|
|  |
| |
|
| | The Innovation Network Network is not currently active and cannot accept new posts | | the entire fate of the Universe rests on you | Views: 779 | | Dec 12, 2009 4:08 pm | | the entire fate of the Universe rests on you | # | 
James Booth | | .
Lately there has been a particular focus here on CO2
Why is that ?
At whose suggestion has the entire fate of the Universe come to rest on CO2 ?
... or perhaps some other "issue du jour" ... ?
Seems to me *innovation* could be defined:
"action to do the right thing better"
With no thought to profit from doing so.
We each do something like that every day.
Could we focus on what we do, can do, are doing ...
To make our world a better place ?
JBPrivate Reply to James Booth | | Dec 12, 2009 9:31 pm | | re: the entire fate of the Universe rests on you | # | 
Ron Sam | | re: .... Seems to me *innovation* could be defined:
"action to do the right thing better"
With no thought to profit from doing so.
Doing the 'right thing(s)' is a malady in that there will always be argument over what is 'right' by the opposing parties in a multicultural world/society.
It makes me wonder where or how we ever got the idea that 'multi-cultural' was a *right* thing.
See: http://www.ourcivilisation.com/mltcult.htm
Also:
http://www.ourcivilisation.com/pc.htm
http://www.ourcivilisation.com/author.htm
There you have it in a nutshell, reasons for doing the right things better, regardless of profits will never stand in an environment of political clashings. Please read more of Philip Atkinson (Author of: "A Study Of Our Decline") writings and let me know your thoughts.
The following CSM article kind of proves the point, at least in my mind.
Ron
Copenhagen global warming draft points to hard bargaining ahead
A draft pact for a global warming treaty released Friday in Copenhagen would commit the US to significant emissions cuts by 2020 and draw developing nations into an agreement for the first time.
http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Global-News/2009/1211/Copenhagen-global-warming-draft-points-to-hard-bargaining-ahead
By Peter N. Spotts Staff writer / December 11, 2009
Negotiators working on a new global warming treaty released a draft pact today that would commit the US to significant emissions cuts by 2020 and 2050. And, for the first time, it would draw developing countries into a climate agreement, something many analysts say is crucial in the fight against global warming.
The seven-page draft provides the springboard for talks next week in Copenhagen among government ministers. At the end of the week, some 117 heads of state -- including President Obama -- are coming to Copenhagen to wrap up an agreement. As senior political officials, the ministers will try to resolve as many of the outstanding issues as they can before the heads of state arrive.
Those outstanding issues appear as bracketed text in the draft, and they include the most critical elements of a new agreement: temperature objectives and emissions targets, and long-term financial aid for developing countries to help them adapt to global warming and afford the green technologies thew would need to live up to their part of the agreement.
The new text and a companion document for countries negotiating a new commitment period under the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, "really crystallize the key issues," says Alden Meyer, director of policy and planning for the Union of Concerned Scientists in Washington. Reviewing the talks so far from his vantage point in Copenhagen, Mr. Meyer, a veteran of climate negotiations since 1992, observed: "This is probably the most intense and high level negotiating session we've ever had on the climate issues."
Among the major issues covered in the draft that still must be negotiated:
o Temperature objectives. Much of the focus has been aimed at limiting the rise in global average temperatures above preindustrial levels to 2 degrees C. (3.6 degrees F.). But developing countries in Africa, among others, strenuously argue for 1.5 degrees C. They do so on the basis of Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change projections suggesting that a 2-degree average warming worldwide will still lead to warming in large regions of Africa of up to 3.5 degrees C.
o Mid-term emissions targets for developed countries. The midterm targets are expressed either as 25-40 percent below 1990 levels, or "on the order of" 30, 40, or 45 percent below 1990 levels. For signatories of the Kyoto Protocol, these targets would be embraced in a second commitment period, which begins in 2013. The US would be covered in a new treaty covering it and developing countries.
o Longer-term emission targets. All participants in the UN Framework Convention onn Climate Change (UNFCCC) -- essentially all of the more than 190 countries present at the talks -- "should" reduce their collective emissions by 50, 85, or 95 percent. Within this all-hands reduction, industrial countries would commit to emissions reductions of 75-85 percent, 80-95 percent, or more than 95 percent by 2050.
o Quick-start money for developing countries. Yvo de Boer, executive secretary of the UNFCCC, has noted that a quick-start fund should be able to deliver $10 billion a year between 2010 and 2012, with money available virtually as soon as negotiators step off the plane at home. In response, the European Union committed today to contribute $3.6 billion a year to the fund. Several analysts expect that this money ultimately will become available. But some small nations have charged that the sum is far from sufficient.
o Long-term financing. After 2012, UN officials estimate that developing countries will need upward of $100 billion a year in adaptation and green-development money. But details over who has a say in how that money is doled out, safeguards to ensure it's being spent the right way, and how contributions to such a large pot would be allocated among industrial countries have yet to been worked out.
This represents "a huge, gaping hole in these proposals," says Antonio Hill, senior climate adviser for Oxfam International.
The draft political agreement, which Malta's Michael Zammit Cutajar distilled from two years of negotiations, falls short of the full legal agreement many developing countries say they want to see by the end of next week. That in itself is likely to generate some additional heat next week.
Still, the prevailing view is that legalese will be left to negotiators to deal with next year, culminating in a fully articulated treaty no later than the next major climate conference, slated for Mexico City. What's important now, many say, is to have an agreement in hand that prompts countries to take immediate actions once they leave Copenhagen.
Private Reply to Ron Sam | | Dec 13, 2009 3:54 pm | | re: the entire fate of the Universe rests on you, so be a good capitalist | # | 
Ken Hilving | | I am not swallowing the idea the profit is bad.
Capitalist: noun, a wealthy person who uses money to invest in trade and industry for profit.
Let's look at this closer. If we accept that money and currency are the same, then I suggest we first expand our currencies to include time, security, knowledge and prestige.
Next, let's consider a wealthy person in terms of all the currencies. We find that many, perhaps most, of us are wealthy in one way or another.
This makes the capitalist, this "evil" profit driven individual, something better.
Capitalist: noun, a person who uses time, money, security, knowledge, and prestige to invest in trade and industry to increase his time, money, security, knowledge, and prestige.
Go innovate, and make a profit. Increase your time, or your money, or your security, or your knowledge, or your prestige, or all five of these. Do your right thing better, and in most cases the rest of us will profit as well.Private Reply to Ken Hilving | | Dec 13, 2009 4:35 pm | | re: the entire fate of the Universe rests on you | # |
James Booth | | .
Always interesting to me what someone "takes away" from discussion ...
"Doing the 'right thing(s)' is a malady in that there will always be argument over
what is 'right' by the opposing parties in a multicultural world/society.
It makes me wonder where or how we ever got the idea that 'multi-cultural' was
a *right* thing."
What is *right* seems to me to "boil down" to some basic things:
- is it "right" to take someone's life ?
- is it "right" to steal from someone ?
- is it "right" to inhibit another's freedom, or happiness ?
Simple basic things that are found in the Ten Commandments, when you think on it ?
What are the *natural consequences* of acting otherwise ?
- losing one's own life through retribution or revenge
- losing one's own tools and sustenance to compensate
- losing one's own health and God-given opportunity to survive
Do we really need more *law* than those simple ancient admonishments ?
Are not all societies and "culture" based on those simple natural laws ?
I wonder ...
Of course we can always intellectualize and make it complicated.
That is something we know how to do, us humans.
JB
Private Reply to James Booth | | Dec 13, 2009 4:38 pm | | re: the entire fate of the Universe rests on you | # |
James Booth | | .
"I am not swallowing the idea the profit is bad."
Good ! - did someone say profit is bad ?
I said it elsewhere this morning, and will repeat it here:
I do not believe "discoveries" or innovation, new ideas, inventions, etc.
... are all motivated by profit potential.
Most are derived from necessity and through God-given creativity.
Only later does "profit" consideration enter into the picture.
JBPrivate Reply to James Booth | | Dec 13, 2009 4:56 pm | | re: re: the entire fate of the Universe rests on you | # |
James Booth | | .
"multiculturalism" is really beyond the scope or intent of this thread, is it not ?
Philip Atkinson's "A Theory Of Civilization" is indeed a theory:
"A Civilization is a community that imposes its beliefs upon all other communities
by violence.
A Community is a shared understanding; a creature that has a life-cycle like any
other as it first waxes to a prime before waning into senility then dissolution.
As a civilization is a community, and a community is an understanding, then the
study of civilization must be the study of understanding and so it is philosophy."
Need I buy into it ?
My preference is to look forward rather than back.
I believe we can be "civilized" - achieve *civilization* - in new ways (yes, plural)
We do NOT have to *impose* on anyone (though certainly we can).
We should by now be aware that imposing our "beliefs" or anything else on others is not *the way*
We should by now be aware what results from attempting to impose on others.
We should therefore be already fashioning a new *culture* which is sustainable
... as some of us are, and have been doing so for a while in our lives.
We must, if we are to survive at all, achieve a NEW UNDERSTANDING !
To that end, let us proceed ...
JBPrivate Reply to James Booth | | Dec 13, 2009 9:09 pm | | re: re: re: the entire fate of the Universe rests on you | # | 
Ed and Yvonne Servis | | Good points JB
As for me this discussion appears to be "boldly going were no man has gone before" therefore I prefer to beam up and find a different planet.Live long and prosper
EdPrivate Reply to Ed and Yvonne Servis | | Dec 13, 2009 9:23 pm | | re: re: re: re: the entire fate of the Universe rests on you | # | 
Thomas Holford | | Ed and Yvonne sayeth:
> As for me this discussion appears to be "boldly going were no man has gone before" therefore I prefer to beam up and find a different planet.Live long and prosper
You have my permission to live on your own planet as long as you promise not to vote on my planet.
T. HolfordPrivate Reply to Thomas Holford | | Dec 13, 2009 9:49 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: the entire fate of the Universe rests on you | # |
Ed and Yvonne Servis | | Haha. Why won't I be able to vote. That doesn't stop the rest of the illegal aliens, in fact I think I will load up a bunch of ETs and bus them to the polling booth in 2012 just like the Democrats do.
EdPrivate Reply to Ed and Yvonne Servis | | Dec 13, 2009 9:53 pm | | re: re: the entire fate of the Universe rests on you | # |
James Booth | | .
"Negotiators working on a new global warming treaty released a draft pact today
that would commit the US to significant emissions cuts by 2020 and 2050. And,
for the first time, it would draw developing countries into a climate agreement,
something many analysts say is crucial in the fight against global warming."
A clear case of *bait and switch*
So, are we in the US, or in "developed countries," supposed to see this as a victory ?
Roll over and say, "Sure! Tax the hell out of me!" ... ?
JBPrivate Reply to James Booth | | Dec 13, 2009 9:56 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: re: the entire fate of the Universe rests on you | # |
Thomas Holford | | Ed sayeth:
> That doesn't stop the rest of the illegal aliens, in fact I think I will load up a bunch of ETs and bus them to the polling booth in 2012 just like the Democrats do.
Ed
But, wouldn't that be wrong?
Oh, Silly me. We're talking about Democrats.
T. HolfordPrivate Reply to Thomas Holford | | Dec 13, 2009 10:20 pm | | the entire fate of the Universe rests on you | # | 
Mike Fesler BizHarmony | | Thomas,
I think that this is a little harsh. . . .
The democrats are better than that.
This is a developing society that is ecologically sound.
The Democrats would never waste such carbon credits driving out and picking up people that are nonresident US citizens.
They simply pay Acorn to manufacture multiples of fictitious voters, and lets not forget recycling. . . . heck all those dead voters are virtually gold to the cause now.
Then after the election? They can claim -0- attachment to the source and then things will be so confused that everyone will forget about the questionable votes as there is -0- time to correct things. . . . we have polar bears, and healthcare issues to contend with.
Remember? Inundate the system to collapse it, then rebuild it to your specs.
Get with the program comrade.
M.
Private Reply to Mike Fesler BizHarmony | | Dec 13, 2009 11:26 pm | | re: the entire fate of the Universe rests on you | # |
James Booth | | .
Could we focus on what we do, can do, are doing ...
To make our world a better place ?
Could we ?
I know we can.
JBPrivate Reply to James Booth | | Dec 13, 2009 11:45 pm | | re: the entire fate of the Universe rests on you | # |
Ed and Yvonne Servis | | Mr Holford
I believe what we are talking about is how the taxpayers of the industrialized world are going to get screwed by a bunch of corrupt third world countries who will use the money not to do anything about climate change but most likely go to the corrupt polititions, dictators. and thugs that hold power in those countries. This isn't as much to do with climate change or weather patterns as much as it is global redistribution of wealth. The biggest obstacle to immediate and meaningfull reductions of CO2 emissions
are the environmentalists who demand it is all their way, all the way, all at once, or nothing at all.
These emissions will come down as a result of economic neccessity i.e. supply and demand issues, convienience, and of course environmental neccessity. There is NOBODY that wants polluted air or wants to gamble on the global warming theories as maybe some day it may be a proven reality, but right now this looks like a shakedown with a hint of extorsion conspired by those who will benefit financialy by its enactment.
Who was it that said "Never waste a crisis" Ronald Reagan?
EdPrivate Reply to Ed and Yvonne Servis | | Dec 14, 2009 12:14 am | | re: re: the entire fate of the Universe rests on you | # |
Thomas Holford | | Ed sayeth:
> believe what we are talking about is how the taxpayers of the industrialized world are going to get screwed by a bunch of corrupt third world countries who will use the money not to do anything about climate change but most likely go to the corrupt polititions, dictators. and thugs that hold power in those countries. This isn't as much to do with climate change or weather patterns as much as it is global redistribution of wealth.
Bingo!
> The biggest obstacle to immediate and meaningfull reductions of CO2 emissions
are the environmentalists who demand it is all their way, all the way, all at once, or nothing at all.
CO2 is only a minor trace gas in the earth's atmosphere. The earth's climate is dynamic and self-balancing. It is really not within the capability of humanity to upset the balance of CO2 even if it tried.
http://www.dailytech.com/Researcher+Basic+Greenhouse+Equations+Totally+Wrong/article10973.htm
Charlatan's have been selling bogeymen and snake oil since the dawn of history.
But if you don't believe me, I have a special mystical rabbit's foot that I can sell you that will save you and your family from global warming. I got it from an old Gypsy woman when I was touring through Romania many years ago. Even though it has special meaning for me, I'll let you have it for $25,000.
T. Holford
Private Reply to Thomas Holford | | Dec 14, 2009 12:37 am | | re: re: the entire fate of the Universe rests on you | # |
Ed and Yvonne Servis | | JB
I think the quickest way to go is natural gas. I don't know how much CO2 it puts out by I am sure it would be better than coal and petrolium products. I think an obstacle to this is the fact that those evil doer oil companies will profit and there are those who would sacrifice anything rather than to see that, but the main obstacles are the environmental lawsuits.
Nuclear is scary but very clean and the spent rods are a problem. The obstacle there are the evironmental lawsuits
Windmills are ugly and the manufacturing will go to the Chinese. The obstacles there are the environmental lawsuits to stop delivery
I love hydropower but the obstacles there are the environmental lawsuits.
Some people think we should kill off all of the livestock because of methane emissions.
Some think we should kill off some people.
Anyway this is the way I see it. Looks like a stalemate to me. Maybe some common sense is in order.
Look forward to your thoughts
EdPrivate Reply to Ed and Yvonne Servis | | Dec 14, 2009 12:44 am | | re: re: re: the entire fate of the Universe rests on you | # |
Ed and Yvonne Servis | | Mr Holford
"I'll let you have it for $25,000"
Does that include shipping and handling? Is there a patent on it?
Ed
Private Reply to Ed and Yvonne Servis | | Dec 14, 2009 4:44 am | | re: re: the entire fate of the Universe rests on you | # |
Ron Sam | | I happen to agree with you on the obeying on the Ten Commandments as doing the right things in life.
When you take multiculturalism out of the scoping of the unity in doing the right things it will implode on you.
The NYC courts are having a trial on whether KSM is guilty or not of 9/11 atrocities. KSM is a devout jihadist who believes in Islam and pleas non-guilty. duh?
Multiculturalism will stand in the way for doing things right in some minds.
re:
- is it "right" to take someone's life ?
- is it "right" to steal from someone ?
- is it "right" to inhibit another's freedom, or happiness ?
ROBERT SPENCER: FREEDOM OF SPEECH NYC
http://3.ly/rAz video
http://3.ly/ixN link
So, in view of Spencer's speech, please tell me how the western Christian culture with its Ten Commandments tolerate the 'right things' that jihadist believe in when carrying out their Islamic ideology?
Do we not have multicultural clashing?
Ron Private Reply to Ron Sam | | Dec 14, 2009 5:37 am | | re: re: re: re: the entire fate of the Universe rests on you | # |
Thomas Holford | | Ed sayeth:
> Does that include shipping and handling? Is there a patent on it?
First class mail shipment is included in the $25,000.
If you want overnight express delivery, that will be an extra $250.
Since it is a mystical rabbits foot, there is no patent.
Patent filings require disclosure of how things work. If the mystical aspects were disclosed, it wouldn't be mystical anymore.
People would be selling all kinds of mystical things, like mystical love potions, mystical hair restorers, mystical carbon trading schemes, etc. etc.
T. Holford
Private Reply to Thomas Holford | | Dec 15, 2009 10:39 pm | | re: re: re: the entire fate of the Universe rests on you | # |
James Booth | | .
I posed the question ...
"Could we focus on what we do, can do, are doing ...
To make our world a better place ?"
... in an attempt to reinstate some *innovation* here.
So far, few seem to have noticed the question.
"I think the quickest way to go is natural gas."
Not sure why that was the first thing came to his mind, but in that vein, yes, nuclear is also an option
... and regardless how "unsightly" so is wind an option to meet our energy needs.
With a will to manage resources we have available to us, hydropower is still an option that can be used without inundating great swaths of land or disrupting fisheries.
From only one source, a 2006 MIT report, my understanding is that geothermal energy right now has potential to provide 13,000 zettajoules of energy.
The word "zettajoule" is not one I use, is in fact new to me, but the point being made was that 2,000 of those zettajoules are "tappable" now with current technology.
"The total energy consumption of all the countries on the planet is about half of a zettajoule a year," meaning that 4,000 years of "planetary power" is right now available from that one source alone.
Not to forget the sun's energy, solar radiation reaching Earth's surface is thousands of times more than the world's energy use and has only begun to be harnessed, for which we need better mediums of storage (a "paper" battery has recently been announced).
Perhaps energy came first to mind in answer to my question because energy is crucial to our production, food processing, transportation and more.
Possibly in answer to my question, another thread (Personal steps to clean air and CO2 reduction) was opened
... and I am sure there are other areas we can address toward "what we do, can do, are doing ... To make our world a better place"
Too often, however, it seems easier to continue keeping ourselves entertained fighting "Mr. Murdoch's War" just like we s'pose ta do.
We need to change our thinking, learn how to measure the "carrying capacity" of a plot of land, of a country, of a continent, of the entire world, in order to *know* what is truly *scarce*
... rather than rely on those who currently control resources, who decide "scarcity" by withholding what is available, who waste resources to continue failed systems which require "cyclical consumption" to keep a worn out "economic engine" running.
It is what we do as individuals that will result in the changes we REQUIRE to make our own existence - extended through our progeny - SUSTAINABLE.
When the Wright Brothers began flying, or when a horse first breathed exhaust fumes from an automobile, people were not waiting around for the "latest model" to be announced by a manufacturer.
JBPrivate Reply to James Booth | | Dec 16, 2009 6:59 pm | | re: the entire fate of the Universe rests on you | # | 
Joseph Lynders | | " ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "
JB - "Seems to me *innovation* could be defined:
"action to do the right thing better"
With no thought to profit from doing so." - JB
A very interesting thought.
I have considered the concept of *Doing Right* in three ways:
The first is *Doing Things Right* which is basic efficiency. Pretty much any creativity involved is in reducing time, cost and mistakes.
The second is *Doing the Right Things* which is basic effectiveness. Pretty much creativity is used first for discovery and testing of better options.
The third is *Doing the Right Things Right* which is basic excellence. Pretty much creativity is used for all its worth. At this third level everyone profits weather money is involved or not.
12/16/09 Joseph F. Lynders FTg/M/?Private Reply to Joseph Lynders | | Dec 16, 2009 9:05 pm | | re: re: the entire fate of the Universe rests on you | # |
James Booth | | .
So that "... creativity is used for all its worth"
Simple - I like that ! : )
JBPrivate Reply to James Booth | | Feb 12, 2010 9:31 pm | | re: re: re: the entire fate of the Universe rests on you | # |
Joseph Lynders | | " ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "
REPORT:
I think it was about a year ago that noted, I think on this network, that I had figured out who was responsible for the messes we all find ourselves in these days and that the person responsible was myself.
Because I was the culprit I would begin to fix the problems.
I noted that I would have to work to solve our problems from my position of weakness which was only fair because I was able to cause them from the same weak position.
So far I have been able to get fifteen substantial people, (6 women and 9 men), to work in the background on our project and I think I am beginning to notice what appears from time to time as a slight slowing of the rate of increase in the growth of our problem.
Who Da ever Thunk It??
end REPORT
02/12/02 Joseph F. Lynders FTg/M/?Private Reply to Joseph Lynders | | |
| |
| |
