of the coming storms.

Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: agelbert on August 05, 2017, 12:28:58 PM
Hello Folks. I hope all are well.

Am i the only person on this forum who is a NBL fan?
I listen to Guy's talks, hear the evidence as he presents it, and hope to hell he is wrong. Trouble is every time I try and investigate and look for facts I come to similar conclusions: Were fucked!

I dont think NBL is promoting nihalism by telling what he belives is the truth. I really do hope Guy is wrong, even though I fear what he says is real, and I do what I can to mitigate the situation and be what I consider a good moral and ethical human being. (Note: I said what I consider not what other tell me I must do!) 

The acceptance thing on NBL is interesting. I dont accept my own demise ever though I rationally know I am a mere mortal. I really picture myself as an RE like immortal Demi-god who will live forever in Valhalla! (Cue Wagner: Ride of the Valkyries and sweeping shot of me flying off into the sunset on the back of a white winged unicorn brandishing a sword.. And perhaps a glass of Merlot in the other hand  if you want to have some authenticity:)

It is hard as a parent to even contemplate the premature demise of my children, even though I know they are going to face hardships me and my parents did not; after all this is the whole modus operandi of the Doomstead Diner: We are comingto the end of the current industrial civilisation and all its perks.... Including Merlot! Damn.

Some of NBL ideas I agree with:
1. We are all going to die. Nothing new or controversial in that statement.
2. We are all going to die soon. Nope, still nothing new. If I live to 100 its still not that far off in geological time frames.
3. We are screwing up the environment. Hmm, pretty obvious here in Oz, let alone what I saw last time I was in mid west Merika we are screwing up the environment and destroying habitat.
4. Screwing up the environment is going to lead to people dying. Happening now. Plenty of foods, fires, droughts and famines. Wait until we see an ice free arctic and lets see what effect this has on Northern Hemisphere weather patterns and food production....
5. If we screw up the environment enough it can and will lead to human extinction. Just a matter of how much we screw it up.

Guy just asserts we have got to the last step already. I fear we have too, but am working on the premise that we haven't, mainly through denial, and the perhaps futile belief I can make a difference for the next generation. After all I did actually bring some of them into the world and I believe I have a moral obligations to try and see them survive.
 
I did enjoyed the Mad Max movies, but would prefer if I could actually avoid the scenarios in real life... (Watch the first one, it is actually the best IMHO, and a lot of the scenes were filmed not far from where I live. Also a  Ford 1977 XB Falcon was my first car, although it was not a V8 or a 2 doorlike those that appear in the film.)

Geo- Engineering is about as logical as a Mars settlements as an answer to the habitat problem we will face.
If we cant live sustainably on a planet we are tailor made for  how the fuck are we going to live in an alien hostile environment!

Geo-engineering i the cause of our problems not the cure...

Clean coal, or indeed clean energy is an oxy-moron. Solar panels don't spontaneously assembly in virgin forests...

Guns and Span wont save humanity either for all you survivalist types. Just leads to holes and constipation in lots of dying people.

The way I see it we really only have 2 possible options:

1. Pain followed by death.
Or
2. Pain followed by death sooner.

Why sweat the details.

Enjoy.
Now where did I leave that bottle..

JOW

There was time most of us were NBL fans, or at least a fan of Guy and what trying to get across in his writing and speeches. The real issue became the tone of the angry people who sought out the blog and used the comments section there to promote hating the human race. Mostly pissed-off burnouts from various environmental movements and animal rights groups who gathered daily to viciously attack well-meaning people who dropped by the blog to weigh in Guy's posts. I haven't checked out NBL in many months, maybe a year or two now.

I have exactly the same POV on NBL as Dr. Geoffrey Chia, whom RE cross-posts from time to time. Collapse is something to be planned for and anticipated, so that you can weather the vicissitudes of the coming storms.



 :emthup:

I post videos of Guy from time to time. He makes a lot of sense, but his narrative is extremely conflicted. He is rather impatient with those who question his extinction box canyon assumptions, only to turn around and talk of "love" and "living the day". His insistance that he was born to be a "teacher" comes off as rather arrogant, considering that he now continuously advocates "humility". He is NOT open to being TAUGHT by ANYONE who doesn't possess the same University Credentials that he severely criticizes as belonging to mostly the bought and paid for cowardly set of scientists and academics out there.

Guy, the "boy genious" was TOTALLY unaware, by his own admission, that the U.S. Gooberment was assigning fawning pseudo-intellectual spies to his classes to gain his confidence and track his every move in order to undermine the validity of his excellent (anarchist = radical = root of proper living) teaching style.

WHY WAS THAT? BECAUSE GUY IS SO FULL OF HIMSELF that he was, and probably still is, a sucker for fawning con artists.

At NO TIME has he appeared, beyond lip service, to BEHAVE as if he possesses any new found humility. So, he has an arrogance problem. Sure, he will self deprecatingly talk about how long it took for him to learn to milk goats and how hard it is for him to grow plants and such in a display of humility, but he cannot seem to give a talk without parading the fact that he earned his full professorial credentials at a young age.

I enjoy listening to his dissertations on climate feedback loops and the in-your-face wishful thinking stupidity of many scientists. He is 100% right on both those issues. But his personal life is testament, though he vociferously denies it, to a man embittered because the establisment turned against the worthy and erudite Guy McPherson.

If you do not see that as a highly conflicted message, I suggest you look a bit deeper.  8)
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: azozeo on August 05, 2017, 01:06:31 PM




And for anyone who cares, I just celebrated 9 years sober. Woo hoo!
[/quote]

I care. 9 years is a big deal.
Fan of Bill's is a fan of mine.  :icon_sunny:
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Eddie on August 05, 2017, 05:55:05 PM
That's a lot of days and a lot of meetings. My heartfelt congratulations to you AZ, on your sobriety birthday!
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: azozeo on August 05, 2017, 05:57:39 PM
That's a lot of days and a lot of meetings. My heartfelt congratulations to you AZ, on your sobriety birthday!


Roy's the 9 year old.

I have a little more time, but who's counting ?
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Eddie on August 05, 2017, 06:01:59 PM
Oh, sorry. I see you were offering Roy your congrats. My bad.

Congratulations to Roy, who is a damn good man.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: RE on August 05, 2017, 06:51:45 PM
I have exactly the same POV on NBL as Dr. Geoffrey Chia, whom RE cross-posts from time to time. Collapse is something to be planned for and anticipated, so that you can weather the vicissitudes of the coming storms.

I don't cross post GC.  He is a Native Diner Blogger.  All his articles are ORIGINAL here on the Diner, they appear here before they appear anywhere else, if they do.  Most of them from the last 3 years can ONLY be found on the web at the Diner URL.

I met GC on NBL, where he used to post up his articles.  He does not run his own blog.  He became disenchanted with Dr. McStinksion and the band of Nihilists & Misanthropes that populate his website, and I offered him space to publish his material here on the Diner.

The philosophy you get off of NBL and the attitude is extremely depressing stuff, that is why he has the Suicide Prevention information on the side bar.  HTF is it helpful to tell everyone the situation is HOPELESS, particularly when in fact it is NOT hopeless? ???  :icon_scratch:  There is NO GUARANTEE carved on Stone Tablets by God that all Homo Saps will be DEAD in 10 years.  That is what Dr. McStinksion sells to his cult followers, and they eat it up.  They are mostly people from the environmental movement who have become depressed about the continuing and ongoing deterioration which nothing they ever did was able to stop.  So now they have just quit and are waiting to die, and hope everyone else dies also so the cancer of Homo Sap is wiped off the face of the Earth forever.

Sorry, I can't join that club, and neither could GC.

RE
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: John of Wallan on August 05, 2017, 07:39:14 PM
Not asking anyone to join any clubs.

I find it interesting and a little perplexing the amount of animosity floating about regarding NBL. I attack the very confronting 10 year time frame from a slightly different perspective: It could be accurate, so I had better hurry the hell up!

Saying it is not going to happen encourages the "kick the can down the road' philosophy so many have applied to a lot of modern economic and environmental issues. I know you dont do this RE, hence the SUN projects and such activities on your part. Interested to know where you get your sense of urgency and drive to actually do something if not from fear of a really bad outcome for those following in our footsteps...

10 years may be off by a factor of 10. Still not a long time. By my actions and I assume yours also RE, I hope we buy some time. I am pessimistic that we will be able to stop the doomsday clock entirely.

JOW
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: RE on August 05, 2017, 08:02:29 PM
10 years may be off by a factor of 10. Still not a long time. By my actions and I assume yours also RE, I hope we buy some time. I am pessimistic that we will be able to stop the doomsday clock entirely.

Extinction is a GUARANTEE and always has been.  Only the timeline is in question.

Dr. McStinksion promotes the idea it will occur in a Decade and there is NOTHING YOU CAN DO ABOUT IT.  Neither concept is likely to be true, and the attitude promotes depression and hopelessness, which Guy OFFICIALLY endorses.  His website literally tells people to give up hope.

He is a DEATH CULT LEADER with a Ph.D. in Biology.  That is all.

RE
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Surly1 on August 06, 2017, 05:49:05 AM

And for anyone who cares, I just celebrated 9 years sober. Woo hoo!

I care. 9 years is a big deal.
Fan of Bill's is a fan of mine.  :icon_sunny:
[/quote]

Congrats, AZ, and well done!
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Surly1 on August 06, 2017, 06:00:32 AM


I post videos of Guy from time to time. He makes a lot of sense, but his narrative is extremely conflicted. He is rather impatient with those who question his extinction box canyon assumptions, only to turn around and talk of "love" and "living the day". His insistance that he was born to be a "teacher" comes off as rather arrogant, considering that he now continuously advocates "humility". He is NOT open to being TAUGHT by ANYONE who doesn't possess the same University Credentials that he severely criticizes as belonging to mostly the bought and paid for cowardly set of scientists and academics out there.

Guy, the "boy genious" was TOTALLY unaware, by his own admission, that the U.S. Gooberment was assigning fawning pseudo-intellectual spies to his classes to gain his confidence and track his every move in order to undermine the validity of his excellent (anarchist = radical = root of proper living) teaching style.

WHY WAS THAT? BECAUSE GUY IS SO FULL OF HIMSELF that he was, and probably still is, a sucker for fawning con artists.

At NO TIME has he appeared, beyond lip service, to BEHAVE as if he possesses any new found humility. So, he has an arrogance problem. Sure, he will self deprecatingly talk about how long it took for him to learn to milk goats and how hard it is for him to grow plants and such in a display of humility, but he cannot seem to give a talk without parading the fact that he earned his full professorial credentials at a young age.

I enjoy listening to his dissertations on climate feedback loops and the in-your-face wishful thinking stupidity of many scientists. He is 100% right on both those issues. But his personal life is testament, though he vociferously denies it, to a man embittered because the establisment turned against the worthy and erudite Guy McPherson.

If you do not see that as a highly conflicted message, I suggest you look a bit deeper.  8)

I have followed the discussion of Guy McPherson and NBL, and a few visits to his site had always been enough to cure me. Intolerant death-cult, indeed.

For my money, AG's assessment above is as accurate and succinct a summation as anyone needs.

(https://cdn.xl.thumbs.canstockphoto.com/canstock21640828.jpg)
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: luciddreams on August 06, 2017, 09:45:09 AM


I post videos of Guy from time to time. He makes a lot of sense, but his narrative is extremely conflicted. He is rather impatient with those who question his extinction box canyon assumptions, only to turn around and talk of "love" and "living the day". His insistance that he was born to be a "teacher" comes off as rather arrogant, considering that he now continuously advocates "humility". He is NOT open to being TAUGHT by ANYONE who doesn't possess the same University Credentials that he severely criticizes as belonging to mostly the bought and paid for cowardly set of scientists and academics out there.

Guy, the "boy genious" was TOTALLY unaware, by his own admission, that the U.S. Gooberment was assigning fawning pseudo-intellectual spies to his classes to gain his confidence and track his every move in order to undermine the validity of his excellent (anarchist = radical = root of proper living) teaching style.

WHY WAS THAT? BECAUSE GUY IS SO FULL OF HIMSELF that he was, and probably still is, a sucker for fawning con artists.

At NO TIME has he appeared, beyond lip service, to BEHAVE as if he possesses any new found humility. So, he has an arrogance problem. Sure, he will self deprecatingly talk about how long it took for him to learn to milk goats and how hard it is for him to grow plants and such in a display of humility, but he cannot seem to give a talk without parading the fact that he earned his full professorial credentials at a young age.

I enjoy listening to his dissertations on climate feedback loops and the in-your-face wishful thinking stupidity of many scientists. He is 100% right on both those issues. But his personal life is testament, though he vociferously denies it, to a man embittered because the establisment turned against the worthy and erudite Guy McPherson.

If you do not see that as a highly conflicted message, I suggest you look a bit deeper.  8)

I have followed the discussion of Guy McPherson and NBL, and a few visits to his site had always been enough to cure me. Intolerant death-cult, indeed.

For my money, AG's assessment above is as accurate and succinct a summation as anyone needs.

(https://cdn.xl.thumbs.canstockphoto.com/canstock21640828.jpg)

I endorse AG's assessment as well. 

Personally I think contemplating NTHE is counterproductive, depressing, and pointless.  If it is true, why the fuck would anybody want to marinate on something so depressing?  Especially when there is nothing anyone can do about any of it.  You might as well just off yourself now if you follow that line of bullshit. 

I have kids.  I scared to death for the future they will likely get.  I brought them into the world consciously and I was collapse/PO aware when I did it.  Neither of my children were mistakes...they were both planned.  Why would anybody do that knowing about collapse and PO? 

In the end I decided that even with all of life's hardships it's still worth living.  The trials and tribulations, the suffering and pain, are all worth enduring because beauty is beautiful.  A good poem, song, or painting, a beautiful sunset at the beach, a birds song in the forest, a star lite sky, a full moon on a crisp winter night with snow on the ground, making love, the joy of a child, the sound of shakuhachi :D  All of that stuff is beautiful and meaningful and for no reason beyond the beauty.  That is why I brought children into the world even though I was collapse/po aware.  If I ask either of them if they are happy to be alive they both say that they are.  They both laugh and smile and play and have a good time everyday. 

In the end we are all going to suffer.  Life is suffering afterall...so says Buddha.  To give up on life simply because man kind is a collective retard is nothing new.  Man has always been pretty stupid collectively.  Anything bigger then tribal lends itself to accentuating our stupidity and hubris.  Even still...all of that beauty still exists...God, gods, or no gods...none of it matters. 

I'm not buying what Guy is selling because I don't want to kill myself, or my children.  If he's correct then I might as well kill my family and then off myself to save us all from the pain and suffering.  To be clear I would NEVER do such a thing.  I'd be a criminal and practice violence to keep my family alive before I'd do such a thing.  I plan take as many breaths as I can in this life, even if they are painful ones. 
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: azozeo on August 06, 2017, 01:02:41 PM

And for anyone who cares, I just celebrated 9 years sober. Woo hoo!

I care. 9 years is a big deal.
Fan of Bill's is a fan of mine.  :icon_sunny:

Congrats, AZ, and well done!
[/quote]



Roy's the Birthday boy.....

My sober date is in January.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: moniker on October 13, 2017, 10:56:11 AM
I see nearly 5 years have elapsed since I first posted on this site. That's not a reflection of the quality of the site or its content; instead it reflects my reluctance to write about my somewhat close encounters with the capstone of the pyramid or power elite as I previously stated.

I made some comments recently outside the forum mistakenly with uid "dank".

Anyhow I was wondering whether RE would be interested in commenting on a story related to Stuyvesant HS, which I attended from 1974 - 1977. In the early 1990's I submitted a solution to a math problem posted in the alumni association newsletter, which was cited as correct in a subsequent issue. This occurred during a much happier phase of my life, but I did not think much of it. I do not have a copy my solution or the newsletter.

In early 2001 I mentioned my solution to an older coworker who had been a math department tutor at Stuy and went on the become an engineer. He leaped out his chair and said he could not believe it solved it and demanded to see a copy of the newsletter mentioning my name and demanded to know who advised me to become an accountant ( I was actually working as a programmer at the time). But I could not find any copies.

Thanks to the internet I recently discovered this "coconut monkey" problem is notoriously difficult. I contacted the alumni office but they said they could not find the back issue.

I should mention that I also suffer from chronic depression, which started in my teenage years.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: azozeo on October 13, 2017, 12:11:49 PM
I see nearly 5 years have elapsed since I first posted on this site. That's not a reflection of the quality of the site or its content; instead it reflects my reluctance to write about my somewhat close encounters with the capstone of the pyramid or power elite as I previously stated.

I made some comments recently outside the forum mistakenly with uid "dank".

Anyhow I was wondering whether RE would be interested in commenting on a story related to Stuyvesant HS, which I attended from 1974 - 1977. In the early 1990's I submitted a solution to a math problem posted in the alumni association newsletter, which was cited as correct in a subsequent issue. This occurred during a much happier phase of my life, but I did not think much of it. I do not have a copy my solution or the newsletter.

In early 2001 I mentioned my solution to an older coworker who had been a math department tutor at Stuy and went on the become an engineer. He leaped out his chair and said he could not believe it solved it and demanded to see a copy of the newsletter mentioning my name and demanded to know who advised me to become an accountant ( I was actually working as a programmer at the time). But I could not find any copies.

Thanks to the internet I recently discovered this "coconut monkey" problem is notoriously difficult. I contacted the alumni office but they said they could not find the back issue.

I should mention that I also suffer from chronic depression, which started in my teenage years.


Hey Mo !


Welcome back to the asylum....

This happy haunt needs a Mo  :icon_sunny:
Let us know if we can help with depression.
Don't let the mob grab you by the shorthairs. The white hats are in the shadows
& will be ridin' into town mucho pronto amigo  :icon_mrgreen:
Az
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: moniker on October 13, 2017, 01:13:47 PM
Thanks for offering help with my depression AZ!

After 4 decades of continual suffering I finally got this under control thanks to kundalini yoga, finally getting competent CBT and internet research.

Amazingly after years of talk therapy I had to diagnose myself based on the results of a study by the NYS Psychiatric Institute on dysthymia conducted in the first decade of this millennium. St. Johns Wort also helped. But then I read an article recently on Natural News.com about the benefits of magnesium for depression I immediately switched from SJW to MG without any withdrawal effects. I also started using adaptogens intensively, having used only Holy Basil extract previously, for muscle atrophy.

I concluded also that my deltoid muscle atrophy was largely attributable to elevated cortisol also. Basically early onset chronic depression results from excessive uncontrollable stress that messes up HPA axis regulation.

In terms of the chakra model, first and second chakras need work because the adrenal cortex is damaged. Also sixth chakra for hypothalamus and pituitary.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: Surly1 on October 13, 2017, 01:39:04 PM
I see nearly 5 years have elapsed since I first posted on this site. That's not a reflection of the quality of the site or its content; instead it reflects my reluctance to write about my somewhat close encounters with the capstone of the pyramid or power elite as I previously stated.


Welcome! Nice to have you here-- again.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: luciddreams on October 13, 2017, 02:00:43 PM
Thanks for offering help with my depression AZ!

After 4 decades of continual suffering I finally got this under control thanks to kundalini yoga, finally getting competent CBT and internet research.

Amazingly after years of talk therapy I had to diagnose myself based on the results of a study by the NYS Psychiatric Institute on dysthymia conducted in the first decade of this millennium. St. Johns Wort also helped. But then I read an article recently on Natural News.com about the benefits of magnesium for depression I immediately switched from SJW to MG without any withdrawal effects. I also started using adaptogens intensively, having used only Holy Basil extract previously, for muscle atrophy.

I concluded also that my deltoid muscle atrophy was largely attributable to elevated cortisol also. Basically early onset chronic depression results from excessive uncontrollable stress that messes up HPA axis regulation.

In terms of the chakra model, first and second chakras need work because the adrenal cortex is damaged. Also sixth chakra for hypothalamus and pituitary.

I personally feel that depression is an indication of a healthy mind in this world.  Who in their right mind would be happy about the way the world is? 

Nothing but horror and more horror.  Stupid people, idiots, no self-respect, and a system designed to suck as much money out of each person as possible.  Waste, consumerism, asphalt and concrete, empty calories, war, prisons...

But I guess there's flowers and cotton candy to distract you from all of that  :icon_scratch:

I'm only not depressed because depression is illogical.  That is, it's not logical to feel badly about the world just because the world sucks.  Given a choice between feeling badly, and feeling joy, I'd rather feel joy.  Even though there is no logical reason to be joyous other than the decision to not be depressed.  Everything is a paradox.  Mind over reality is the best option we have. 

If I break it all down, and if I try to come up with a good reason why I should not be depressed, I can only come up with one reason.  That reason is that depression is horrible.  It makes life unbearable.  For me it's not about feelings (although I have aspergers...at least that's what I tell myself), it's about controlling my thoughts.  Emotions affect thoughts, but so do thoughts affect emotion. 

I suffer from depression every day.  However, my depression is not so much emotional.  My depression is due to cognitive dissonance.  Again, it's mental space for me.  Not emotional.  It's easier for me because I can just make up my mind...and I have children and a wife to provide for.  In return they provide me with a constant source of purpose.  Man...the provider.  I would never argue that having children is a good idea for purpose.  However, it is a product of procreation.  Unless you are a shit bag, in which case it's sort of like stupid is as stupid does...shitbags smell like shit. 

I used to smoke cannabis to combat depression.  It worked for me, but not for my wife.  It worked for me because I was able to erect a false dichotomy of idealism.  I was able to convince myself that engaging with nature for the purposes of creating sustainable food, fuel, fiber, and medicine systems was the highest good.  I was able to convince myself that following my bliss would result in a viable path in this reality.  It didn't do that.  Maybe it can do that for some people. 

Basically you are required to possess a certain amount of money to live.  There is no place for money to exist in idealism.  In fact, money is the opposite of idealism.  It's the greatest swindle in the history of man. 

Anyways, don't beat yourself up for being depressed...depression is nothing more than your bodies reaction to this fucked up reality that we inhabit.  Welcome to the Diner  :emthup:

 :icon_sunny:
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: azozeo on October 13, 2017, 02:43:00 PM
Thanks for offering help with my depression AZ!

After 4 decades of continual suffering I finally got this under control thanks to kundalini yoga, finally getting competent CBT and internet research.

Amazingly after years of talk therapy I had to diagnose myself based on the results of a study by the NYS Psychiatric Institute on dysthymia conducted in the first decade of this millennium. St. Johns Wort also helped. But then I read an article recently on Natural News.com about the benefits of magnesium for depression I immediately switched from SJW to MG without any withdrawal effects. I also started using adaptogens intensively, having used only Holy Basil extract previously, for muscle atrophy.

I concluded also that my deltoid muscle atrophy was largely attributable to elevated cortisol also. Basically early onset chronic depression results from excessive uncontrollable stress that messes up HPA axis regulation.

In terms of the chakra model, first and second chakras need work because the adrenal cortex is damaged. Also sixth chakra for hypothalamus and pituitary.


What are your thoughts towards QHHT ?
Perhaps a journey to ???????? can shed some light on the subject (pun intended)
When a soul is in low density (depression, fear, anger, rage, etc.) parasites can hitch a ride on the stage & make the journey
loaded with hostiles around every bend.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: RE on October 13, 2017, 02:44:17 PM
I see nearly 5 years have elapsed since I first posted on this site. That's not a reflection of the quality of the site or its content; instead it reflects my reluctance to write about my somewhat close encounters with the capstone of the pyramid or power elite as I previously stated.

I made some comments recently outside the forum mistakenly with uid "dank".

Anyhow I was wondering whether RE would be interested in commenting on a story related to Stuyvesant HS, which I attended from 1974 - 1977. In the early 1990's I submitted a solution to a math problem posted in the alumni association newsletter, which was cited as correct in a subsequent issue. This occurred during a much happier phase of my life, but I did not think much of it. I do not have a copy my solution or the newsletter.

In early 2001 I mentioned my solution to an older coworker who had been a math department tutor at Stuy and went on the become an engineer. He leaped out his chair and said he could not believe it solved it and demanded to see a copy of the newsletter mentioning my name and demanded to know who advised me to become an accountant ( I was actually working as a programmer at the time). But I could not find any copies.

Thanks to the internet I recently discovered this "coconut monkey" problem is notoriously difficult. I contacted the alumni office but they said they could not find the back issue.

I should mention that I also suffer from chronic depression, which started in my teenage years.

:hi: back to the Diner Mo.  :icon_sunny:

You might try contacting Eric Lander at the Whitehead institute, Math Genius and ex-chief of the Human Genome Project and Obama's head of the Science council.  Alsos my ex-Biology Lab partner.  :icon_sunny:  He might have a back copy himself or know where to find one.  Ypu could try the Library of Congress also.

Don't stay Walkabout so long next time!

RE
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: RE on October 13, 2017, 02:47:14 PM
Thanks for offering help with my depression AZ!

After 4 decades of continual suffering I finally got this under control thanks to kundalini yoga, finally getting competent CBT and internet research.

Amazingly after years of talk therapy I had to diagnose myself based on the results of a study by the NYS Psychiatric Institute on dysthymia conducted in the first decade of this millennium. St. Johns Wort also helped. But then I read an article recently on Natural News.com about the benefits of magnesium for depression I immediately switched from SJW to MG without any withdrawal effects. I also started using adaptogens intensively, having used only Holy Basil extract previously, for muscle atrophy.

I concluded also that my deltoid muscle atrophy was largely attributable to elevated cortisol also. Basically early onset chronic depression results from excessive uncontrollable stress that messes up HPA axis regulation.

In terms of the chakra model, first and second chakras need work because the adrenal cortex is damaged. Also sixth chakra for hypothalamus and pituitary.

I personally feel that depression is an indication of a healthy mind in this world.  Who in their right mind would be happy about the way the world is? 

I will chip in on the depression issue later.  Have to head over to let the vampires suck my blood.

RE
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: azozeo on October 13, 2017, 02:49:08 PM
Thanks for offering help with my depression AZ!

After 4 decades of continual suffering I finally got this under control thanks to kundalini yoga, finally getting competent CBT and internet research.

Amazingly after years of talk therapy I had to diagnose myself based on the results of a study by the NYS Psychiatric Institute on dysthymia conducted in the first decade of this millennium. St. Johns Wort also helped. But then I read an article recently on Natural News.com about the benefits of magnesium for depression I immediately switched from SJW to MG without any withdrawal effects. I also started using adaptogens intensively, having used only Holy Basil extract previously, for muscle atrophy.

I concluded also that my deltoid muscle atrophy was largely attributable to elevated cortisol also. Basically early onset chronic depression results from excessive uncontrollable stress that messes up HPA axis regulation.

In terms of the chakra model, first and second chakras need work because the adrenal cortex is damaged. Also sixth chakra for hypothalamus and pituitary.

I personally feel that depression is an indication of a healthy mind in this world.  Who in their right mind would be happy about the way the world is? 

I will chip in on the depression issue later.  Have to head over to let the vampires suck my blood.

RE


Tip the death nurse.....
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: moniker on October 13, 2017, 05:34:48 PM
Well yes, insanity is a sane response to an insane world. By the way, I also has a serious adverse effect to ssri's once I finally broke down and decided to try meds. Once they got their hands on me, the psycho-pharmacologists almost finished me off.

By the way, the quote from Rumi is also known the hermetic principal of correspondence. If anyone could explain the practical application of these laws it would be great.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: K-Dog on October 13, 2017, 06:19:47 PM
I see nearly 5 years have elapsed since I first posted on this site. That's not a reflection of the quality of the site or its content; instead it reflects my reluctance to write about my somewhat close encounters with the capstone of the pyramid or power elite as I previously stated.


I am very familiar with such things having had more than close encounters myself.

Yet being reluctant gives them power and they win.  Caution care and deliberation need to be your watchwords not reluctance.

As far as depression goes I'm choosing not to indulge.  We live in an absurd world and I am going to make the most out of of the time I have left.  I simply choose not to embrace the absurdity.  I choose to rebel against it.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: azozeo on October 13, 2017, 06:42:38 PM


By the way, the quote from Rumi is also known the hermetic principal of correspondence. If anyone could explain the practical application of these laws it would be great.

Hope all your reap what you sow questions are answered here. It's light physics.
http://www.youtube.com/v/bIvILcCqSaA&fs=1
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: RE on October 13, 2017, 07:14:08 PM
I personally feel that depression is an indication of a healthy mind in this world.  Who in their right mind would be happy about the way the world is? 

I don't think it's ever healthy to be depressed.  At best you end up feeling crappy all the time, at worst you can get suicidal.  Suicide is not good for your health.  Even worse than smoking. lol.

However, just because you are not depressed doesn't automatically make you "happy".  There are many mood states between "depressed" and "happy".

I don't get depressed about the state of the world for a few reasons.  First off, I've had a lot of time to process it, and long ago realized the world was fucked up.  "Life sucks, and then you die."  So you just plug onward, sometimes getting bad breaks, other times getting some good ones.  Every day above ground is another day to contemplate the meaning of life and watch another SUN☼rise.   :icon_sunny:

The only time money ever depressed me was when I was completely broke and still had Credit Card bills.  Once I declared Bankruptcy though and got my first trucking job with Schneider, money never depressed me again.  I always had enough, because I don't need a lot.  I could live on a min wage salary.  Recently, money didn't depress me, but it did worry me after my accident and before my SSI was approved and I won my Workman's Comp case.  For 7 months with no income, I had nightmares every night of ending up a Homeless Cripple Freezing to Death on the Streets of Palmer, Alaska.  I watched my carefully harbored Savings dwindle.  But my frugality paid off for me, because my Savings lasted long enough to carry me through to the day the first payment from SSI rolled into my checking account, and except for the health problems I face I LOVE retirement.  :icon_sunny:

How did I do that?  After declaring BK, I made a vow I would never go in debt again, never take another loan from a bank.  No Mortgages, No Car Loans, No Credit Cards.  Everything I bought for the last 25 years was paid for with CASH.  I never took on expenses that were beyond what I could afford, in fact I always tried to keep my expenses to half what I could afford, so that I could SAVE MONEY.  Save money I did, and that is what SAVED ME.  I made it through 7 months with no income.  How many Amerikans could do that?  Answer, not too many.

Will SS last forever?  No, it won't but when SS dies, Collapse is full on.  Many SS recipients now support their adult children and grandchildren.  20% of the population receives some sort of mailbox money.  You take that out of the economy, and the crash would be literally overnight.  I am just trying to stay above ground long enough to see my predictions validated.  I hope I can last that long.

Anyhow, between "happy" and "depressed", I put "fatalistic", which is what I am.  We all get born with no choice as to who, where or when we sprung to corporeal life.  Somewhere along the way you may get the Epiphany that "Life Sucks and then you Die".  Most of the people through history and most of the people living on the planet today have a suckier life than you do.  Slums, Slavery, Child labor, Refugee Camps, polluted drinking water, the works.  However, you don't see them dropping Fukitol every day to make it through another day.

For you Depressed Diners out there I have no recipe for ridding yourself of depression, but it's definitely not a healthy state of mind and you should try.

RE
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: K-Dog on October 13, 2017, 07:32:12 PM
I personally feel that depression is an indication of a healthy mind in this world.  Who in their right mind would be happy about the way the world is? 

I don't think it's ever healthy to be depressed.  At best you end up feeling crappy all the time, at worst you can get suicidal.  Suicide is not good for your health.  Even worse than smoking. lol.

However, just because you are not depressed doesn't automatically make you "happy".  There are many mood states between "depressed" and "happy".

I don't get depressed about the state of the world for a few reasons.  First off, I've had a lot of time to process it, and long ago realized the world was fucked up.  "Life sucks, and then you die."  So you just plug onward, sometimes getting bad breaks, other times getting some good ones.  Every day above ground is another day to contemplate the meaning of life and watch another SUN☼rise.   :icon_sunny:

The only time money ever depressed me was when I was completely broke and still had Credit Card bills.  Once I declared Bankruptcy though and got my first trucking job with Schneider, money never depressed me again.  I always had enough, because I don't need a lot.  I could live on a min wage salary.  Recently, money didn't depress me, but it did worry me after my accident and before my SSI was approved and I won my Workman's Comp case.  For 7 months with no income, I had nightmares every night of ending up a Homeless Cripple Freezing to Death on the Streets of Palmer, Alaska.  I watched my carefully harbored Savings dwindle.  But my frugality paid off for me, because my Savings lasted long enough to carry me through to the day the first payment from SSI rolled into my checking account, and except for the health problems I face I LOVE retirement.  :icon_sunny:

How did I do that?  After declaring BK, I made a vow I would never go in debt again, never take another loan from a bank.  No Mortgages, No Car Loans, No Credit Cards.  Everything I bought for the last 25 years was paid for with CASH.  I never took on expenses that were beyond what I could afford, in fact I always tried to keep my expenses to half what I could afford, so that I could SAVE MONEY.  Save money I did, and that is what SAVED ME.  I made it through 7 months with no income.  How many Amerikans could do that?  Answer, not too many.

Will SS last forever?  No, it won't but when SS dies, Collapse is full on.  Many SS recipients now support their adult children and grandchildren.  20% of the population receives some sort of mailbox money.  You take that out of the economy, and the crash would be literally overnight.  I am just trying to stay above ground long enough to see my predictions validated.  I hope I can last that long.

Anyhow, between "happy" and "depressed", I put "fatalistic", which is what I am.  We all get born with no choice as to who, where or when we sprung to corporeal life.  Somewhere along the way you may get the Epiphany that "Life Sucks and then you Die".  Most of the people through history and most of the people living on the planet today have a suckier life than you do.  Slums, Slavery, Child labor, Refugee Camps, polluted drinking water, the works.  However, you don't see them dropping Fukitol every day to make it through another day.

For you Depressed Diners out there I have no recipe for ridding yourself of depression, but it's definitely not a healthy state of mind and you should try.

RE

I agree 100%, depression is a bad situation to be avoided.

I personally feel that depression is an indication of a healthy mind in this world.  Who in their right mind would be happy about the way the world is? 

Who in their right mind would choose not to be happy?   If the state of the world is not a source of happiness find it elsewhere.  You will not be selling out if you do.  It will not be the same thing as joining the ranks of the mindless sheep as you think.  Under conditions of standard temperature and pressure the organism will naturally be happy.  Find the right conditions for you.

Depression is complicated but part of its perpetuation is us choosing the same reactions to a circumstance which repeats when other reactions that we could have would be better, more appropriate, and better suited to break the cycle.
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: moniker on October 14, 2017, 09:15:41 AM
Well yes the principal of mentalism is applicable: all is mental. But isn't this like lifting oneself up by the bootstraps?
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: RE on October 14, 2017, 09:22:01 AM
Well yes the principal of mentalism is applicable: all is mental. But isn't this like lifting oneself up by the bootstraps?

Not really, because you don't function in a vacuum.  You can look for levers outside yourself to crank yourself out of the depression vortex.  Not always EZ to find of course, but they are there.

RE
Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: azozeo on October 14, 2017, 02:18:20 PM
Don't be this guy....

http://www.youtube.com/v/UKO4hljxdUU&fs=1
Title: Welcome! Hey Mo, Heads Up
Post by: azozeo on October 15, 2017, 01:56:36 PM
Thanks for offering help with my depression AZ!

After 4 decades of continual suffering I finally got this under control thanks to kundalini yoga, finally getting competent CBT and internet research.



In terms of the chakra model, first and second chakras need work because the adrenal cortex is damaged. Also sixth chakra for hypothalamus and pituitary.

Magic mushroom extract changes brains of people with depression



https://www.newscientist.com/article/2150305-magic-mushroom-extract-changes-brains-of-people-with-depression/ (https://www.newscientist.com/article/2150305-magic-mushroom-extract-changes-brains-of-people-with-depression/)


New Scientist

By New Scientist staff and Press Association

Psilocybin, a hallucinogenic compound found in magic mushrooms, may help re-set the activity of neural circuits in the brain that are involved in depression.

Magic mushroom enthusiasts have long believed that the drug’s ability to induce profound-feeling experiences could be therapeutically useful. Brain-imaging studies have shown that psilocybin targets areas of the brain overactive in depression.

Last year, Robin Carhart-Harris of Imperial College London and his colleagues conducted the first clinical trial of using psilocybin to treat depression, and got some encouraging results. The trial only involved 12 people and no control group, but the team found that after two sessions of psilocybin-assisted psychotherapy, all of the volunteers had reduced symptoms.

Now Carhart-Harris and his team have shown that psilocybin seems to cause changes in the brains of people with depression. The study involved 19 people who, like in the previous study, had depression that had not been helped by conventional treatments.
Mood reset

Each volunteer was given a 10 mg and 25 mg dose of psilocybin, seven days apart. Brain scans showed that, after taking the drug, activity in some regions of the brain reduced. These areas included the amygdala, which plays a role in processing stress and fear. The participants reported an immediate improvement in mood that lasted for up to five weeks.

“We have shown for the first time clear changes in brain activity in depressed people treated with psilocybin after failing to respond to conventional treatments,” says Carhart-Harris. “Several of our patients described feeling ‘reset’ after the treatment.”

“This is further evidence that psilocybin may turn out to be effective for the most stubborn depression,” says Paul Morrison, of King’s College London. “Developments in this area are a priority in psychiatry. Some people can go through years of suffering, which resist all standard therapies.”

Carhart-Harris’s team warned that people should not attempt to self-medicate with psychedelic drugs.

Journal reference: Scientific Reports, DOI: 10.1038/s41598-017-13282-7

Read more: Meet the man giving people psychedelics for science

Title: Re: Welcome!
Post by: moniker on June 20, 2018, 05:09:45 PM
These are the power elite and will not be defeated at their own game.  The only hope for humanity is