Human race 'will be extinct within 100 years'

[wintler2]

Have you looked into the large amount of evidence that builds an overwhelming case that hidden technology is being used right now? ..

Some, and am unconvinced by everything i've seen and read. Sure there are plenty of unexplained phenomena that could be 'explained' by reference to some unknown and apparently indescribable technology, but you can (and millions do) use a deity of choice the same way. In both cases only words and fuzzy pictures are available to 'prove' their existence. I like the trickster-entity explanation personally, so thats the one i believe.

What kills the hidden tech belief for me is what it doesn't explain: why didn't Bush I or II use it to win the wars they lost? Why fight so hard for oil and gas and coal and uranium when there is supposedly some magical energy source available to elites? why wouldn't they commercialise its use, if only for themselves?

I think elites are too selfish to keep any collective secrets, i can't see a billionaires union deciding and then enforcing a policy of 'no-o-o, we need to save this for later'. Didn't happen with oil or uranium. Of course US & USSR tried with nukes, but good old fashioned greed and ambition saw the technology being leaked/distributed regardless. Why is that not happening with whatever supposedly drives 'black triangles'? Hidden-tech answers less questions than it raises.

.. The [Bartlett] lecture still haunts me, to tell the truth.

Eight years later, after conscious attention to my grieving process and a rebuilding of my assumptions from ground up, i've got the haunting down to an occasional shiver.

Wintler!!! AWESOME!! Thank you. Never even heard of that before, and I was literally puzzling over Venus with the missus just last night in a camper looking at the stars. Really appreciate the new brainfood.

Err, you're welcome, but here's hoping the Venus Syndrome possible future will be disproven by time.

[Sounder]

wintler2 wrote...

Sure there are plenty of unexplained phenomena that could be 'explained' by reference to some unknown and apparently indescribable technology

More to the point, there are plenty of unexplained phenomena that cannot be explained through current conceptual structures. But hey, I guess if it’s unknown and apparently indescribable, what is the use in trying to describe it?

Good to hear from you again ASoF.

wintler2 wrote…

Didn't happen with oil or uranium.

HaHa Ha ha. Yeah, the horseshit consortium was real powerful but new tech rolled over them anyway. (London and major cities were swimming in horseshit before the automobile.)

[Canadian_watcher]

I can't watch videos from here but I couldn't stand not knowing what this Bartlett guy was on about that had everyone so transfixed.

Imagine my disappointment when I discovered that it was a Malthusian warning drill. *yawn*
exponential growth of population in a thread about going extinct? it's funny, really.
Then again maybe there is something within the videos that puts a different spin on it, but if it's just more "we don't have the space for all that grain" malarkey I'm not into it.

[Nordic]

The Bartlett videos are extremely compelling. I was up late last night watching them and I "couldn't put them down". When each one ended, I found myself scrambling for the next one, didn't want to miss a syllable.

It's stuff I've known for years, but is easy to forget, a lot gets lost in the shuffle, the noise.

I didn't see the very last one, I finally had to go to bed at 3 a.m.

They are, indeed, something that everybody should see. Most people simply aren't aware of this, not one bit.

[The Consul]

What a relief....I didn't think we had that long.

[lupercal]

The Bartlett videos are extremely compelling. I was up late last night watching them and I "couldn't put them down". When each one ended, I found myself scrambling for the next one, didn't want to miss a syllable.

It's stuff I've known for years, but is easy to forget, a lot gets lost in the shuffle, the noise.

I didn't see the very last one, I finally had to go to bed at 3 a.m.

They are, indeed, something that everybody should see. Most people simply aren't aware of this, not one bit.

Yeah they're scary, at least the three I watched, mainly because the guy sounds like Malthus and Mengele channeled through Ron Popeil. I suspect Bill Gates and Warren Buffet are huge fans along with the entire state of Texas, present company excepted. Anyway, here are a couple of less alarming but more informative clips:

Food: There's Lots Of It


2.1 Kids: Stable Population


Overpopulation: The Making of a Myth

[Elvis]

Yeah they're scary, at least the three I watched, mainly because the guy sounds like Malthus and Mengele

I noticed that more than 1,500,000 people watched Part 1, but only about 250,000 made it to Part 8.

If you only watch through Part 3, then you totally miss the later part about 'what we can do about it', and he lays that out rather elegantly.

That's why I'm telling my friends: watch the whole thing.

[Hammer of Los]

Canadian_watcher, you are beautiful!

Exponential growth of population in a thread about going extinct? it's funny, really.

[Nordic]

Canadian_watcher, you are beautiful!

Exponential growth of population in a thread about going extinct? it's funny, really.

Two words:

Easter Island.

HA HA HA HAH A HA SOOO funny!

[wintler2]

..
That's why I'm telling my friends: watch the whole thing.

Why watch to the end when an easy cheap shot demonstrating obedience to local beliefs occurs to you 30 seconds in?

[wintler2]

More to the point, there are plenty of unexplained phenomena that cannot be explained through current conceptual structures. But hey, I guess if it’s unknown and apparently indescribable, what is the use in trying to describe it?

It can be very useful to try and to describe & explain the inexplicable, but i'm so bored with the whining when questions are asked of those making incredible claims. Thinking outside of the box does not give anyone a free pass on making sense, on at least internal consistency.

HaHa Ha ha. Yeah, the horseshit consortium was real powerful but new tech rolled over them anyway. (London and major cities were swimming in horseshit before the automobile.)

Thankyou for endorsing my example of break-through technology being commercialised and made publicly available. I wonder why thats not happening with this unknown technology that unnamed elites have.

[lupercal]

..
That's why I'm telling my friends: watch the whole thing.

Why watch to the end when an easy cheap shot demonstrating obedience to local beliefs occurs to you 30 seconds in?

I didn't even need 30 seconds. Come on, this stuff has been around for nearly a century in its current environmental form, and in many other forms before that, but here's a refresher for anyone who doesn't feel like watching genocide pitched like a Veg-a-matic:

11-24-03
The Horrifying American Roots of Nazi Eugenics
By Edwin Black

Hitler and his henchmen victimized an entire continent and exterminated millions in his quest for a co-called "Master Race." But the concept of a white, blond-haired, blue-eyed master Nordic race didn't originate with Hitler. The idea was created in the United States, and cultivated in California, decades before Hitler came to power. California eugenicists played an important, although little known, role in the American eugenics movement's campaign for ethnic cleansing.

Eugenics was the racist pseudoscience determined to wipe away all human beings deemed "unfit," preserving only those who conformed to a Nordic stereotype. Elements of the philosophy were enshrined as national policy by forced sterilization and segregation laws, as well as marriage restrictions, enacted in twenty-seven states. In 1909, California became the third state to adopt such laws. Ultimately, eugenics practitioners coercively sterilized some 60,000 Americans, barred the marriage of thousands, forcibly segregated thousands in "colonies," and persecuted untold numbers in ways we are just learning. Before World War II, nearly half of coercive sterilizations were done in California, and even after the war, the state accounted for a third of all such surgeries.

California was considered an epicenter of the American eugenics movement. During the Twentieth Century's first decades, California's eugenicists included potent but little known race scientists, such as Army venereal disease specialist Dr. Paul Popenoe, citrus magnate and Polytechnic benefactor Paul Gosney, Sacramento banker Charles M. Goethe, as well as members of the California State Board of Charities and Corrections and the University of California Board of Regents.

etc: http://hnn.us/articles/1796.html

I don't mean any of this personally, and many people who take this all seriously aren't necessarily reich wingers. I know a few IRL. So Elvis, sure I'll watch the rest, but I already know where it's going. We've seen this movie many times before and unfortunately it didn't end in 1945.

[Simulist]

Canadian_watcher, you are beautiful!

Exponential growth of population in a thread about going extinct? it's funny, really.

Two words:

Easter Island.

HA HA HA HAH A HA SOOO funny!

I agree, Nordic. Easter Island is an apt point of reference.

[Nordic]

..
That's why I'm telling my friends: watch the whole thing.

Why watch to the end when an easy cheap shot demonstrating obedience to local beliefs occurs to you 30 seconds in?

I didn't even need 30 seconds. Come on, this stuff has been around for nearly a century in its current environmental form, and in many other forms before that, but here's a refresher for anyone who doesn't feel like watching genocide pitched like a Veg-a-matic:

11-24-03
The Horrifying American Roots of Nazi Eugenics
By Edwin Black

Hitler and his henchmen victimized an entire continent and exterminated millions in his quest for a co-called "Master Race." But the concept of a white, blond-haired, blue-eyed master Nordic race didn't originate with Hitler. The idea was created in the United States, and cultivated in California, decades before Hitler came to power. California eugenicists played an important, although little known, role in the American eugenics movement's campaign for ethnic cleansing.

Eugenics was the racist pseudoscience determined to wipe away all human beings deemed "unfit," preserving only those who conformed to a Nordic stereotype. Elements of the philosophy were enshrined as national policy by forced sterilization and segregation laws, as well as marriage restrictions, enacted in twenty-seven states. In 1909, California became the third state to adopt such laws. Ultimately, eugenics practitioners coercively sterilized some 60,000 Americans, barred the marriage of thousands, forcibly segregated thousands in "colonies," and persecuted untold numbers in ways we are just learning. Before World War II, nearly half of coercive sterilizations were done in California, and even after the war, the state accounted for a third of all such surgeries.

California was considered an epicenter of the American eugenics movement. During the Twentieth Century's first decades, California's eugenicists included potent but little known race scientists, such as Army venereal disease specialist Dr. Paul Popenoe, citrus magnate and Polytechnic benefactor Paul Gosney, Sacramento banker Charles M. Goethe, as well as members of the California State Board of Charities and Corrections and the University of California Board of Regents.

etc: http://hnn.us/articles/1796.html

I don't mean any of this personally, and many people who take this all seriously aren't necessarily reich wingers. I know a few IRL. So Elvis, sure I'll watch the rest, but I already know where it's going. We've seen this movie many times before and unfortunately it didn't end in 1945.

What the hell are you even talking about? Did anyone say ANYTHING about eugenics? No, only you.

To automatically assume that anyone who is pointing out the obvious and completely rational truth as to where exponential population growth is leading us is a propenent of "eugenics" is just paranoid and, frankly, weird.

And you might want to actually wach it, yes, before you jump to such bizarre conclusions.

[tazmic]

He's an anticornucopian! (just wanted to use the word...)

Not uninteresting background (from, guess where):

Bartlett is a modern-day Malthusian.

Professor Bartlett often explains how sustainable growth is a contradiction. His view is based on the fact that a modest percentage growth can equate to huge escalations over short periods of time.
He regards overpopulation as "The Greatest Challenge" facing humanity, and promotes sustainable living. Bartlett opposes the cornucopian school of thought (as advocated by people such as Julian Lincoln Simon), and refers to it as The New Flat Earth Society.

J. B. Calvert (1999) has proposed that Bartlett's Law will result in the exhaustion of petrochemical resources due to the exponential growth of the world population (as per the Malthusian Growth Model).

Bartlett has made two notable statements relating to sustainability:

"The greatest shortcoming of the human race is our inability to understand the exponential function."

(Nah, I would say it's our ability to make myopic generalisations...)

and his Great Challenge:

"Can you think of any problem in any area of human endeavor on any scale, from microscopic to global, whose long-term solution is in any demonstrable way aided, assisted, or advanced by further increases in population, locally, nationally, or globally?"

(Er, the problem of increasing telecommunications profits? Increasing tax revenue to afford pensions? Swelling ones army, filling factories, building an empire...building the pyramids... colonising space...!)

((Can anyone give me the name of the logical fallacy his question employs?))

There's an audio version of the talk on his website:

http://www.albartlett.org/presentations/arithmetic_population_energy.html

And an amusingly titled (ironically wrong) 'Professor talks at exponential rate'...

http://www.albartlett.org/articles/art2005jan25.html

And... Bartlett breaks down the critics:

THE MASSIVE MOVEMENT TO MARGINALIZE THE MODERN MALTHUSIAN MESSAGE
http://jclahr.com/bartlett/malthusian.html

(This is a revised version of an article that was published in The Social Contract Vol. 8, No. 3, Spring 1998, Pgs. 239 - 251. The entire issue was devoted to the celebration of the 200th anniversary of the publication by Malthus of his famous essay.)

"Because of our high per capita consumption of resources, Slowing U.S. population growth is important for all the people of the world."

"There seems to be a concerted effort, locally, nationally, and globally to marginalize the modern Malthusian message and to talk about sustainability, using terms and concepts that don’t offend anyone. This marginalization requires that we make no mention of the facts that at all levels,

a) Sustainability requires that both population and the rates of consumption of resources be stabilized at levels substantially smaller than those of today, and that

b) The world’s worst population problem is right here in the U.S. "