In science, the only things that are "settled" are things that have been unequivocally disproven. Things like Phlogiston, humors, etc.
Simply because a significant number (or even a majority (or even ALL)) of current scientists in the field agree that *this* is the One True Way, doesn't mean that they're correct.
Note: This is NOT the same thing as saying that they're wrong. Nor that the ideas they're espousing are worthless.
The basic message is "we should leave the planet better off than we found it". Which is a good and admirable thing.
The big problem is that nobody has a clear, and widely agreed-upon idea about what to do about it. And some of the options being put forth are fairly shady, dangerous, or just flat-out unacceptable. Sometimes two or three of those at once.
Sending everyone to live in caves, killing off a significant chunk of the world population, or destroying the world energy economy fall under the "all three" category.
The whole "carbon credit" trading scheme has already proven totally shady, since it's a carte blanche license to pollute.
Basically, I foresee nothing real being done about it for a long, LONG time while vast sums of money are spent uselessly and people wrangle over "The Right Way".
Coal? Yeah. They sure as fuck DO have the outcome of an apocalyptic event. It's just a slower-building apocalypse where we continue spewing crap into the atmosphere and slowly poisoning the planet until we simply can't live here anymore.
Kidding! This is actually Planet Timeshare! NOW INVEST FUCKERS!
And your first clear date will be a between 2 and 3PM local equatorial time on the third Monday of the month, approximately half a billion years from now...
Basically anarchy is a state where naked force, rather than the reserved threat of unleashing such force, holds sway. In a state of anarchy, you're only entitled to whatever you're strong enough to hold onto. And if enough people gang up on you and take it from you? Tough shit.
Some people think anarchy is some sort of "free for all" where everyone just gets by on mutual interest. And that's just basic communism. Which only works until someone wants to be "more equal".
Continue pulling the same stupid shit that alienated people and has people rushing towards ad and script blockers like someone in the desert jumping on a glass of water.
I agree! Without some form of government, you basically have anarchy, which is even worse, since in anarchy, you have no rights other than what you take for yourself and can enforce.
That doesn't mean that government still isn't an antagonistic concept juxtaposed with freedom.
Slashdot Mirror
You forgot to mention the real threat.
MANBEARPIG!
That science is SETTLED my friend.
In science, the only things that are "settled" are things that have been unequivocally disproven. Things like Phlogiston, humors, etc.
Simply because a significant number (or even a majority (or even ALL)) of current scientists in the field agree that *this* is the One True Way, doesn't mean that they're correct.
Note: This is NOT the same thing as saying that they're wrong. Nor that the ideas they're espousing are worthless.
The basic message is "we should leave the planet better off than we found it". Which is a good and admirable thing.
The big problem is that nobody has a clear, and widely agreed-upon idea about what to do about it. And some of the options being put forth are fairly shady, dangerous, or just flat-out unacceptable. Sometimes two or three of those at once.
Sending everyone to live in caves, killing off a significant chunk of the world population, or destroying the world energy economy fall under the "all three" category.
The whole "carbon credit" trading scheme has already proven totally shady, since it's a carte blanche license to pollute.
Basically, I foresee nothing real being done about it for a long, LONG time while vast sums of money are spent uselessly and people wrangle over "The Right Way".
You have to love Bat-spaghetti.
Can you tell those unrepentant douchenozzles at Apple to stop circle-jerking themselves and get on with their suicide pact please?
What's the vintage? 5 billion BC? Hmm. Good year...
So, all people have to do is say "it's a threat" and they can do whatever the fuck they want now...
Great!
Can we just all gang up and export our politicians into space?
What? No! Who said they'd need space suits?
What? A nuclear powerplant is not a potential teraton explosion waiting to happen...
Since there's nowhere near a teraton of water in the cooling system? No.
Nuclear plant explosions have more in common with a bursting water heater than they do with a nuclear bomb.
Now, don't get me wrong. A high pressure steam explosion is a nasty thing too. But it's NOT a nuclear explosion.
Apocalyptic? No.
Coal? Yeah. They sure as fuck DO have the outcome of an apocalyptic event. It's just a slower-building apocalypse where we continue spewing crap into the atmosphere and slowly poisoning the planet until we simply can't live here anymore.
Most people would designate a piece of software that would phone home, track, keylog, and continue doing so regardless of your preferences as malware.
That's not a troll. And I'm not shilling a damn thing.
Kidding! This is actually Planet Timeshare! NOW INVEST FUCKERS!
And your first clear date will be a between 2 and 3PM local equatorial time on the third Monday of the month, approximately half a billion years from now...
Basically every option for them and their little fireball of an island chain are Bad Choices.
Still, engineered and maintained properly, with no corner cutting, they'd be better served by nuclear.
Only if you're rich/someone is paying your bills for you.
Downtown property rates are nearly as stupid as SF/SJ property rates.
Most people don't have the wherewithall to 3D print a car.
A drone? Sure, you need some motors and rotors and control hardware/software. But the actual body of a drone? Not hard at all.
And 3D printed drones are, effectively, untraceable.
They have all that excess manpower.
Take a few hundred "undesirables" at a time, stick them in shoddily built rockets and fire them on an outbound trajectory.
Food? Oxygen reserves? Sealed containers so the air stays in and the vacuum stays out?
Who has time for that? And a budget! Nonono!
Problem solved.
Basically anarchy is a state where naked force, rather than the reserved threat of unleashing such force, holds sway. In a state of anarchy, you're only entitled to whatever you're strong enough to hold onto. And if enough people gang up on you and take it from you? Tough shit.
Some people think anarchy is some sort of "free for all" where everyone just gets by on mutual interest. And that's just basic communism. Which only works until someone wants to be "more equal".
Now what are they going to do?
Continue pulling the same stupid shit that alienated people and has people rushing towards ad and script blockers like someone in the desert jumping on a glass of water.
A single person has a surprisingly limited amount of bandwidth. They would quickly find themselves overwhelmed by the job.
Seriously.
"the actual difference is fairly significant"
But not relevant enough to state what that significant difference is.
Why is it that trolls automatically start bitching when I don't drop in a LMGTFY link to easily available information?
Sorry? What was that?
I couldn't understand you over all that shit falling out of your mouth...
I thought the U.S. was a plutocracy :^)
Well...
Then don't kill animals for you dinner.
Do what billions of people do.
Pay someone ELSE to kill animals for your dinner.
Freedom and government are mutually antagonistic concepts.
that's an incredibly silly comment.
Not at all. It's an observation.
I didn't say freedom and government cannot coexist.
I simply stated that, by and large, they're mutually antagonistic.
And, like everything else in life, too much of A Good Thing is still A Bad Thing.
The Big Problem is trying to find the balance between freedom and governmental lock-down and codification of EVERYTHING.
There you go then.
The US isn't a democracy.
It's a democratic republic.
While, semantically, the difference seems tiny, the actual difference is fairly significant.
I agree! Without some form of government, you basically have anarchy, which is even worse, since in anarchy, you have no rights other than what you take for yourself and can enforce.
That doesn't mean that government still isn't an antagonistic concept juxtaposed with freedom.