Author We've Lost So Much Antarctic Ice It's Causing A Dip In Earth's Gravity  (Read 10336 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

We've Lost So Much Antarctic Ice It's Causing A Dip In Earth's Gravity
« Reply #150 on: October 12, 2014, 01:23:58 AM »
Based on that, it isn't that difficult to tell who the villains are.

Fascists, Marxists, Socialists, Islamic Jihadists, Progressives, Occupy and the other mob rule thugs, The Obama Administration, race baiters, Big Media, Academia, the various Left-wing pressure groups, the America hating Leftists, the Fed and Keynesian economists, the Fortune 500/International conglomerates/Wall St Bankers/crony capitalists, the Democrat Party leadership, the Establishment DC Republican 'leadership', much of the Federal Court system, the bureaucracy, the union leadership - especially the public sector union leadership, etc, etc, etc

We've Lost So Much Antarctic Ice It's Causing A Dip In Earth's Gravity
« Reply #151 on: October 12, 2014, 01:49:01 AM »
I really think that your utopia and mine are different. Capitalism: an economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state. I would say that is the !% you are talking about. Now I might be wrong but if you look at  Rothschilds, JP Morgans and other Elites is that not capitalism? Do they not control the world? Can you name more then ten countries that do not have a Rothschild or JP Morgan Bank in ti? Is it not true he who controls the money controls all? Just kind of seems capitalism does not work. Of course this is my opinion based on fact I have looked up!!1

http://humansarefree.com/2013/11/complete-list-of-banks-ownedcontrolled.html

ROTHSCHILD OWNED & CONTROLLED BANKS:

Afghanistan: Bank of Afghanistan
Albania: Bank of Albania
Algeria: Bank of Algeria
Argentina: Central Bank of Argentina
Armenia: Central Bank of Armenia
Aruba: Central Bank of Aruba
Australia: Reserve Bank of Australia
Austria: Austrian National Bank
Azerbaijan: Central Bank of Azerbaijan Republic
Bahamas: Central Bank of The Bahamas
Bahrain: Central Bank of Bahrain
Bangladesh: Bangladesh Bank
Barbados: Central Bank of Barbados
Belarus: National Bank of the Republic of Belarus
Belgium: National Bank of Belgium
Belize: Central Bank of Belize
Benin: Central Bank of West African States (BCEAO)
Bermuda: Bermuda Monetary Authority
Bhutan: Royal Monetary Authority of Bhutan
Bolivia: Central Bank of Bolivia
Bosnia: Central Bank of Bosnia and Herzegovina
Botswana: Bank of Botswana
Brazil: Central Bank of Brazil
Bulgaria: Bulgarian National Bank
Burkina Faso: Central Bank of West African States (BCEAO)
Burundi: Bank of the Republic of Burundi
Cambodia: National Bank of Cambodia
Came Roon: Bank of Central African States
Canada: Bank of Canada – Banque du Canada
Cayman Islands: Cayman Islands Monetary Authority
Central African Republic: Bank of Central African States
Chad: Bank of Central African States
Chile: Central Bank of Chile
China: The People’s Bank of China
Colombia: Bank of the Republic
Comoros: Central Bank of Comoros
Congo: Bank of Central African States
Costa Rica: Central Bank of Costa Rica
Côte d’Ivoire: Central Bank of West African States (BCEAO)
Croatia: Croatian National Bank
Cuba: Central Bank of Cuba
Cyprus: Central Bank of Cyprus
Czech Republic: Czech National Bank
Denmark: National Bank of Denmark
Dominican Republic: Central Bank of the Dominican Republic
East Caribbean area: Eastern Caribbean Central Bank
Ecuador: Central Bank of Ecuador
Egypt: Central Bank of Egypt
El Salvador: Central Reserve Bank of El Salvador
Equatorial Guinea: Bank of Central African States
Estonia: Bank of Estonia
Ethiopia: National Bank of Ethiopia
European Union: European Central Bank
Fiji: Reserve Bank of Fiji
Finland: Bank of Finland
France: Bank of France
Gabon: Bank of Central African States
The Gambia: Central Bank of The Gambia
Georgia: National Bank of Georgia
Germany: Deutsche Bundesbank
Ghana: Bank of Ghana
Greece: Bank of Greece
Guatemala: Bank of Guatemala
Guinea Bissau: Central Bank of West African States (BCEAO)
Guyana: Bank of Guyana
Haiti: Central Bank of Haiti
Honduras: Central Bank of Honduras
Hong Kong: Hong Kong Monetary Authority
Hungary: Magyar Nemzeti Bank
Iceland: Central Bank of Iceland
India: Reserve Bank of India
Indonesia: Bank Indonesia
Iran: The Central Bank of the Islamic Republic of Iran
Iraq: Central Bank of Iraq
Ireland: Central Bank and Financial Services Authority of Ireland
Israel: Bank of Israel
Italy: Bank of Italy
Jamaica: Bank of Jamaica
Japan: Bank of Japan
Jordan: Central Bank of Jordan
Kazakhstan: National Bank of Kazakhstan
Kenya: Central Bank of Kenya
Korea: Bank of Korea
Kuwait: Central Bank of Kuwait
Kyrgyzstan: National Bank of the Kyrgyz Republic
Latvia: Bank of Latvia
Lebanon: Central Bank of Lebanon
Lesotho: Central Bank of Lesotho
Libya: Central Bank of Libya
Uruguay: Central Bank of Uruguay
Lithuania: Bank of Lithuania
Luxembourg: Central Bank of Luxembourg
Macao: Monetary Authority of Macao
Macedonia: National Bank of the Republic of Macedonia
Madagascar: Central Bank of Madagascar
Malawi: Reserve Bank of Malawi
Malaysia: Central Bank of Malaysia
Mali: Central Bank of West African States (BCEAO)
Malta: Central Bank of Malta
Mauritius: Bank of Mauritius
Mexico: Bank of Mexico
Moldova: National Bank of Moldova
Mongolia: Bank of Mongolia
Montenegro: Central Bank of Montenegro
Morocco: Bank of Morocco
Mozambique: Bank of Mozambique
Namibia: Bank of Namibia
Nepal: Central Bank of Nepal
Netherlands: Netherlands Bank
Netherlands Antilles: Bank of the Netherlands Antilles
New Zealand: Reserve Bank of New Zealand
Nicaragua: Central Bank of Nicaragua
Niger: Central Bank of West African States (BCEAO)
Nigeria: Central Bank of Nigeria
Norway: Central Bank of Norway
Oman: Central Bank of Oman
Pakistan: State Bank of Pakistan
Papua New Guinea: Bank of Papua New Guinea
Paraguay: Central Bank of Paraguay
Peru: Central Reserve Bank of Peru
Philip Pines: Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas
Poland: National Bank of Poland
Portugal: Bank of Portugal
Qatar: Qatar Central Bank
Romania: National Bank of Romania
Russia: Central Bank of Russia
Rwanda: National Bank of Rwanda
San Marino: Central Bank of the Republic of San Marino
Samoa: Central Bank of Samoa
Saudi Arabia: Saudi Arabian Monetary Agency
Senegal: Central Bank of West African States (BCEAO)
Serbia: National Bank of Serbia
Seychelles: Central Bank of Seychelles
Sierra Leone: Bank of Sierra Leone
Singapore: Monetary Authority of Singapore
Slovakia: National Bank of Slovakia
Slovenia: Bank of Slovenia
Solomon Islands: Central Bank of Solomon Islands
South Africa: South African Reserve Bank
Spain: Bank of Spain
Sri Lanka: Central Bank of Sri Lanka
Sudan: Bank of Sudan
Surinam: Central Bank of Suriname
Swaziland: The Central Bank of Swaziland
Sweden: Sveriges Riksbank
Switzerland: Swiss National Bank
Tajikistan: National Bank of Tajikistan
Tanzania: Bank of Tanzania
Thailand: Bank of Thailand
Togo: Central Bank of West African States (BCEAO)
Tonga: National Reserve Bank of Tonga
Trinidad and Tobago: Central Bank of Trinidad and Tobago
Tunisia: Central Bank of Tunisia
Turkey: Central Bank of the Republic of Turkey
Uganda: Bank of Uganda
Ukraine: National Bank of Ukraine
United Arab Emirates: Central Bank of United Arab Emirates
United Kingdom: Bank of England
United States: Federal Reserve, Federal Reserve Bank of New York
Vanuatu: Reserve Bank of Vanuatu
Venezuela: Central Bank of Venezuela
Vietnam: The State Bank of Vietnam
Yemen: Central Bank of Yemen
Zambia: Bank of Zambia
Zimbabwe: Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe

We've Lost So Much Antarctic Ice It's Causing A Dip In Earth's Gravity
« Reply #152 on: October 12, 2014, 01:50:51 AM »
Read up on the Technocracy Movement in the late 19th and early 20th century (not the term Technocrat as used in Europe these days- although it is somewhat similar.) Basically a society, eventually global, controlled by the elite, educated scientists and engineers eliminating price systems (and thus in their mind inefficiency or unfairness) and using technology to provide everything to all. (However, UNLIKE the leftists they did not advocate revolution or subversion to get to their version of utopia and unlike the leftists of today they wanted people will real degrees to be leaders. But like the leftists, especially Fabian types, they did want "social engineering" to enact change- just non-violent.) Quick summary:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technocracy_movement

It's only a matter of time before this movement makes a huge comeback. I don't think a lot of people realize just how fast technology is moving and just what it means socially for the future. Our current social systems such as democracy, religion, economics, etc. are already having trouble keeping up with technology development. They will become completely unviable at some point, likely at the development of augmented human intelligence or machine superintelligence, which will probably happen sometime within the next 35 years. Preceding this, and already happening now to some degree, will be exponentially increasing job loss to computers and automation until there eventually comes a time where unemployment is so massive that our system can't absorb it and the world economy can't absorb the commensurate loss of viable consumers. That will force people to look to alternative politics, such as technocracy, and begin voting for it due the inefficiency of our current politics to do anything meaningful about it. As it stands, we can't even stop flights from Liberia efficiently to keep Ebola out, much less employ people.

I'm no technocrat, but it's coming. On the plus side, it's really hard for a reporter to lie and exaggerate when everyone has an IQ of 180 or a superintelligent computer calls them out. Things might end up being a bit more honest at least. Well, unless the supercomputer starts lying. Then we're screwed and end up with H.I.T.L.E.R. instead of Hal 9000. 

We've Lost So Much Antarctic Ice It's Causing A Dip In Earth's Gravity
« Reply #153 on: October 12, 2014, 02:30:30 AM »
Just maybe when people realize working for money is bullshit and a type of slavery. We as humans can move away from trying to get rich with money and instead get rich in living life to its fullest. I hope computer take away all jobs and make all things automated. Then we can become humans again!!1

We've Lost So Much Antarctic Ice It's Causing A Dip In Earth's Gravity
« Reply #154 on: October 12, 2014, 02:35:43 AM »

I'm for being environmentally friendly and 'saving the planet'.

Can we do it in a smart, logical, non-demagogic way that doesn't involve the usual lies and heavy-handedness the Left always insist on?  And doesn't include the end of capitalism and industry?

As someone who studied engineering, I don't see why these things should be at odds with each other.  I'm all for finding technological answers to these problems.  No one is going to adopt any new technology or any new way of life that doesn't provide greater convenience, better performance, or lower costs.  Environmental regulations can actually lead to more efficient industrial practices that ultimately save companies money.  Trying to get over that initial hurdle that ultimately leads to those more efficient practices doesn't often come spontaneously though, and this is where regulation is required as well as government sponsored investment in learning how to improve processes. 

It would be great if everyone would ride mass transit but that's just not going to happen.  So, for example as I've always hoped, if we were to convert our automotive fleets to natural gas (preferably also switching to a more efficient engine technology like gas turbines) we first need refueling infrastructure.  But no one is going to build infrastructure until there is enough of a market.  And no one is going to buy natural gas vehicles until there is infrastructure.  This means to me government intervention is required.  Once it becomes popular, there are actually home refueling stations available for people with gas service which makes the whole thing more convenient for them.  Another problem is that all the related technologies have to mature, such as the ability to produce cheap LNG which requires its own funding.  This is just by way of example.  With more efficient engines and hybrid technologies coming of age, I'm not so certain of the benefits of conversion anymore.

Before we can start any of this happening, we all have to agree whether there is anthropogenic global warming.  Personally, I think the conclusion is overwhelmingly supported but obviously many don't agree with me and there is great resistance or simply apathy to the problem in important political and commercial circles.

We've Lost So Much Antarctic Ice It's Causing A Dip In Earth's Gravity
« Reply #155 on: October 12, 2014, 02:37:18 AM »
I really think that your utopia and mine are different...

Those selling Utopia are going to try to make it sound great. 

ObamaCare is very Utopian.  Compare and contrast what ObamaCare was supposed to accomplish vs how it turned out (even before considering the worst of it was pushed out past the upcoming elections).  Do you find it interesting these Democrats mention not a word about ObamaCare in their current campaigns, and their accomplices in Big Media don't seem to have much to say about it right now either, weird.

... Capitalism: an economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state. I would say that is the !% you are talking about. Now I might be wrong...

Yeah, you're wrong.  It also includes anyone with a job, a career, a small business, a retirement account, a home, a checking account,  investments.

For the most part the 1% earned what they have - through talent, hard work, and luck.  There is not a limited amount of wealth in a country, to be divided.  Wealth is created by those who earn it, and it's theoretically unlimited. 

If someone buys software that will save time and make their business run more efficiently, both the buyer and the seller of that software are better off than they were before the sale.  A little bit of wealth was created in the exchange that benefits both.  Multiply that by the millions of transactions that occur every day.

Take Bill Gates, if Microsoft went bankrupt, his house burned to the ground, and he lost everything else, no one else would be better off.

The fixation on what others have - the 1% - and the jealousy that has been developed through society by the Left is nothing but destructive.  If someone wants 'more', go goddamn out and earn it, and stop worrying about someone else.


White-collar crime, unethical behavior, crony capitalism between government officials and corporations should be chased down and punished and ended, but whether that is happening or not is not a big of a factor of how you or I are doing.  If it ended today, would we be better off financially as individuals?

The easiest thing in the world is for some scum-ball politician to point to someone else and say 'they're doing better than you are, that's not fair, and I'm going to do something about it'.  Don't fall for it.


... but if you look at  Rothschilds, JP Morgans and other Elites is that not capitalism? Do they not control the world? Can you name more then ten countries that do not have a Rothschild or JP Morgan Bank in ti? Is it not true he who controls the money controls all?...


Clorox is in 150 countries.  Coke is in more than that.  So what?

The question isn't how big a company is or how much influence they have, it's whether they are ethical, whether their customers are happy with the product.

There are plenty of honest, ethical companies.  Plenty of honest and ethical banks. 

Here are 3 thoughts:

1)  While they both run the range from very honest and ethical to very corrupt, across the board corporations are more honest and ethical than government agencies.  They are also more efficient, and produce more of what people want

2)  No matter how much influence and power any given bank or any given corporation has, that pales in comparison to the power and reach of the Federal government.  The Left acts like Big Business is some vast entity running roughshod - the reality is the Federal government dwarfs them in size, influence, and power - and is the real threat to our freedom.

Big Business didn't steal our healthcare system, the Democrats did.

3)  Crony capitalism is not Capitalism.  Theft, dishonesty and unethical behavior is not Capitalism.  Those whose goal is to end Capitalism have been very clever about lumping it all together and condemning it.  The truth is Capitalism has been great for the little guy, it has benefitted the formerly poor greatly.  It's a populist movement. 

The story of the United States is the story of the vast benefits of Capitalism, which is why they don't teach our proud history in school much anymore.

Our Planet Is Not Warming Faster Than We Realized
« Reply #156 on: October 12, 2014, 02:51:03 AM »
The problem is objective thinking normal people of all backgrounds trying to make a living don't go into environmental sciences, or climate sciences. Environmentalists do. They enter the field with a skull full of mush, and then are subjected to the previous generations environmentalists who pursued the environmental sciences and are now professors. Its a big snowball that lacks any objectivity. This flaw in the higher education system can be applied to political science, journalism, history. It's why there is so much revisionist history. No one wants to do a masters thesis on how Abraham Lincoln freed the slaves, there no news there. They have do it on how he smoked pot, was from Kenya, was pro-choice, believed in global-warming, or whatever the flavor of the week pop-culture issue is.

Science is absolutely an objective method of studying and acquiring knowledge. When performed by bias scientists who have a predetermined objective and have been caught rigging data and lying, you can toss their entire cause. This would be the global disruption campaign.

I'm not sure I agree.  A good understanding of climate science requires advanced degrees in physics and chemistry.  Having a taste of what those people go through in their education I have great respect for anyone in those fields, and don't know that they initially pursued them with the intent of going into environmental sciences.

We've Lost So Much Antarctic Ice It's Causing A Dip In Earth's Gravity
« Reply #157 on: October 12, 2014, 02:52:02 AM »
Those whose goal is to end Capitalism have been very clever about lumping it all together and condemning it. 

Funny that; because some lump Marxism, being liberal, and climate change in the same pot too, and condemn it all as one thing. Now, who might that be?  ::)

Our Planet Is Not Warming Faster Than We Realized
« Reply #158 on: October 12, 2014, 02:57:29 AM »
I'm not sure I agree.  A good understanding of climate science requires advanced degrees in physics and chemistry.  Having a taste of what those people go through in their education I have great respect for anyone in those fields, and don't know that they initially pursued those fields with the intent of going into environmental sciences.


GD believes what he thinks GFP. You'll come to a brick wall trying to explain things in a logical and realistic way to him. He doesn't know any scientists, he just thinks they're all corrupt and Alinskyisist, Marxist, Moaist, liberal thingies..

Maybe like these guys?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-29566784


Quote
The hunt for a cure for type 1 diabetes has recently taken a "tremendous step forward", scientists have said.

The disease is caused by the immune system destroying the cells that control blood sugar levels.

A team at Harvard University used stem cells to produce hundreds of millions of the cells in the laboratory.

Tests on mice showed the cells could treat the disease, which experts described as "potentially a major medical breakthrough".

Damn liberals.

Our Planet Is Not Warming Faster Than We Realized
« Reply #159 on: October 12, 2014, 03:13:02 AM »
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-29566784


Damn liberals.
[/quote]

Trouble being that it was a study funded by a private university, i.e. private grant and not your NHS. Damned private libertarian-style funding getting in the way of the drug company/NHS government-knows-all funding system.

We've Lost So Much Antarctic Ice It's Causing A Dip In Earth's Gravity
« Reply #160 on: October 12, 2014, 03:21:34 AM »
Those selling Utopia are going to try to make it sound great. 


Damn right!  What's the matter with those people, anyway?  Why can't they be honest and admit that Utopia is really nothing but a barren, lawless Hellscape where only the fittest and most ruthless survive.  Saint Thomas More was a bad mother, wasn't he?

Our Planet Is Not Warming Faster Than We Realized
« Reply #161 on: October 12, 2014, 03:27:19 AM »
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-29566784


Damn liberals.


Trouble being that it was a study funded by a private university, i.e. private grant and not your NHS. Damned private libertarian-style funding getting in the way of the drug company/NHS government-knows-all funding system.

You'd have only had to have done some brief googling to find out what research, development and in many cases cures have been done in the NHS since it's establishment, that yep, even the US now enjoys (but only if you can afford it natch) before typing that. Still, keep believing what you want to believe, just don't present it as fact that's all.

We've Lost So Much Antarctic Ice It's Causing A Dip In Earth's Gravity
« Reply #162 on: October 12, 2014, 03:28:43 AM »




Those selling Utopia are going to try to make it sound great. 

Like I said you and me are different and see the world different...

Well I will say this Capitalism is bullshit and makes the rich richer and the poor poorer. As for corporations being good /caring about their customers and the environment is bullshit too. So I will leave you with this "We humans are the ones who will save or destroy all life on this planet"!!1

http://youtu.be/QPKKQnijnsM


We've Lost So Much Antarctic Ice It's Causing A Dip In Earth's Gravity
« Reply #163 on: October 12, 2014, 08:47:11 AM »

Like I said you and me are different and see the world different...

Well I will say this Capitalism is bullshit and makes the rich richer and the poor poorer. As for corporations being good /caring about their customers and the environment is bullshit too. So I will leave you with this "We humans are the ones who will save or destroy all life on this planet"!!1

http://youtu.be/QPKKQnijnsM

Zoo,

We are NOT living in the Free Market Capitalism that The Founders envisioned; we ARE living a system of economic fraud and enslavement run by plutocrats and their puppets, yes even democrat puppets, in Washington, who know full well what is going on, but feed you bullshit so you will vote for them. Both sides do the same thing. They want you to think that the economic rape of the country is Free Market Capitalism as a means of justifying the rape.

Throughout all of human history, those who benefit by fucking over the little people, support the systems - and the people that want to wrest power, use the little people to take over, promising them things that will never happen.

Up until the Civil War, we actually did have a Free Market Capitalist System, but once the North defeated the South, Federalism took over the country, and that was the beginning of the End of The USA. Contrary to popular myth, the North did NOT go to war with the South to end slavery, they DID go to war for power and money, and they won. Slavery, since the beginning of human existence, is always wrong, but it still goes on today -- any time one group of people are stronger than another, they invent reasons to kill and/or enslave them, one way or the other.

Despots can do this because people refuse to educate themselves. We will always have despots -- next time you see a kid running for class president in Jr. High School, you are looking at a potential despot.

The only thing that stops despots is their death.

We have met the Enemy, and he is us.

Our Planet Is Not Warming Faster Than We Realized
« Reply #164 on: October 12, 2014, 04:19:37 PM »
You'd have only had to have done some brief googling to find out what research, development and in many cases cures have been done in the NHS since it's establishment, that yep, even the US now enjoys (but only if you can afford it natch) before typing that. Still, keep believing what you want to believe, just don't present it as fact that's all.

Dig deeper. It's a cabal between the NHS and British drug companies that does such wonderful things as deny amputees the latest state of the art prosthetics, instead giving them hooks made by major manufacturers. A British start-up company actually had more luck getting the United States VA to adopt their advanced prosthetics for our wounded soldiers than they had getting your NHS to even take a look at buying them.

I've come to seriously believe, and in this I may be wrong, that the least educated people about the British NHS are the British. You never seem to hear about any of the questionable stuff, such as the administration of hormone blockers as early as age 12 on suspected transgendered children which was little more than child abuse/experimentation in the interest of being politically correct to the adult transsexual lobby. Why that wasn't at least newsworthy enough to make it into serious public debate in the UK, I'll never know. I suspect it's for lack of reporting.

We've Lost So Much Antarctic Ice It's Causing A Dip In Earth's Gravity
« Reply #165 on: October 12, 2014, 04:24:15 PM »



Like I said you and me are different and see the world different...

Well I will say this Capitalism is bullshit and makes the rich richer and the poor poorer. As for corporations being good /caring about their customers and the environment is bullshit too. So I will leave you with this "We humans are the ones who will save or destroy all life on this planet"!!1

http://youtu.be/QPKKQnijnsM

It's not capitalism you're having a problem with, it's corporatism. The two are distinct.

We've Lost So Much Antarctic Ice It's Causing A Dip In Earth's Gravity
« Reply #166 on: October 12, 2014, 04:44:02 PM »
Just maybe when people realize working for money is bullshit and a type of slavery. We as humans can move away from trying to get rich with money and instead get rich in living life to its fullest. I hope computer take away all jobs and make all things automated. Then we can become humans again!!1

Well, really being a human again would entail you heading out with a spear to gig a mammoth, and even then early humans probably practiced barter which is a form of capitalism. In a few decades, you'll actually be post-human, if the majority of the futurists are right. Perhaps you'll simply send a computer generated or robotic avatar of yourself to work.

http://www.ryot.org/digital-twin-immortal-her-in-real-life/818245

Though it may not even go that far. I think what will really happen is that the majority of people will be unemployed and living off a standardized living wage with the motivated making more money by going into whatever careers or businesses are left that computers probably cannot do in the same way we do them, such as write songs or fiction books. Chefs are probably safe, I have trouble envisioning a computer that can estimate just what the perfect amount of oregano in a lasagna is without actually having eaten lasagna.

Oddly, some of the first people whose jobs will be taken by superintelligent computers will be scientists, engineers and computer programmers. 

We've Lost So Much Antarctic Ice It's Causing A Dip In Earth's Gravity
« Reply #167 on: October 12, 2014, 05:58:48 PM »
Oddly, some of the first people whose jobs will be taken by superintelligent computers will be scientists, engineers and computer programmers.

 ;D ;D ;D

You're the best!

Our Planet Is Not Warming Faster Than We Realized
« Reply #168 on: October 12, 2014, 09:21:13 PM »
Dig deeper. It's a cabal between the NHS and British drug companies that does such wonderful things as deny amputees the latest state of the art prosthetics, instead giving them hooks made by major manufacturers. A British start-up company actually had more luck getting the United States VA to adopt their advanced prosthetics for our wounded soldiers than they had getting your NHS to even take a look at buying them.

I've come to seriously believe, and in this I may be wrong, that the least educated people about the British NHS are the British. You never seem to hear about any of the questionable stuff, such as the administration of hormone blockers as early as age 12 on suspected transgendered children which was little more than child abuse/experimentation in the interest of being politically correct to the adult transsexual lobby. Why that wasn't at least newsworthy enough to make it into serious public debate in the UK, I'll never know. I suspect it's for lack of reporting.
Liverpool Care Pathway and the incentives by the NHS for "meeting goals" as another example. Granted I didn't know many poor people but when I lived there nobody I knew, for example, had their child in NHS facilities. All used private hospitals for maternity: better care, less "get in/get out", more doctors and nurses who could you could understand, etc.

Having said that we do need some change to the US system and poor care is better than no care or simply using the ER for routine maladies (or waiting and using the ER when a problem becomes acute.) Eventually, as we see with all the infected illegals Obama is letting in, or this Ebola thing, we do need some way to get healthcare to poor people but Obamacare is not the way.

Not sure how global warming, climate change, climate disruption turned into NHS and healthcare discussion but I'm sure, if I asked Al Gore Jr, it is directly related to carbon footprints and evil capitalists.

Our Planet Is Not Warming Faster Than We Realized
« Reply #169 on: October 12, 2014, 11:54:04 PM »
Liverpool Care Pathway and the incentives by the NHS for "meeting goals" as another example. Granted I didn't know many poor people but when I lived there nobody I knew, for example, had their child in NHS facilities. All used private hospitals for maternity: better care, less "get in/get out", more doctors and nurses who could you could understand, etc.

Having said that we do need some change to the US system and poor care is better than no care or simply using the ER for routine maladies (or waiting and using the ER when a problem becomes acute.) Eventually, as we see with all the infected illegals Obama is letting in, or this Ebola thing, we do need some way to get healthcare to poor people but Obamacare is not the way.

Not sure how global warming, climate change, climate disruption turned into NHS and healthcare discussion but I'm sure, if I asked Al Gore Jr, it is directly related to carbon footprints and evil capitalists.

I actually like Bush's idea of Federally funded clinics to give people a place to go for routine maladies, vaccinations, STD treatment etc. to keep them from going to the ER. It seemed a cost effective way of tackling the problem. Obamacare is a failure, a really expensive unviable one at that. I still think it was intended to fail in order to open the way for single payer. The next Dem administration will create a US version of the NHS, and by that time health insurance will have become so expensive for everyone that we'll have no choice.

I'll get it back to climate change. Climate change, even if it's 50 times worse than is currently claimed, will be fixed by 2050 by a superintelligent supercomputer.

We've Lost So Much Antarctic Ice It's Causing A Dip In Earth's Gravity
« Reply #170 on: October 13, 2014, 02:11:35 AM »
;D ;D ;D

You're the best!

Stuck that in there just for you Karl, I knew you'd get it.

Our Planet Is Not Warming Faster Than We Realized
« Reply #171 on: October 13, 2014, 02:27:56 AM »
Dig deeper. It's a cabal between the NHS and British drug companies that does such wonderful things as deny amputees the latest state of the art prosthetics, instead giving them hooks made by major manufacturers. A British start-up company actually had more luck getting the United States VA to adopt their advanced prosthetics for our wounded soldiers than they had getting your NHS to even take a look at buying them.

You've heard of Headley Court? Look it up. Come back when you have.

Quote
I've come to seriously believe, and in this I may be wrong, that the least educated people about the British NHS are the British. You never seem to hear about any of the questionable stuff, such as the administration of hormone blockers as early as age 12 on suspected transgendered children which was little more than child abuse/experimentation in the interest of being politically correct to the adult transsexual lobby. Why that wasn't at least newsworthy enough to make it into serious public debate in the UK, I'll never know. I suspect it's for lack of reporting.


That is universal? I see... Is that all you've got? Bleeding hell man, if it is, you're really clutching at straws.

 The general population is on the whole ignorant of what the NHS has achieved. I've said on several occasions it isn't perfect, it's frequently abused too, and taken for granted. But it's better than you have in the US for the general population.  Yours is driven by insurance companies who have to show a profit. In fact over here, there is growing antagonism towards the current government who are trying to make it more and more like the US model (mainly because their donors have involvement in providing that 'service'-shurly shome coinshidence?).
As for reporting, we have almost daily news stories telling anyone who will listen how it's being run down by the government, so we certainly don't lack the media getting it's snout in.

Our Planet Is Not Warming Faster Than We Realized
« Reply #172 on: October 13, 2014, 10:58:13 AM »
You've heard of Headley Court? Look it up. Come back when you have.


That is universal? I see... Is that all you've got? Bleeding hell man, if it is, you're really clutching at straws.

 The general population is on the whole ignorant of what the NHS has achieved. I've said on several occasions it isn't perfect, it's frequently abused too, and taken for granted. But it's better than you have in the US for the general population.  Yours is driven by insurance companies who have to show a profit. In fact over here, there is growing antagonism towards the current government who are trying to make it more and more like the US model (mainly because their donors have involvement in providing that 'service'-shurly shome coinshidence?).
As for reporting, we have almost daily news stories telling anyone who will listen how it's being run down by the government, so we certainly don't lack the media getting it's snout in.
I agree with you on much of this. The insurance racket and the lawsuit racket is the primary reason for much of the healthcare problems we have in the US. And an almost open-border and rules that hospitals have to treat illegals or anyone, insurance or not, who show up at the ER and don't pay the bills (but then don't follow doctor's orders, don't have regular check-ups, etc so the health problems often become acute or worse.) Also, the burden on US companies and evil corporations increase dramatically for all the HR headaches and costs related to providing their employees health insurance. In an ideal world people would eat sensibly, exercise, and be able to pay out-of-pocket for healthcare or form non-profit co-ops etc to cover catastrophic costs. But people don't act rationally and healthcare costs have inflated to an extent that a minor office visit or procedure is $$. We do need to figure out some system but Obamacare doesn't seem to be the way. Some blended system (private coverage/hospitals and also a minimum public coverage with tort reform and controlled borders) would probably be best though many rich "sides" won't want to compromise their profits.

Our Planet Is Not Warming Faster Than We Realized
« Reply #173 on: October 13, 2014, 11:49:02 AM »
You've heard of Headley Court? Look it up. Come back when you have.

Despite the humorous fact that you just gave an example of a single underfunded veterans hospital with 200 employees to a guy that lives in a country that has 1700 veteran's hospitals of this type employing tens of thousands not withstanding, when I searched the names of the state of the art bionic limbs in conjunction with Headley Court I found no evidence that they were distributing modern, cutting edge bionic limbs and instead appear to be still giving out hooks, clamps and peg legs leaving your veterans to find out about bionics and buy them on their own if they can afford them. It appears that if change is to be made to the NHS, the specific issue must be politicized and prosthetics hasn't been yet.

Quote
That is universal? I see... Is that all you've got? Bleeding hell man, if it is, you're really clutching at straws.

It does seem to be fairly universal, yes. In any area I research I find horror stories with the NHS, and a fair amount of successes to be fair. And that's not to say that we don't have horror stories over here, but rather we know about our horror stories. You folks generally don't seem to be aware of yours due to media selective reporting. It's like that with the French system too, they lost an appalling amount of intensive care patients to a heat wave in 2003 due to not thinking (or avoiding funding) air conditioning units in hospital intensive care units. Something so simple as realizing that hospitals should be climate controlled escaped them.

Quote
The general population is on the whole ignorant of what the NHS has achieved. I've said on several occasions it isn't perfect, it's frequently abused too, and taken for granted. But it's better than you have in the US for the general population.  Yours is driven by insurance companies who have to show a profit. In fact over here, there is growing antagonism towards the current government who are trying to make it more and more like the US model (mainly because their donors have involvement in providing that 'service'-shurly shome coinshidence?).

Yours is driven by insurance as well, if you can afford it. If you want a decent doctor, you pay. Granted, you have free doctors, and that's an asset, but you should not downplay the effects of politicization of medicine. It's inherently dangerous, and as you point out with your current government, it's very much political. Our current administration has done it's best to socialize it and came up with a very expensive joke as a result that is degrading our medical care system.

Quote
As for reporting, we have almost daily news stories telling anyone who will listen how it's being run down by the government, so we certainly don't lack the media getting it's snout in.

In other words, Labour is saying that it's being degraded for political advantage. What's the actual truth, have you noticed a degradation when you use the system?

We've Lost So Much Antarctic Ice It's Causing A Dip In Earth's Gravity
« Reply #174 on: October 13, 2014, 04:33:47 PM »
Looks like the Pentagon believes climate change is real and is just a wee bit concerned about it.  Make of it what you will.


http://www.cna.org/sites/default/files/MAB_2014.pdf

We've Lost So Much Antarctic Ice It's Causing A Dip In Earth's Gravity
« Reply #175 on: October 13, 2014, 11:01:27 PM »
Well, really being a human again would entail you heading out with a spear to gig a mammoth, and even then early humans probably practiced barter which is a form of capitalism. In a few decades, you'll actually be post-human, if the majority of the futurists are right. Perhaps you'll simply send a computer generated or robotic avatar of yourself to work.

http://www.ryot.org/digital-twin-immortal-her-in-real-life/818245

Though it may not even go that far. I think what will really happen is that the majority of people will be unemployed and living off a standardized living wage with the motivated making more money by going into whatever careers or businesses are left that computers probably cannot do in the same way we do them, such as write songs or fiction books. Chefs are probably safe, I have trouble envisioning a computer that can estimate just what the perfect amount of oregano in a lasagna is without actually having eaten lasagna.

Oddly, some of the first people whose jobs will be taken by superintelligent computers will be scientists, engineers and computer programmers.

I agree with much of this.  I think a lot of the political discussion in the United States is not recognizing that the playing field has and is changing.  There are a number of societal and technological factors that have led to the 2008 recession and the current economy.  Government decisions certainly play a large role on when and how disruptions in the economy manifest, but we cannot keep thinking old strategies are going to rebuild America's economy and that the current administration is completely inept. 

Automation and globalization are driving wealth to a smaller percentage of the population, namely company leaders.  Labour,  blue collar, and even the more easily modeled white collar jobs are being displaced by cheaper oversees labour forces and by machines.  In compensation we are seeing almost a resurgence in cottage industries, but this cannot be the model for a modern economy.  Coincidently, we are also seeing a stronger dependence on social spending for such things as food stamps and universal health care -- what some would call 'entitlements'.  This seems inevitable and though it flies in the face of conservative beliefs, not particularly the result of any administration.  Ultimately I don't see how we can avoid going to a completely socialist system of wealth distribution or face a future of a few kings with everyone else paupers.

Couple that all with an aging population (Reagan, Bush, Clinton, and Bush relied on funding programs with Social Security taxes but this is becoming less of a possibility) and a largely apathetic population who has benefited from the wealth of their parents (the real entitlements) and are losing the drive to educate themselves and work hard.

We've Lost So Much Antarctic Ice It's Causing A Dip In Earth's Gravity
« Reply #176 on: October 14, 2014, 01:01:06 AM »
I agree with much of this.  I think a lot of the political discussion in the United States is not recognizing that the playing field has and is changing.  There are a number of societal and technological factors that have led to the 2008 recession and the current economy.  Government decisions certainly play a large role on when and how disruptions in the economy manifest, but we cannot keep thinking old strategies are going to rebuild America's economy and that the current administration is completely inept. 

Automation and globalization are driving wealth to a smaller percentage of the population, namely company leaders.  Labour,  blue collar, and even the more easily modeled white collar jobs are being displaced by cheaper oversees labour forces and by machines.  In compensation we are seeing almost a resurgence in cottage industries, but this cannot be the model for a modern economy.  Coincidently, we are also seeing a stronger dependence on social spending for such things as food stamps and universal health care -- what some would call 'entitlements'.  This seems inevitable and though it flies in the face of conservative beliefs, not particularly the result of any administration.  Ultimately I don't see how we can avoid going to a completely socialist system of wealth distribution or face a future of a few kings with everyone else paupers.

Couple that all with an aging population (Reagan, Bush, Clinton, and Bush relied on funding programs with Social Security taxes but this is becoming less of a possibility) and a largely apathetic population who has benefited from the wealth of their parents (the real entitlements) and are losing the drive to educate themselves and work hard.

I agree with most of what you said. I'm often branded a conservative or libertarian, and I sometimes use those titles when it's useful, but the fact is liberalism, conservatism, libertarianism, communism, etc. are growing rapidly obsolete. Ideas from each will be briefly relevant for a few years at a time over the next few decades, but they will not be viable coherent ideologies by 2045. They already aren't really. Even moderate socialism won't last 20 years under the unprecedented levels of tech development that we're seeing now. We need to be envisioning things like The Borg from Star Trek, or technocracy, or Cylons and decide if we want that for society or not. We need to do it now because we're far closer to that than we are to the framers of the constitution, Marx or Ayn Rand. These ideologies are becoming obsolete.

Case in point, religion. It seems like a completely viable idea to eventually make a copy of yourself and store it in a computer and project it in a virtual world where brain-computer interfaces are possible (probably happen around 2035, we have the rudiments down already). In this case, the person and the copy are indistinguishable. Well, what does the death of a loved one mean when you can put on the Google Glasses Mark V and interact with them as though they are still alive? If the simulation of the dead passes the Turing Test and is indistinguishable from the real thing, then religion has a real problem on its hands because we've just learned how to photocopy a soul. That technology will cause great social upheaval in a culture that at the same time will be learning how to bioengineer itself to be more intelligent. What does all of that mean? It can't be predicted, we can only speculate.

How would our current politics deal with it? The Conservatives can't exactly oppose it. Such a thing would be hugely profitable for the funeral industry, but they couldn't exactly support it because it marginalizes the soul and runs the Christians off. Money and religion become at odds. How would the liberals deal with it? Such a thing will consume resources for no real reason, people simply dealt with death before and then suddenly we have all these unsustainable supercomputers emulating everyone's grandmother all while they experience a dramatic decrease in meaningful taxpayers because to be pro-technology will be toxic and to be anti-technology will be toxic. The libertarians will advocate that people do whatever they wish to do, but what happens when there aren't enough jobs to support a free market? We're nearly there now.

Our political norms are obsolete and it's a waste of time to bitch about climate change and gay people. Technology will change the face of those concerns faster than we can come up with political ideas to fight about from here on out. It's time to wonder what the future of politics will be, whether it's a technocracy, or a Computer-Emperor, or a Borg Collective or whatever the hell is going to happen. We should probably figure that out while we have time to decide how to control it and guide it, but as it stands, we're mired in fighting about old ideas. It's a weird thing, our politics are frozen in the 1960's while our reality is significantly further along than anyone knows, and it's kept that way by the media. It's fucked up.

We've Lost So Much Antarctic Ice It's Causing A Dip In Earth's Gravity
« Reply #177 on: October 14, 2014, 01:36:43 AM »
Looks like the Pentagon believes climate change is real and is just a wee bit concerned about it.  Make of it what you will.


http://www.cna.org/sites/default/files/MAB_2014.pdf


Liberal.

We've Lost So Much Antarctic Ice It's Causing A Dip In Earth's Gravity
« Reply #178 on: October 15, 2014, 02:39:52 AM »
Not going to ring the Pentagon's gong for them, but seems like the big bell or whichever is being rung by someone else... I should look for similar treatieses....

Something along the lines of "Afghan endgame" & etc...  written about the time or perhaps a few years before the Iraq Endgame was played out...

I dunnow, that whole article 'bout global warmish, seemed suspect... Who was the author?

We've Lost So Much Antarctic Ice It's Causing A Dip In Earth's Gravity
« Reply #179 on: October 29, 2014, 02:29:58 PM »

I'm for being environmentally friendly and 'saving the planet'.

Can we do it in a smart, logical, non-demagogic way that doesn't involve the usual lies and heavy-handedness the Left always insist on?  And doesn't include the end of capitalism and industry?

Conservation and a clean environment is a great thing. And of course it can be done in a responsible non-demagogic manner. Will it it be? Not unless it makes Liberals ie. big media happy and big government politicians even wealthier.

The irony is if/when we get a fusion power plant online, its value will be due to the growth of the solar and electric powered industries which have blown up thanks to a combination of capitalism and environmentalism.