Natalia wrote: > *Chris, I was /joking /about the water and electricity.
Even joking should make some sense. Bringing up the combination of electricity and water as an "argument" for water being "alive", doesn't make sense. > This you label > superstitious, and keep it up below, thus making references to > superstitions which utterly confuse the issues. It wasn't your only superstition. > >> NK---What are you going to say about all this when /science/ proves that > >> everything we see or detect has no life until it is actually observed? > > > > Such nonsense won't happen. Of course we are alive, even while we are > > not being observed. > > *That is not possible, even in the context of science which claims only > reproductive physical beings have life. Consciousness entails observation.* What is not possible? > > Mind requires life. > > *Agree, but not for the same reason. But perhaps there is both physical > and non-physical life, or perhaps just non-physical, or just physical, > as you are relying on older science to continue to believe. * Funny, so I'm "relying on older science". But you are relying on superstition. Which is certainly older, but not even science. > *You're making the presumption that Gaia functions with the same > consciousness as its cancer, or that all upon Gaia must think just like > her because she gave them form. Do you think in the same way as your > mother or father, of the same DNA? But, Gaia is doing something about > the imbalances. She is reacting. If she is reacting, she hits the wrong persons. For example, since it is either 10°C or 35°C in the Alpine summer (instead of 24°C in the past), very few people continue to use bicycles for transportation/travel, but the SUVs with their fuel-consuming air conditioners keep booming... Also, isn't it unfair of Gaia that she kills or renders homeless millions of poor Pakistanis with a much smaller eco-footprint than the billionaires who remain unscratched by Gaia? I mean, at least she could down some private jets with thunder and storms, just to show her good will... > Dogma is an inappropriate term here. I > do not expect you to believe anything unquestioningly, nor do those who > choose to see our world in this light. How generous of you. The guy with the hydrogen bomb did, however. As do other "Gaia" fans. Some even raid TV stations and take hostages to enforce their views... > The idea is about protecting the > delicate systems which work interdependently. The billionaires' cull, as > you like to put it, could take many avenues to achieve that end. And it does. But if "the idea is about protecting...", shouldn't the billionaires cull themselves first? (with their vast eco-footprints) Or at least dramatically chance their own behavior, and give their billions for R&D of renewable energy systems, instead of genetic tinkering, pot legalization and other harmful BS? > It > doesn't mean you should cast aspersions on something that aims to save > our butts. Oh, I understand: We have to be culled in order to save our butts. Sounds like "Operation Iraqi Freedom": Gotta kill'em to save'em! > But you have great difficulty disentangling the predators > from most everything. No wonder since their tentacles are all over most everything... > And I sympathize. They have a controlling hand in > everything. But just because they do, does not mean you should fail to > be respectful of the earth's needs, or fail to eat organic produce now > becoming big business, or fail to ride your bike, now produced by big > business, or fail to read good books, now published by big business, etc. Of course I don't stop being an environmentalist. That's why I say that Predators and their PR tricks are counter-productive for the environment. > > Your projection is outright laughable, and your superstition is NOT helping > > to advance environmentalism, because it requires a belief in "Gaia" -- a > > concept that doesn't make sense. > > *David Suzuki, who believes in Earth's consciousness, must then also be > called superstitious. Yes. > He's done a great deal to awaken those who have > been ignorant and insensitive. Suzuki actually suggested to __extract the Canadian tar sands__ and use the revenues to fund research and development of clean energy! What a sick joke -- why not use the billions already stolen by Predators and leave the tar sands alone?? > Now, I'm not saying you have to believe > Earth has a consciousness, but you're so hung up on scientific evidence > of its 'life' that you end up negating the good that has come about from > this venue of acknowledging that pollution is destroying our only home. To acknowledge that pollution is destroying our only home, it took SCIENCE, not superstition! Just think of how superstition dealt with the plague (misplacing the blame and taking wrong, ineffective and even counter- productive measures), and how science did (solving the problem and saving millions of lives). But of course you would say that the plague was Gaia's reaction to get rid of those bad humans, so it was a good thing and science should be damned. See where superstition leads? Genocide. > Being hung up on the form in which we will achieve balance is like a > strict parent who insists on obedience, or the religious zealot who > demands fealty to dogma. In fact, obsession with science has actually > slowed the momentum of awareness needed to avert disaster. Everyone had > to have science expensively and unanimously declare we're hurting the > earth. Well, Duh! In that delay, predators played a key role, before and > after global awareness, only at the cost of, oh, life. This is a distortion. It wasn't science that delayed action against GHGs -- it was business interests (Predators) who paid lying hacks for "dissent", just like the tobacco industry paid "scientists" for decades to claim that smoking doesn't cause cancer, so they could always say "there's no consensus". And how come you believe that the Gaia nonsense is more effective than science to avoid dissent? You have no proof whatsoever, and it doesn't make sense -- why should this be convincing? It's outright counter-productive, as even I as a die-hard environmentalist oppose this esoterical nonsense. Keep in mind that it was science that found out about GHGs in the first place. And it can only be science that finds solutions to curb GHGs. But it didn't take science to pollute the environment! > *I meant the above in the respect that pertains to your purported > scientific approach to truth. Science is the realm of predators No, superstition is the realm of Predators. Science is the realm of Producers, but -- like all realms of Producers, especially the lucrative ones -- have been invaded and screwed up by Predators. > Predators get scientist to twist findings to suit > their own ends. Scientists work for these predators knowingly, then cry > afterwards that they were forced to do something against their will, or > were ignored. Scientists will change facts to suit the demands of the > predators. The point is: How do we curb this? With more science or with more superstition? > The digitized society believes there is science behind > everything. Well, in one sense, that's true. Most scientists can be bought. Remove Predators from power and the corruption will stop. > Gaia consciousness is hardly esoteric, since it has been a global issue > for quite some time now, though you can call it nonsense if you wish. Horoscopes have been a global issue for quite some time too! >> You may ask, how can science be corrupted? Well, it isn't corrupted >> BY science but by power (money). You can counter this corruption only >> with science (debunking the frauds) -- not with superstition! By >> advocating superstition, you are helping the Predators. > > *Yeah, no scientist ever dreamed that the nukes he helped develop would > ever be used to kill thousands! Einstein thought the nukes were necessary to stop Hitler. Who brought Hitler to power? Predators. No Predators in power ==> no nukes necessary. In fact, no heavy arms at all. > They just did it for the science of it all. If it wasn't for the funding and "motivation" by Predators, there simply would have been no money for this "R&D"! And for the same reason, there's no money for renewables R&D today. No scientist can work for free -- there are bills to be paid (also for materials, not just the work). > Where you have atomic research, I'll allow that there are sundry > purposes for its use. But specifically designing for armaments--yes, it > is the scientist. Franken foods--yes. Pesticides, Fertilizers--yes. They > know what it's all going to be used for, and what effects it will have. Producers can only do that which gets funded -- and Predators decide on the funding flows of money, as long as they're in power. >> No. Science progresses by taking up new findings, not superstition. >> It was superstition (the church) who persecuted the scientist Galileo, >> not the other way around. > > *I didn't say it was the other way around. What I said was specialized > knowledge usually takes time to become common knowledge. You confuse specialized science with superstition! > Persecution always occurs But not by science. >> Homeopathy is NOT "experimental science". It hasn't even progressed in >> 200 years. It's superstition that has not even acknowledged the >> Avogadro constant! > > *On this, I tend to agree. I favour herbals and foods, and alternative > therapies. Good. (For most people, however, "alternative therapies" include homeopathy.) > > And that "little guy" was fooling little old ill ladies with "advice" > > that was outright harmful, so your pity with the guy is inappropriate. > > *I have no pity for any con. I was simply observing how you squabble > about little guys ever so much more passionately where it comes to > pseudo-science. No, I most passionately squabble about big Predators. > > But as you should have figured out long ago on this > > list, I'm not a person who thinks egoistically. > > *Say what??* You don't have to believe me. Others on this list have accused me of altruism. Chris ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SpamWall: Mail to this addy is deleted unread unless it contains the keyword "igve". _______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [email protected] https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
