Re: OT: The U.S. is falling further behind China and Europe in electric-vehicle production

[Frank Berger]

On 6/30/2021 7:08 PM, Dan Koren wrote:
> https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/29/the-us-is-falling-further-behind-china-and-europe-in-ev-production.html
>
> dk
>

I'm more worried about the mine shaft gap.

[Frank Berger]

On 6/30/2021 9:00 PM, Dan Koren wrote:

> On Wednesday, June 30, 2021 at 8:51:41 PM UTC-4, Frank Berger wrote:
>> On 6/30/2021 7:08 PM, Dan Koren wrote:
>>> https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/29/the-us-is-falling-further-behind-china-and-europe-in-ev-production.html
>>

>> I'm more worried about the mine shaft gap.
>

> ?!?!?
>
> dk
>

Dr. Strangelove reference. Never mind.

[Owen]

On 6/30/21 9:00 PM, Dan Koren wrote:
> On Wednesday, June 30, 2021 at 8:51:41 PM UTC-4, Frank Berger wrote:

>> On 6/30/2021 7:08 PM, Dan Koren wrote:
>>> https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/29/the-us-is-falling-further-behind-china-and-europe-in-ev-production.html
>>

>> I'm more worried about the mine shaft gap.
>

> ?!?!?
>
> dk
>

cf. Movie "Dr. Strangelove, or How I learned to Stop Worrying and Love
the Bomb"

-Owen

P.S. where will you get all this useless trivia after you retire??

-O

[number_six]

But he'll see everything -- he'll see the big board!

[Frank Berger]

You can't fight in here, it's the War Room!

[Frank Berger]

On 6/30/2021 10:55 PM, Dan Koren wrote:

> On Wednesday, June 30, 2021 at 9:56:22 PM UTC-4, Owen wrote:
>> On 6/30/21 9:00 PM, Dan Koren wrote:
>>> On Wednesday, June 30, 2021 at 8:51:41 PM UTC-4, Frank Berger wrote:
>>>> On 6/30/2021 7:08 PM, Dan Koren wrote:
>>>>> https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/29/the-us-is-falling-further-behind-china-and-europe-in-ev-production.html
>>>>
>>>> I'm more worried about the mine shaft gap.
>>>
>>> ?!?!?
>>

>> cf. Movie "Dr. Strangelove, or How I learned
>> to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb"
>>
>> -Owen
>>
>> P.S. where will you get all this
>> useless trivia after you retire??
>

> I am only retiring from r.m.c.r.,
> not from other activities. I am
> frankly disappointed by what
> is going on lately in this ng.
>
> dk
>

So is everybody else.

[Andy Evans]

On Thursday, 1 July 2021 at 05:17:06 UTC+1, Frank Berger wrote:
>>. I am
> > frankly disappointed by what
> > is going on lately in this ng.
> > > > dk
> >

> So is everybody else.

This is only a fraction of how disappointed thinking people are with the world situation in general.

[Herman]

On Thursday, July 1, 2021 at 4:55:20 AM UTC+2, dan....@gmail.com wrote:
> I am
> frankly disappointed by what
> is going on lately in this ng.
>
> dk

1 | Dan Koren | 804 | 1,907,369 | 55 | 19.28%

A large part of what's going on is your good self.

[Frank Berger]

That's because their expectations are too great. Pipe-dreamers will always be disappointed.

[Andy Evans]

So it's a pipe dream to imagine that while the world is well on its way to self destruct, no thinking people from our so-called "advanced" human race are going to be able to stop international criminals like Trump, Bolsonaro and all the sorry rest of them from destroying the planet? At this crucial time in our history the majority of world leaders are greedy, incompetent narcissists and psychopaths and they just flat out don't care or are too stupid or warped to care. Plus nobody is stopping meat eaters, gas guzzlers, frequent flyers and all the other "ordinary citizens" who are blind to what's happening and too complacent to do anything about it.

If you think it's a pipe dream to imagine that anybody is going to stop this destruction from happening you live in a worse hell than the rest of us.

[Todd Michel McComb]

In article <73e25723-14b4-4c05...@googlegroups.com>,

Andy Evans <performan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>At this crucial time in our history the majority of world leaders
>are greedy, incompetent narcissists and psychopaths and they just
>flat out don't care or are too stupid or warped to care.

Thinking & feeling are hard. Especially when things aren't going
well.

(So "bring on the easy answers!" is the way it seems to go.... Or
is it "a problem that can't be solved with a simple slogan isn't
worth solving!"? Something of that sort....)

[raymond....@gmail.com]

The real problem Andy, is that these cesspools of criminals are getting elected. Most or nearly all of them should be behind bars, but they aren't. The dumbing down of the electorates that has put them in power hasn't just happened. It has taken time to evolve, and certain forces have stood silent and only been too pleased to see it happen.

Ray Hall, Taree

[Todd Michel McComb]

In article <d4812ee3-5332-47e3...@googlegroups.com>,
Dan Koren <dan....@gmail.com> wrote:
>There is a set of people who believe "free markets" solve all the
>problems without ever creating other problems.

That's been a popular slogan from the late 20th century....

But as long as we're on this topic, in a group with a historical
emphasis, the term "free market" meant something rather different
in the 17th century -- which is the previous period when people
were lamenting the loss of "free markets."

What did they mean by this? A market was a place, of course, and
a free market was a market where not only was everyone free to go,
but all transactions were public. In other words, people at that
time were lamenting the rise of private, secret transactions.

[Frank Berger]

Who's going to stop the hysterics? I fear your pent-up anger will kill you long before anything environmental or viral. I hope not.

Personally, I only call people criminals who have actually violated laws, not just people who don't believe what I believe or don't act as I would have them act. Not believing in the coming environmental disaster or not believing that aggressive steps should be taken to flatten the curve may be wrong, may be stupid, but they are not irresponsible and certainly not criminal.

[Frank Berger]

On 7/1/2021 7:23 PM, Dan Koren wrote:

> Frank suffers from the typical libertarian delusion: free
> markets will naturally fix all problems by themselves,
> without anyone ever doing anything deliberately, other
> than competing for profits with everyone else. Sounds
> like a pipedream to me.
>
> dk
>

Not exactly, but pretty close.

[Frank Berger]

On 7/1/2021 7:40 PM, Dan Koren wrote:

> There is a set of people who believe "free markets"
> solve all the problems without ever creating other

> problems. It is just a different kind of pipedream.
>
> dk
>

Libertarians are not anarchists. If they were, they wouldn't be called libertarians. They would be called anarchists.

[Frank Berger]

Maybe we should go back to only allowing property owners to vote.

[Owen]

On 6/30/21 10:41 PM, Dan Koren wrote:
> On Wednesday, June 30, 2021 at 9:56:22 PM UTC-4, Owen wrote:

>> On 6/30/21 9:00 PM, Dan Koren wrote:
>>> On Wednesday, June 30, 2021 at 8:51:41 PM UTC-4, Frank Berger wrote:
>>>> On 6/30/2021 7:08 PM, Dan Koren wrote:
>>>>> https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/29/the-us-is-falling-further-behind-china-and-europe-in-ev-production.html
>>>>
>>>> I'm more worried about the mine shaft gap.
>>>
>>> ?!?!?
>>

>> cf. Movie "Dr. Strangelove, or How I learned
>> to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb"
>>
>> -Owen
>>
>> P.S. where will you get all this useless trivia after you retire??
>

> I am only retiring from r.n.c.r.,
> not from everything else I do.
>
> dk
>


Yes, but RMCR has much better useless trivia.

-Owen

[Herman]

On Friday, July 2, 2021 at 2:01:32 AM UTC+2, Frank Berger wrote:

>
> Personally, I only call people criminals who have actually violated laws, not just people who don't believe what I believe or don't act as I would have them act. Not believing in the coming environmental disaster or not believing that aggressive steps should be taken to flatten the curve may be wrong, may be stupid, but they are not irresponsible and certainly not criminal.

Largely I agree with this sentiment - not calling people you happen to disagree with / getting divorced from etc ad inf 'criminal'. However many of these leaders Andy was talking about do actually break laws; they generally don't get arrested because they are in positions of power. And they stay in power so as not to get arrested. Think Berlusconi, think Trump.

[Frank Berger]

I'm not sure what laws Trump has broken. Are you? I'm going to wait until he is charged with something and convicted.

Everybody's all upsed about Bill Cosby's conviction being vacated. All you hear is how "unjust" it is that he won't complete his sentence. You could say the outcome of his trial isn't just. But nobody seems to look at the bigger picture, which is that the trial process has to be just as well, and in the opinion of the PA Supreme Court, it wasn't. Making sure that the trial process is just is more important than whether Cosby serves his full sentence or not. The same people complaining about Cosby going free would celebrate a murderer going free because he wasn't read his Miranda rights.

[Bob Harper]

Certainly on (say) tax increases.

Bob Harper

[Bob Harper]

On 7/1/21 8:23 PM, Dan Koren wrote:

> On Thursday, July 1, 2021 at 10:07:14 PM UTC-4, Frank Berger wrote:
>>
>> I'm not sure what laws Trump
>> has broken. Are you? I'm going
>

> Presidents are held to higher
> standards than just barely
> not breaking statutory law.

>
>> to wait until he is charged with
>> something and convicted.
>

> Your wait may soon be over.
>
> dk
>
I very much doubt it.

Bob Harper

[Frank Berger]

On 7/1/2021 11:23 PM, Dan Koren wrote:

> On Thursday, July 1, 2021 at 10:07:14 PM UTC-4, Frank Berger wrote:
>>
>> I'm not sure what laws Trump
>> has broken. Are you? I'm going
>

> Presidents are held to higher
> standards than just barely
> not breaking statutory law.
>

That means you don't vote for them, not that you throw thwm in jail.

>> to wait until he is charged with
>> something and convicted.
>

> Your wait may soon be over.
>

I don't care one way or the other.


> dk
>

[Herman]

On Friday, July 2, 2021 at 4:07:14 AM UTC+2, Frank Berger wrote:
> On 7/1/2021 9:22 PM, Herman wrote:
> > On Friday, July 2, 2021 at 2:01:32 AM UTC+2, Frank Berger wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> Personally, I only call people criminals who have actually violated laws, not just people who don't believe what I believe or don't act as I would have them act. Not believing in the coming environmental disaster or not believing that aggressive steps should be taken to flatten the curve may be wrong, may be stupid, but they are not irresponsible and certainly not criminal.
> >
> > Largely I agree with this sentiment - not calling people you happen to disagree with / getting divorced from etc ad inf 'criminal'. However many of these leaders Andy was talking about do actually break laws; they generally don't get arrested because they are in positions of power. And they stay in power so as not to get arrested. Think Berlusconi, think Trump.
> >
> I'm not sure what laws Trump has broken. Are you? I'm going to wait until he is charged with something and convicted.
>

During his time in office Trump c.s. contended he could not be charged because of presidential immunity.

To me throwing an ex-president in jail doesn't seem like a good aspiration either (btw who introduced the "lock her up! chant into national politics?), apart from the fact that Trump has all his life played the delay and stall game in the courts. However, if there is not some form of accountability there will be lasting damage to the system.
I know you're likely to say, the accountability is he did not get reelected. However, there are tens of millions of Americans who firmly believe, counter to all evidence, that T. did get reelected, and they are prepared to commit acts of mass violence to defend this assumption.

[Andy Evans]

On Friday, 2 July 2021 at 02:22:51 UTC+1, Herman wrote:
> Largely I agree with this sentiment - not calling people you happen to disagree with / getting divorced from etc ad inf 'criminal'. However many of these leaders Andy was talking about do actually break laws; they generally don't get arrested because they are in positions of power. And they stay in power so as not to get arrested. Think Berlusconi, think Trump.

The vast majority of the world's population are acting as if "things will go back to normal" after the pandemic. That they can go on eating the meat that's destroying the Amazon rain forest, flying aeroplanes just for leisure and pleasure, using gas guzzling vehicles, polluting the oceans and the whole of the rest of the great basilica of folly that is destroying the planet. They may also hang on for a while longer to the idea that only people who break social laws are criminals. But we are about to experience a new world order where almost everything is going to change. Bolsonaro is a very good example of a "climate criminal". It will take a little time for world leaders and populations to get their heads around the idea that "crimes against the planet" are crucially serious and are becoming increasingly so. They will have to create new legislative bodies, sanctions and enforcement bodies to deal with this, just as we have created the International Criminal Court in 2002. Expecting the world to carry on for the next 50 years in the same way it is operating today is a blindness born of humans' poor ability to conceptualise the future and act on new concepts. But the science is all there - all you have to do is read it, understand it, and start figuring out how humans are going to have to change. OK, it's a mental leap that some are going to find easier than others, but at least make a start somewhere.

[Herman]

On Friday, July 2, 2021 at 10:07:58 AM UTC+2, Andy Evans wrote:


> The vast majority of the world's population are acting as if "things will go back to normal" after the pandemic.

I'm not sure it's the vast majority of the world population, however there is critical mass and it's not moving in the right direction. And it's an intellectual failure to keep going on this way. People just don't give a shit. Some say science will think of something; other just don't believe in the science.

My daughter is fourteen years old. Her natural lifespan would reach to the year 2100-ish. I have no idea how that would look like, and I feel incredibly bad about it. When she's talking about having kids later, I wonder if that's even an option.

What I envision is tremendous shortage of resources as great big fires keep on devastating crops in a vicious cycle of dry spells and overheating; I envision mass migration and wars of competition for safe territories.

We (my gf and I) have stopped flying; we don't own an automobile, and we try not to be wasteful. However, that's completely useless, since we're only creating space for other folks to pollute some more. Just on a small scale it's obvious that the covid crisis has created a mood among people they're not giving a fuck anymore, and they're throwing away their beer cans and soft drink bottles where ever they are when they're done. The littering has increased enormously.

[Herman]

On Friday, July 2, 2021 at 4:07:14 AM UTC+2, Frank Berger wrote:


> >
> I'm not sure what laws Trump has broken. Are you?

The phone call to Georgia's secretary of state, about finding 11.000 votes was recorded and is an excellent piece of evidence for breaking the law.

"Russia, if you're listening" is another case.

The speech on Penn Ave on Jan 6 is another clear case of incitement.

[Andy Evans]

On Friday, 2 July 2021 at 10:54:49 UTC+1, Herman wrote:
> My daughter is fourteen years old. Her natural lifespan would reach to the year 2100-ish. I have no idea how that would look like, and I feel incredibly bad about it. When she's talking about having kids later, I wonder if that's even an option.
>
> What I envision is tremendous shortage of resources as great big fires keep on devastating crops in a vicious cycle of dry spells and overheating; I envision mass migration and wars of competition for safe territories.

That sounds about right to me. My son is 30 and he and his wife will have a lot to cope with in their lifetimes. I'm gutted, and in fact frightened, to think of the world they're all going to inherit.

[JohnGavin]

If you look back on all of human history on this planet you have to conclude that the pendulum swings back-and-forth between worst times and better and has always done so. We have had a relatively good run since the end of World War II. Everyone’s secret wish is to have the pendulum get stuck in the very best position, but that is never possible here.

As far as world leaders being corrupt and greedy, there’s an old saying that we basically get the leaders we deserve. You can’t escape the fact that the problem lies with the individual first and then the collective.

The problem is that the earth is not designed to fulfill peoples material desires to the point of satiation and permanent satisfaction. Too many people are chasing a dream that isn’t real. Human beings are smart enough to know that death is in inevitability and yet we all live as if it isn’t true. Most of humanity lives completely focused on the transient, missing the point, and guaranteeing the continued swing of the pendulum. It does seem like it’s not only continuing but it seems to be changing direction. A bit of good news mixed with the bad is that for those who are ready, more valuable lessons are learned in adverse conditions than in luxurious times.

[Herman]

On Friday, July 2, 2021 at 12:11:28 PM UTC+2, Andy Evans wrote:
> My son is 30 and he and his wife will have a lot to cope with in their lifetimes. I'm gutted, and in fact frightened, to think of the world they're all going to inherit.

We feel the same way, alas. It's called conscience.

[Andy Evans]

On Friday, 2 July 2021 at 11:33:44 UTC+1, JohnGavin wrote:
> As far as world leaders being corrupt and greedy, there’s an old saying that we basically get the leaders we deserve. You can’t escape the fact that the problem lies with the individual first and then the collective. The problem is that the earth is not designed to fulfill peoples material desires to the point of satiation and permanent satisfaction. Too many people are chasing a dream that isn’t real. >>

I don't have any data, but my impression is that "climate activists", i.e. people who are doing something active, like flying less, becoming vegan etc, are outnumbered by "do nothings" by....... I don't know, 1,000 to one, 100,000 to one. Just guessing wildly here but it's a big number. It's going to take a huge change in attitude by individuals to form a collective for climate action that is going to make any real change. And I think that climate activists are only going to feel any kind of confidence in change when they outnumber the do-nothings. That will take years. And then large groups of voters will have to vote in climate-active governments. That will take even longer since most of the world is led by military regimes or autocracies, so voting will have no effect. We are nowhere near creating a new category of "crimes against the planet" and it will take years for this to be set up and enacted. I'd estimate at least 5 more years of doing virtually nothing, while seas rise, heatwaves spread, storms become much worse and water shortage, fires and desertification cut down crop yield. After 5 years of this the world's population will be in no doubt that something is happening, if only because of mass migration, but they probably won't know what to do about it and will still cling onto the idea that our clever race will find some miracle solution.........

[Frank Berger]

The only thing I object to in your statement is that you didn't mention a particular crime for which he can be charged. I didn't like the "Lock her up" stuff and I don't like it now. We don't throw people in jail because we don't like them.

[Frank Berger]

And you think the best start would be to throw Trump in jail?

[Frank Berger]

You could trip over one of those beer cans and break your neck.

I think the fear mongers have painted such a bleak picture that a lot of people think the sacrifices necessary to avert it are not feasible or just not acceptable. Combined with a hope that science will come to the rescue and you get inaction, right or wrong.

[Frank Berger]

On 7/2/2021 5:58 AM, Herman wrote:
> On Friday, July 2, 2021 at 4:07:14 AM UTC+2, Frank Berger wrote:
>
>
>>>
>> I'm not sure what laws Trump has broken. Are you?
>
> The phone call to Georgia's secretary of state, about finding 11.000 votes was recorded and is an excellent piece of evidence for breaking the law.
>

The request may not have been explicit enough to convince a jury. I don't know.

> "Russia, if you're listening" is another case.
>

That was a joke. We don't throw people in jail for jokes. At least, not yet. Even if they're Republicans.

> The speech on Penn Ave on Jan 6 is another clear case of incitement.
>

Same comment as above. We have mostly free speech. SCOTUS cases have set the bar vary high for incitement, as I recall.

[Frank Berger]

On 7/2/2021 6:33 AM, JohnGavin wrote:
> On Friday, July 2, 2021 at 6:11:28 AM UTC-4, Andy Evans wrote:
>> On Friday, 2 July 2021 at 10:54:49 UTC+1, Herman wrote:
>>> My daughter is fourteen years old. Her natural lifespan would reach to the year 2100-ish. I have no idea how that would look like, and I feel incredibly bad about it. When she's talking about having kids later, I wonder if that's even an option.
>>>
>>> What I envision is tremendous shortage of resources as great big fires keep on devastating crops in a vicious cycle of dry spells and overheating; I envision mass migration and wars of competition for safe territories.
>> That sounds about right to me. My son is 30 and he and his wife will have a lot to cope with in their lifetimes. I'm gutted, and in fact frightened, to think of the world they're all going to inherit.
>
>
> If you look back on all of human history on this planet you have to conclude that the pendulum swings back-and-forth between worst times and better and has always done so. We have had a relatively good run since the end of World War II. Everyone’s secret wish is to have the pendulum get stuck in the very best position, but that is never possible here.
>
> As far as world leaders being corrupt and greedy, there’s an old saying that we basically get the leaders we deserve. You can’t escape the fact that the problem lies with the individual first and then the collective.

An observation that always falls on deaf ears. The greater the concentration of power (big government, especially but not limited to totalitarian government), the greater the possibility of corruption. This is one of the main reasons for preferring small government.

[Frank Berger]

You've read all the sci-fi stories. The disaster is inevitable. Why worry? Enjoy life while you can. I guess when you decided to have children you weren't so smart about the bleak future or didn't care about bringing children into a doomed world.

[Herman]

On Friday, July 2, 2021 at 4:21:34 PM UTC+2, Frank Berger wrote:

> >
> You've read all the sci-fi stories. The disaster is inevitable. Why worry? Enjoy life while you can. I guess when you decided to have children you weren't so smart about the bleak future or didn't care about bringing children into a doomed world.

Thanks, Frank.

[Frank Berger]

Happy to help.

[gggg gggg]

https://www.google.com/search?q=quotes+goethe+prosperity&sxsrf=ALeKk03vWvhw8vucUezStnTqYuB6_H7Oxg:1625244249390&tbm=isch&source=iu&ictx=1&fir=McWa2d4kgGX0XM%252CAEFvLmdWL5wmpM%252C_&vet=1&usg=AI4_-kRpwyfa2tZAJGXidE5CF9JLdUqEyg&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjwuqHR6sTxAhUXu54KHeyjCFAQ9QF6BAgaEAE#imgrc=McWa2d4kgGX0XM

[Herman]

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2021/07/how-to-live-in-a-climate-permanent-emergency.html

Climate change scientists look at the heat dome over the Pac NW as the beginning of irreversible change, much sooner than expected.

[Todd Michel McComb]

In article <1eb6a0b0-3367-45aa...@googlegroups.com>,

JohnGavin <dag...@gmail.com> wrote:
>You can't escape the fact that the problem lies with the individual
>first and then the collective.

That's a typical Western attitude, but it simply isn't true.

The collective forges the individual. (And this society forges
individuals with very bad ideas about how to live.)

[raymond....@gmail.com]

An attitude that encapsulates the thoughts of people like yourself. No consideration for others, no thoughts about trying to prolong the inevitable - just rape, burn and slash while you can. Pitiful.

Ray Hall, Taree

[Frank Berger]

So is your sense of humor.

[raymond....@gmail.com]

On Saturday, 3 July 2021 at 10:10:04 UTC+10, Frank Berger wrote:

Makes two us then.

Ray Hall, Taree

[John Fowler]

Electric vehicle production is pointless without a massive increase in electricity production.
Unless of course you live in a place like Bedrock where cars are powered by feet. Yabba-dabba-doo.

[Bob Harper]

On 7/2/21 7:21 PM, John Fowler wrote:
(snip)

>
> Electric vehicle production is pointless without a massive increase in electricity production.
> Unless of course you live in a place like Bedrock where cars are powered by feet. Yabba-dabba-doo.
>

And the only way that desideratum will be achieved is by a massive
increase in the use of nuclear energy to produce electricity. Read
'Apocalypse Never' by Micheal Shellenberger to get a reality check.

Bob Harper

[John Fowler]

Though Germany is happy to import massive amounts of oil and gas from Russia.

[number_six]

Gazprom was prominent in the advertising signage at the Euro quarterfinal match held yesterday in Munich...

[Bob Harper]

No doubt. Germany's move away from nuclear power will be seen to have
been a massive own goal.

Bob Harper

[raymond....@gmail.com]

[raymond....@gmail.com]

On Sunday, 4 July 2021 at 01:56:50 UTC+10, Bob Harper wrote:

Nuclear energy, used with solar and wind resources, is the way to go, imho.

Ray Hall, Taree

[Bob Harper]

Given the costs of wind--unsightly wind farms and dead birds--to name
only two issues, and solar--massive amounts of land required and
screwing up wildlife habitat, together with the fact that they will
never be able to cover reliable base load (can a big enough battery be
built?:)), I find them much less desirable than nukes. And I'm hopeful
that we crack the fusion nut one of these years. Then the biggest
problem will be the grid, which will require very large investments.

Bob Harper

[Andy Evans]

On Saturday, 3 July 2021 at 18:17:12 UTC+1, Bob Harper wrote:
I'm hopeful that we crack the fusion nut one of these years. Then the biggest
> problem will be the grid, which will require very large investments.
> > Bob Harper

Energy is only part of the issue. The world will have to stop eating meat, for several reasons - the destruction of rain forests, the methane emissions of cattle, the wastefulness of feeding crops to animals, the energy consumed in bringing meat to markets... it goes on, and that's without diseases passed on by animals and the damage done to antibiotic effectiveness through using them on cattle. Not at all difficult for vegetarians, but it will be a big shift for meat eaters, who will do all in their power - together with the multinationals - to preserve the meat industry. Expect many outraged cries of "individual liberties" and "nanny state"......

[Bob Harper]

Andy, you really need to read Shellenberger's book. He addresses this
'problem' at length.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/s?k=apocalypse+never&crid=1P0RB97I55N6V&sprefix=apocalypse+never%2Caps%2C306&ref=nb_sb_ss_ts-doa-p_1_16

I believe your fears are overblown.

Bob Harper

[gggg gggg]

Instead of using genetic engineering to create blond blue-eyed babies, shouldn't it be used to create future generations who consume less and who are also more disease-resistant in anticipation of a world swarming with even more diseases?

[Herman]

On Saturday, July 3, 2021 at 10:13:05 PM UTC+2, Bob Harper wrote:


>
> I believe your fears are overblown.

haha, yes, everything will be just fine!
please buy a bigger car.

[Bob Harper]

Don't want one, but I encourage everyone to follow the instruction on
the cover of 'The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy'.

(OT) Wasn't England splendid today?

Bob Harper

[gggg gggg]

On Friday, July 2, 2021 at 3:11:28 AM UTC-7, Andy Evans wrote:
> On Friday, 2 July 2021 at 10:54:49 UTC+1, Herman wrote:
> > My daughter is fourteen years old. Her natural lifespan would reach to the year 2100-ish. I have no idea how that would look like, and I feel incredibly bad about it. When she's talking about having kids later, I wonder if that's even an option.
> >
> > What I envision is tremendous shortage of resources as great big fires keep on devastating crops in a vicious cycle of dry spells and overheating; I envision mass migration and wars of competition for safe territories.
> That sounds about right to me. My son is 30 and he and his wife will have a lot to cope with in their lifetimes. I'm gutted, and in fact frightened, to think of the world they're all going to inherit.

https://www.wired.com/story/the-miami-building-collapse-and-humanitys-tragic-fight-for-the-future/

[gggg gggg]

On Friday, July 2, 2021 at 3:11:28 AM UTC-7, Andy Evans wrote:
> On Friday, 2 July 2021 at 10:54:49 UTC+1, Herman wrote:
> > My daughter is fourteen years old. Her natural lifespan would reach to the year 2100-ish. I have no idea how that would look like, and I feel incredibly bad about it. When she's talking about having kids later, I wonder if that's even an option.
> >
> > What I envision is tremendous shortage of resources as great big fires keep on devastating crops in a vicious cycle of dry spells and overheating; I envision mass migration and wars of competition for safe territories.
> That sounds about right to me. My son is 30 and he and his wife will have a lot to cope with in their lifetimes. I'm gutted, and in fact frightened, to think of the world they're all going to inherit.

Didn't Wagner believe that humankind was self-destructive?

[Herman]

On Sunday, July 4, 2021 at 6:28:34 PM UTC+2, quote bot wrote:

> Didn't Wagner believe that humankind was self-destructive?

So fucking what? I know you're just a robot, but the newer models can actually act like a human.

[Todd Michel McComb]

In article <b7c430e2-cce4-4b90...@googlegroups.com>,

Herman <her...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Climate change scientists look at the heat dome over the Pac NW
>as the beginning of irreversible change, much sooner than expected.

And don't forget the Mass Extinction Event that's well underway.
Clearly irreversible. (Repercussions pending.)

[gggg gggg]

https://www.google.com/search?q=robots+have+feelings+too&tbm=isch&sxsrf=ALeKk03EW9vin0iO4Kp1O7jFpVMaOtsRqA%3A1625423510127&source=hp&biw=1366&bih=657&ei=lv7hYP2eBbXR9APa9pTYCA&oq=robots+have+&gs_lcp=CgNpbWcQARgAMgIIADICCAAyAggAMgIIADIECAAQHjIGCAAQBRAeMgYIABAFEB4yBggAEAUQHjIGCAAQBRAeMgYIABAFEB46BAgjECc6BQgAELEDOggIABCxAxCDAVDiAlj3EWCKIWgAcAB4AIABcIgB7weSAQM5LjOYAQCgAQGqAQtnd3Mtd2l6LWltZw&sclient=img#imgrc=87NweAr7Muq62M

[Todd Michel McComb]

In article <0f8357fa-93a3-4675...@googlegroups.com>,
Andy Evans <performan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>... will be a big shift for meat eaters, who ....

>Expect many outraged cries of "individual liberties" and "nanny
>state"......

Well, count me among those who'll definitely view mandates to end
traditional e.g. dietary practices in a very different light from
curtailing the exact modern excesses (e.g. cars, planes -- per your
prior list) that have so fucked the world in the first place. I've
never driven a car anyway. Not even once.

[gggg gggg]

- Sadly, in the name of progress, we have polluted the air, water, soil and the food we eat.

Radhanath Swami

[Andy Evans]

On Sunday, 4 July 2021 at 21:50:52 UTC+1, Todd Michel McComb wrote:
> Well, count me among those who'll definitely view mandates to end
> traditional e.g. dietary practices in a very different light from
> curtailing the exact modern excesses (e.g. cars, planes -- per your
> prior list) that have so fucked the world in the first place. I've
> never driven a car anyway. Not even once.

That sounds like a decent "thinking" response, which is a huge step up from either being unaware or not giving a damn. The main thing we can do is not bury our heads in the sand and pretend nothing is happening. We may choose to put it to the back of our minds and live a fulfilling life, but at least admit and believe what science is telling us.

[Todd Michel McComb]

In article <7ac61853-a323-41b0...@googlegroups.com>,
Dan Koren <dan....@gmail.com> wrote:
>Then how can you play the piano ?!? One must learn how to reach
>the pedals! ;-)

Ha, well, I've operated farming & construction equipment, including
heavy machinery... but not on public roads.

(And I forgot when I posted, but my father did once make me drive
his big van around an empty mall parking lot.)

[Todd Michel McComb]

In article <2caeb9f7-a0da-4deb...@googlegroups.com>,
Dan Koren <dan....@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Sunday, July 4, 2021 at 4:14:38 PM UTC-7, Todd Michel McComb wrote:
>>Ha, well, I've operated farming & construction
>>equipment, including heavy machinery... but
>>not on public roads.

>That is only adequate for playing Hammerklavier!

I suppose you're right....

[Owen]

On 7/1/21 11:23 PM, Dan Koren wrote:
> On Thursday, July 1, 2021 at 10:07:14 PM UTC-4, Frank Berger wrote:
>>
>> I'm not sure what laws Trump
>> has broken. Are you? I'm going
>
> Presidents are held to higher
> standards than just barely
> not breaking statutory law.

Well, actually, No. They're not.

FDR got away with concentration camps for Japanese Americans.
JFK got away with running a covert war against Cuba even after the
missile crisis.
LBJ got away with killing 50000 American soldiers fighting a war he knew
could not be won. Not to mention that he actually never did put those TV
stations he owned in Texas in a "blind trust."
Nixon got away with Watergate.
Obama got away with Fast and Furious and using the IRS to punish
conservative groups.
We know what Clinton got away with.
Reagan got away with Iran Contra.

The truth of the matter is Presidents can get away with breaking a whole
lot of standards, and the only thing that determines if they are even
affected by their breakages is: how popular is he?

-Owen

[Owen]

On 7/2/21 4:07 AM, Andy Evans wrote:
> On Friday, 2 July 2021 at 02:22:51 UTC+1, Herman wrote:
>> Largely I agree with this sentiment - not calling people you happen to disagree with / getting divorced from etc ad inf 'criminal'. However many of these leaders Andy was talking about do actually break laws; they generally don't get arrested because they are in positions of power. And they stay in power so as not to get arrested. Think Berlusconi, think Trump.
>
> The vast majority of the world's population are acting as if "things will go back to normal" after the pandemic. That they can go on eating the meat that's destroying the Amazon rain forest, flying aeroplanes just for leisure and pleasure, using gas guzzling vehicles, polluting the oceans and the whole of the rest of the great basilica of folly that is destroying the planet. They may also hang on for a while longer to the idea that only people who break social laws are criminals. But we are about to experience a new world order where almost everything is going to change. Bolsonaro is a very good example of a "climate criminal". It will take a little time for world leaders and populations to get their heads around the idea that "crimes against the planet" are crucially serious and are becoming increasingly so. They will have to create new legislative bodies, sanctions and enforcement bodies to deal with this, just as we have created the International Criminal Court in 2002. Expecting the world to carry on for the next 50 years in the same way it is operating today is a blindness born of humans' poor ability to conceptualise the future and act on new concepts. But the science is all there - all you have to do is read it, understand it, and start figuring out how humans are going to have to change. OK, it's a mental leap that some are going to find easier than others, but at least make a start somewhere.
>

It will be interesting to look back at the pandemic years, where all the
things which we're considering that will remedy climate changes, were
actually done. People limited their driving for a year, doing far more
to limit auto exhausts than any EPA restrictions ever would. Plane
flights were cancelled. People stopped commuting to work. All these
things when they happened should have had some measurable effect on the
planet, as all the polluting activities were basically cut back to
almost nothing from March 2020 to March 2021. If these cutbacks
actually did and do effect climate change, the scientists should be able
to measure it.

-Owen

[Todd Michel McComb]

In article <xNudnQqqRf19E3_9...@supernews.com>,

Owen <in...@clipboardinc.com> wrote:
>People limited their driving for a year, doing far more to limit

>auto exhausts than any EPA restrictions ever would. flights were

>cancelled. People stopped commuting to work. All these things
>when they happened should have had some measurable effect on the
>planet, as all the polluting activities were basically cut back
>to almost nothing from March 2020 to March 2021.

Your timeframe is incorrect -- much pollution was back to normal
far before March '21. However, your note is accurate. There were
various reports of improved conditions in Spring '20. You can look
it up. That you *didn't* and are instead making this post, however,
suggests that you should not be making this post. Thank you.

[gggg gggg]

Does a wrongdoing president's successor make the difference? Didn't Ford pardon Nixon?

And in the U.S., putting presidents in jail for wrongdoing is just not done.

[gggg gggg]

The euphemism is that sending a president to prison 'sets a bad precedent'.

[gggg gggg]

According to this:

- Bowman agreed that a Biden administration might be hesitant to go after Trump.

"A Biden DOJ is going to be very cautious about indicting a former president, even Trump. As they should be," Bowman said. "Leaving aside the bad precedent it could create for a cycle of legal retribution after elections, it would be a huge distraction, and convicting a guy who got 70 million votes would be very tough, regardless of the strength of the evidence. And the last thing you want is an indictment and acquittal."

https://www.cnn.com/2020/12/02/politics/trump-presidential-pardon-children/index.html

[Herman]

On Monday, July 5, 2021 at 7:42:53 AM UTC+2, gggg gggg wrote:

> The euphemism is that sending a president to prison 'sets a bad precedent'.

well, you're having a great discussion with yourself, bot.

you could look up the definition of euphemism.

[Frank Berger]

Small quibble about Nixon.

[Frank Berger]

Yeah, and what a great year it was!

[Owen]

I had assumed that any such reports would not be complete by now. Thank
you.

-Owen

[Owen]

Well, I found a few reports that showed that pollution was down greatly
during the spring of 2020. This should not surprise anyone -- for all
intents and purposes the world was shut down during that time. What
they don't show is whether there was any appreciable retrograde in
climate change effects. In other words, did the drastic measures taken
in 2020 actually affect climate change, and to what amount? We may
never have this opportunity to measure this again. One can see the
drastic change in pollution, just in Wuhan, while under current and
proposed treaties, China wasn't due to change anything for another few
years. This is a good place for climate change advocates to show that
making sacrifices will actually make a difference, because even the
planned changes will not have the impact that Covid did.

-Owen

[Todd Michel McComb]

In article <UI-dnYXr_ZJOw379...@supernews.com>,

Owen <in...@clipboardinc.com> wrote:
>This is a good place for climate change advocates to show that
>making sacrifices will actually make a difference, because even
>the planned changes will not have the impact that Covid did.

It was heartening to see some pollution indicators clear up
dramatically in a short time. However, regarding any long-term
trends, it was only a blip. (And I'm sure the "planned measures"
are insufficient.)

[gggg gggg]

- If mankind had wished for what is right, they might have had it long ago.

William Hazlitt

- Human nature is weak.

Dr. Fauci

[Frank Berger]

I don't really know the science, but it could easily be that a year or so of reduced pollution doesn't make much difference, but 20 or 50 years would. The "problem" is that most people don't want to spend 20 or 50 years in lockdown conditions.

Regarding eating meat. Are there any statistics that break down pollution emissions by source? I would imagine that the internal combustion engine is most of it. Do cow farts really matter much? If they do, in addition to banning meat, we should force humans to eat foods that don't cause gas. We could make it a crime to fart.

[raymond....@gmail.com]

On Tuesday, 6 July 2021 at 06:35:45 UTC+10, Frank Berger wrote:
> On 7/5/2021 3:34 PM, Owen wrote:
> > On 7/5/21 2:27 PM, Owen wrote:
> >> On 7/5/21 12:59 AM, Todd Michel McComb wrote:

> >>> In article <xNudnQqqRf19E3_9...supernews.com>,

Cows emit methane mostly from belching. The emission from ICE's is CO2. Both are bad, but it is believed that emissions from cars are far more damaging because it hangs around for a lot longer, even though methane is far more potent. Both create layers that prevent heat from escaping Earth.

I am not an expert but meat eating and transport are two major causes of climate change. Energy production (electricity) is another detrimental cause. Nuclear is the way to go in this regard.

Ray Hall, Taree

[Frank Berger]

Maybe we can breed cows that don't belch and fart. Maybe super solar cells in space and super batteries will solve the energy problem. How about windmills in space that catch the solar wind. Anyone ever think of that? Maybe most of us will survive the coming disaster. Maybe a nuclear melt-down will kill us all. We could always build millions of space cruiser and move to another planet that we can destroy. I can't continue as I have to get the burgers off the grill. Later.

[Owen]

On 7/5/21 4:35 PM, Frank Berger wrote:

>
> I don't really know the science, but it could easily be that a year or
> so of reduced pollution doesn't make much difference, but 20 or 50 years
> would.  The "problem" is that most people don't want to spend 20 or 50
> years in lockdown conditions.
>
> Regarding eating meat.  Are there any statistics that break down
> pollution emissions by source?  I would imagine that the internal
> combustion engine is most of it.  Do cow farts really matter much?  If
> they do, in addition to banning meat, we should force humans to eat
> foods that don't cause gas. We could make it a crime to fart.

The hard sell, as it were, of getting people to believe in climate
change is whether the changes we make will actually make a difference,
or are the changes proposed just changes that will make us more
comfortable. The subject title is a good one - electric vehicle
production - electric vehicle production is much more harmful to the
environment than gas powered, and there is still a great deal of
electricity generated by fossil fuels. And disposal of used batteries
is problematic Is moving to electric vehicles in total good or bad for
the environment?

Human society has spent centuries terraforming the Earth perhaps to the
point where Earth's albedo (the amount of reflected vs. absorbed light
and heat from the sun) has changed. Vast fields full of black solar
panels vs. green leafy plants. Huge amount of black asphalt roads cover
the earth absorbing a great deal of the sun's heat.

-Owen

[raymond....@gmail.com]

On Tuesday, 6 July 2021 at 13:11:53 UTC+10, Owen wrote:
> >
> > I don't really know the science, but it could easily be that a year or
> > so of reduced pollution doesn't make much difference, but 20 or 50 years
> > would. The "problem" is that most people don't want to spend 20 or 50
> > years in lockdown conditions.

This is one of the problems. People are used to the quick-fix, and 25-50 years will be deemed too long for anyone to wait. It will require those in power (politicians) to make these decisions, but instant popularity, vested interests (fossil fuels), override the need to allocate resources to the future. As it is, these resources are badly distributed, and the reason why millions starve to death every week, whilst billionaires are allowed to exist. This alone is obscene.

> Human society has spent centuries terraforming the Earth perhaps to the
> point where Earth's albedo (the amount of reflected vs. absorbed light
> and heat from the sun) has changed. Vast fields full of black solar
> panels vs. green leafy plants. Huge amount of black asphalt roads cover
> the earth absorbing a great deal of the sun's heat.

These are good points, but vastly improved public transport is universally required, and cities should prohibit the use of cars. Roads could be reduced in width by over 50% and replaced by plants. Solar could be restricted and more installed on roofs.

Ray Hall, Taree

[gggg gggg]

Concerning 'quick-fix' and 'instant popularity':

- Planning in business and government is short-range; the long-term threats are someone else’s concern. This is to be expected in a competitive society where those who do not devote themselves to short-term advantage are unlikely to be in the competition in the long run.

Chomsky

[gggg gggg]

On Friday, July 2, 2021 at 3:11:28 AM UTC-7, Andy Evans wrote:
> On Friday, 2 July 2021 at 10:54:49 UTC+1, Herman wrote:
> > My daughter is fourteen years old. Her natural lifespan would reach to the year 2100-ish. I have no idea how that would look like, and I feel incredibly bad about it. When she's talking about having kids later, I wonder if that's even an option.
> >
> > What I envision is tremendous shortage of resources as great big fires keep on devastating crops in a vicious cycle of dry spells and overheating; I envision mass migration and wars of competition for safe territories.
> That sounds about right to me. My son is 30 and he and his wife will have a lot to cope with in their lifetimes. I'm gutted, and in fact frightened, to think of the world they're all going to inherit.

Concerning the future, ever read NEUROMANCER?:

- As far as themes go, the most prevalent in Neuromancer (and most cyberpunk) are: the struggle against a vast economic inequality, the way technology doesn’t make life better for everyone, and the inevitable corruption of governments and corporations that run the world.

https://scjensen.com/2021/05/10/cyberpunk-book-review-neuromancer-by-william-gibson/