Future predictor

[allover]

After waking this morning and seeing that 75% of people in Australia want climate change action, i came across this site
Being stuck at home because of Covid. i have plenty of time to surf the net

I must admit i was all gung ho up until the 10.30 minute mark, then the thought that this could be devastational for Australia's future
Whilst Nero fiddles, check it out and draw your own conclusions

[Al Bundy]

F#@king more pie in the sky Climate Change bullshit.
Don't get me wrong Climate Change is real, it always has been, billions of years before we came along, and it will always continue to be for billions of years after we have gone. It’s just another excuse to create a false economy, just like the introduction of the NEM here in Australia as an example, my power bills were a fraction of what they are now before Basslink was built and Tassie became part of the NEM.
In that video what is not spoken about is the Carbon footprint to build each Wind Farm or the Carbon cost of production of Solar Panels or Lithium Ion batteries, they don’t get plucked out of thin air they have to be manufactured but nobody wants to think about what that may cost, in money, emissions and waste byproducts.
Again, I will repeat Climate change is real, but just in my humble opinion instead of spending a besquillion dollars trying to slow it down or stop it just try to remember the vast bulk of Climate Change is through Mother Nature, not us, so that besquillion dollars would be much better spent in preparing for the inevitable, and not squandered by trying to piss into the wind.

[trash]

As the devil's advocate here. I'm going to offer you all up a thought experiment.
Assume that's your wrong for this though experiment Al Bundy. Lets just entertain that thought.
With this pretend knowledge that your wrong, where do you think you made the error?

This is really fun experiment for anybody to do, I'm not targeting you Al, just using your real position and putting in an imaginary situation.
Now one of two things happen here. You'll come up with a valid fictitious answer why you are wrong OR you will continue to validate your real world position in the experiment and not find any reason why your wrong with a valid opposite premise.

I have tried this experiment on several friends and collogues so far and the results are really interesting.

I CAN predict the future. And in that future you are not capable of performing this experiment.
I've torn a fresh page on my notebook here and I'm about to write down the names of souls I'm collecting

[Uncle Fester]

I bet none of the thankers of Bundy's BS comment actually understood or even fully watched that video.

It is about future disruptive technology that will overcome 19/20th century technology with orders of magnitude superior performance, low cost and longevity but comes at cost for the need to adapt and change some of our vocations.

While some of it will indeed have the here 'disliked' the side effect of reducing all kinds of emissions(not just CO2) and waste, it will bring more comfort and efficiency in our lives + make people who want to invest in this new economy wealthy.
I think the worst disruption for the Australian and USA market to fathom, will be artificially produced meat without understanding that the new products will be of consistent high quality and taste, for far less cost and thus readily available even to poorer countries.

Nothing much in that video is new to me as I have always followed progress with passion.
I don't know if all this will stop the devastating effects of climate change either but I know these technological changes will be exciting and I hope I can live long enough to experience some of them.
It is time to move on from the smart phones and start improving other things.
I have taken care that I gave(and am still giving) my kids the education they need to be flexible and available to participate in all this and be creators, NOT just consumers.

This is a tech forum but you old geezers don't seem to welcome technological progress much, do you, because you think it is all about (reducing) climate change only and are brainwashed to think that we will all run out of electricity or can't afford it when we shut down a coal fired plant.

Well you seem to have forgotten that electricity has gotten cheaper in the past years, I pay today 30% less per kWh than even before rooftop solar RECs were introduced.
The only reason why electricity was so expensive back then was the privatisation of electricity companies and distribution (poles and wires) with the introduction of a middle man earner.
While they all sat on their fat arses collecting profits, very little of those profits were used to invest in the poles and wires to meet todays demands that were/are actually the reason for blackouts and now reverse distribution problems with rooftop solar.

[Uncle Fester]

I CAN predict the future. And in that future you are not capable of performing this experiment.

Ha ha, I think you nailed that one

Hey put me down on your page:

Am I wrong or is it right!
Is it black or am I white?

[Al Bundy]

As the devil's advocate here. I'm going to offer you all up a thought experiment.
Assume that's your wrong for this though experiment Al Bundy. Lets just entertain that thought.
With this pretend knowledge that your wrong, where do you think you made the error?

This is really fun experiment for anybody to do, I'm not targeting you Al, just using your real position and putting in an imaginary situation.
Now one of two things happen here. You'll come up with a valid fictitious answer why you are wrong OR you will continue to validate your real world position in the experiment and not find any reason why your wrong with a valid opposite premise.

I have tried this experiment on several friends and collogues so far and the results are really interesting.

I CAN predict the future. And in that future you are not capable of performing this experiment.
I've torn a fresh page on my notebook here and I'm about to write down the names of souls I'm collecting

Well, let’s have a look will we;
”With this pretend knowledge that your wrong, where do you think you made the error?”
I think the obvious error was to post on this forum what I have learnt, observed and experienced over 60 years, whether others believe it to be the case or otherwise. And of course Your experiment is Catch 22

[Guiseppe]

I bet none of the thankers of Bundy's BS comment actually understood or even fully watched that video.

MY thanks was for the fact that his post presented regarding climate change.

Well you seem to have forgotten that electricity has gotten cheaper in the past years, I pay today 30% less per kWh than even before rooftop solar RECs were introduced.
The only reason why electricity was so expensive back then was the privatisation of electricity companies and distribution (poles and wires) with the introduction of a middle man earner.
While they all sat on their fat arses collecting profits, very little of those profits were used to invest in the poles and wires to meet todays demands that were/are actually the reason for blackouts and now reverse distribution problems with rooftop solar.

It was only a few years ago I joked with my wife that we would have to be careful so that our electricity bill would stay under a $1/day.

Now the "supply charge" is nearly 50% more than that ...

I seem to remember someone said/wrote that the poles and wires were "gold plated" for the privatisation (?)

[allover]

What i was trying to draw peoples attention to was that Australian farming and mineral exports may plunge, ie our standard of living decreases, due to new products from other countries taking our place
I am of the opinion that we are indeed a lucky country to date, as the useless politicians on both sides haven't been able to stuff it up, but the matter may be taken out of their hands
The other item that caught my attention was increased forestation absorbing carbon, now the hypothetical, if we had industrial revelation (as we have) but did not deforest as much, would there be no global warming?

[Uncle Fester]

What i was trying to draw peoples attention to was that Australian farming and mineral exports may plunge, ie our standard of living decreases, due to new products from other countries taking our place

The other item that caught my attention was increased forestation absorbing carbon, now the hypothetical, if we had industrial revelation (as we have) but did not deforest as much, would there be no global warming?

I think you, like many here do not seem to understand future industries yet.
First of all this will take 10 years before we will notice any halfway significant changes.

Our mining exports would not plunge but explode if our 19th century government would support anything other than coal but the industry will still survive without those dimwits.
Greenbushes WA has Lithium and Coltan resources that could put Congo to shame.
Other minerals for the future industries like Nickel, Cobalt and rare earths are also abundant here and just ready to grab.
And lastly the world will never stop using steel, we just have to start making it locally and not rely on the crap shit quality we get sent back from China from our Iron ore exports.
Fortescue Future Industries is running almost white hot right now to make Australia likely in 5 years or less a world supplier of Green Steel. Nobody will want to touch China's dirty shyte anymore.
Plus we have their massive Hydrogen/Ammonia and Hydro projects that will dramatically turn around the way we produce electricity and provide automotive force.

Progress increases living standards, not decreases them otherwise we wouldn't have progress.

As for deforestation, yes the humans started it but now massive wildfires world wide including South America's rain forests caused by climate change will accelerate climate change.
Can we stop it? Probably too late, I don't really see how anymore.
They want to plant trees but they will just burn again and again... pumping just more CO2 into atmosphere rather than sinking it.

[trash]

@Fester ... looks like you've managed to avoid damnation. Well done.

It is a catch 22 Al. It's heads I win or tails you lose. The question is given the situation where you know you are going to lose, how do you minise your losses.
But the experiment is not really about losing, it's which route you take to get to a specific loss.

But so far Al you've avoided the experiment. I'll give you a hint. Instead of flipping the premise that human induced global warming is true.
Consider what the experiment is and then re-apply it with different subjects and look how the reasoning plays out.

I've heard several examples of this experiment over the past few days.
Try this example.

Some nurses who are trained health professionals are anti vaxers. So if I have one of them assume a complete lie (to them), that vaccination works 100% is safe and effective.
What mistake might they have made to lead them to the wrong answer. If they say they aren't wrong, then they are incapable of performing the experiment.

A response might be that they have seen a lot of bad side effects even if the vaccination is safe and effective.
Now we can flip the premise back, and the reasoning. If they had not seen any effects but the vaccine was not safe, would they support the vaccination if they thought it was safe.
If they say no, then this parity check suggests they are lying and the experiment continues. If they said yes, which means they understood the experiment and thought about it carefully.

This all sounds like a bit of back and forth. That's the point. To understand the underlying reasoning and test it. Look for the faulty logic and then flip it to see if it still holds true.
When it doesn't hold true, it's a lie. The question is... do you recogise the lie and change it or do you get caught lying. (changing it to another lie also gets you caught)
There are valid answers, the question is can you find them?

So the premise is manmade global warming is real. What lie can you tell that makes sense to support this statement.

[Guiseppe]

So the premise is manmade global warming is real. What lie can you tell that makes sense to support this statement.

If you do not believe that man is adding to the natural climate change then you must be a fully paid up Member of the Flat Earth Society.

[trash]

If you do not believe that man is adding to the natural climate change then you must be a fully paid up Member of the Flat Earth Society.

Lets explore that statement. Now we both know it's a strawman statement. Since Flat Earth is an ideology. Climatology is Science.
And the two have no connection. The statement is a political statement that implies they if you believe global warming is real, you're as crazy as the other group.

So the four possibilities here are...
1 - Flat Earth true || Global warming true
2 - Flat Earth false || Global warming true
3 - Flat Earth true || Global warming false
4 - Flat Earth false || Global warming false

Now Guiseppe implies I am at position 1, when in fact I am at position 2.
His evidence for this is .... he is at position 4.
What does doing this achieve? Well it certainly doesn't reveal any truth. But it does signal to the readers that he thinks I'm nuts.
And I will confirm this. I am batshit crazy. (that is of course not really true) And it doesn't change reality, it only tries to ignore it.



So since you've stepped up to the plate Guiseppe. We can try a front door approach.
If global warming is actually real, what do you think caused you to think it wasn't?

Think hard, because you're not going to like the answers you give yourself.
The warning here is I expect you to lie or avoid the question.

Flip the presumption of truth if you have to. See if it makes a difference to your answers.

[Al Bundy]

Actually I glean from Guiseppe’s comment that he is in fact at position 2, but I could stand corrected

[Al Bundy]

I understand your “experiment”, well I think I do, and you are right when you say
“So the premise is manmade global warming is real. What lie can you tell that makes sense to support this statement.” I find it hard even impossible to think of a straight out lie to support that statement, but when I flip that premise and say manmade global warming is false, I’m faced with the same problem, I still can’t come up with a straight out lie to support the opposite premise.
Just an aside, I don’t think it is referred to as global warming any more, it was changed to Climate Change as they are still not sure which way the pendulum is going to swing...

[allover]

If you do not believe that man is adding to the natural climate change then you must be a fully paid up Member of the Flat Earth Society.

Could i not draw more than one conclusion from Guiseppe's comment?

[trash]

What the experiment is looking for is underlying ideologies or actual misunderstanding.
Misunderstanding is actually easy to fix because you can ask a person what they know, ask them what they think is wrong and they can give reasonable straight forward logical answers that a missing the key points. I know a LOT of people who are just like me. Science based and rational people. But everybody got a gris-gris and global warming is an easy one to pick up and a hard one to shake. It's kind of like smoking for rational people. They know it's bad for them, but they just can't seem to shake the habbit.

And this is where you find that given the right evidence or just simple explanation, they will back away from it. These people have an underlying ideology and what makes it harder to recognise this is a lot of them are atheists or agnostic. Not the kind of people easily pick up ideologies. And until they relise they have an ideology, what is is and why cannot shake it, they can't accept scientific evidence.

I was one of these people too. I had to first realise that global warming (call it climate change if you like) was the truth. You can't do that if your ideology prevents it. Mine certainly does, it still does, but now I know what this is I an not sucked in by my own errors. From this position you brain is in conflict. Two conflicting things are now true, one of them is wrong. If you choose the one you like most and then rationalise it.... it's like sucking down on a cigaratte telling yourself, "how can something that makes me feel this good be wrong."

So it gets harder. Not only do you have to identify your ideology, you have to rationalise it. Lets face it, you're not going to give it up.
But when you know what it is and why you have it, you can rationise it to the point where it does not conflict with the truth.

A good example is christians and evolution. Christians who think evolution is not true are just wrong. The will always be wrong. They cannot ever accept the truth because their ideology prevents it. They want god to be true more than they want to know the truth. So how does even the catholic church rationalise evolution?
Well, it's pretty simple. Evolution doesn't conflict with with god. God can still be real and so can evolution. The clergy don't believe in genesis is true anymore. It's a nice story and they keep it for legacy but they longer pretend it's true.

So lets flip it - If you're a scientific rational person and don't believe human induced global warning is real. You can skip evidence, change the premise and try to find what your religion (ideology) is. Oh science and logic is your ideology? Then how are you wrong? This is a conflicting statement.
the wrong step is to say, I'm right and the evidence is wrong. No, the Evidence is right and you don't understand it. That breaks the premise.

It is sooooooooo hard to get past this point as a rational person because you think, you know you're rational. (yes on everything but this - everybody got a gris-gris - no exceptions).


Oh, and if you do get past this point, you're going to hate me. (in a good way).
Because global warming is real and I fvcking hate that it was taken away. But you get something better in return.
Which is better? The truth or confirmation? Does my arse look big in this? No, you arse doesn't look big, it is big!
>whack< WTF was that for? You didn't know I like you big fat arse? >ouch<

[Uncle Fester]

The problem is not only me, we are all human Rsoles.
Most are not perfect rational and logical thinking machines who can always compute reality AKA science.

We are what we PERSONALLY experience and that builds our ideologies.
From that we define our personal reality but there is more.

A lot depends on the scope of that experience.
I am arrogant enough to say that if somebody has not experienced the mentality of living and growing up in at least two different countries, completely different lifestyles and mental states they will likely just stay inside a box. Just flat earthers. You only can see as far as the horizon and that is flat.

This is my ideology:
Somewhere when I gained consciousness around 8 y/o (although I have been told I was suddenly capable of speech at 6), I built a Meccano car employing an electric motor but what made me go into tantrums was the cost of the bloody D-Cells to power it.
From that moment on I wanted to build a full scale electric vehicle(to sit in), eventually powered by the sun (talking 1960's here).
I also intended to include two floats and a propeller to my EV so I could drive across the lake as well and pedals(also for the prop) if clouds came and the battery ran dead.

The project had an abrupt end when I dropped an old car battery I found and did not have securely attached to my bike.
My parents were pissed off with all the acid everywhere and from then on my 'activities' were closer monitored which led to degradation of my frontal lobe.
Somehow I managed to continue with my deviant projects on a smaller scale.

At 12 I moved to Germany and couldn't speak German, so I failed at school, except for one essay I wrote for the English class about nuclear fusion.
I liked Latin better because I didn't feel like talking to anybody anyhow.
I found all kinds of old tech in ruins near the east Berlin wall that fascinated me and school became just a grey foggy area.

Then (what seemed to me decades later) I inexplicably managed to have a hot girl friend for a while, who was all into nature and originally to impress her, I did a crash course in Biology by collecting every living matter I could get my hands on and studied it and I gained genuine interest(not only of her vagina).
Then I volunteered to manage the science materials storage room, that I could lock myself and the girl into at lunch breaks.

That became a key game changer in the way I figured out strategic solutions.
Suddenly I had top grades in Biology at school, as well as Chemistry, Maths and Physics.
I still didn't understand a word the teacher said but I developed my own learning strategies.
It came to a point that when the maths/chem/physics teacher, who everybody hated and I was mucking around as usual said: Why don't you come up and teach!
So I did.
That was so successful that I became responsible for demonstrating and explaining all the Physics and some Chemistry experiments.
Finally I knew what my problem was and how to solve it. I didn't feel like The Retard anymore.

For me it all became about lateral thinking and not following the Bullshit others tell you !!!

So blinded by hands on experience with technology and biology I somehow ended up in UNI but never liked the academic drool there.
So I am NOT a scientist, but somebody who sees a real world from a practical and more survival point of view and strives to find simple solutions for REAL problems.


When I hear all these people telling me you can't do this or that because of their closed minds, I just get it done.

With all this in mind I still can not fathom that people don't want free energy, don't give a fvck about the environment and the rest of the world,
don't want free vaccines or advanced technology because their frontal lobes have become so degraded that they can't think past the status quo.
So few seem to have an open mind.

[trash]

The free energy isn't the issue. I live on free energy. It's rather annoying when everything is free.
I have free electricity, free water, free hot water, free heating, free cooling. But I'm not free from fvckwits.
I'm also not free from some limitations. Welding as it happens is a limitation. I can't quite power it from free energy.

And I don't expect people to live off grid like I do. It's hard. And they don't need to. You do what you can when you can.
I don't want to give up my diesel 4x4, but the moment I think and electric one is going to be better and cheaper, I'm in.
But I'm keeping my vintage gas guzzling 2 stroke vintage motorcycle. If I'm going to hell for global warming I'm taking all of you with me

In real world energy terms, it's also hard to get to carbon neutral. There are some things you can't instantly replace. But taking small steps in the right direction helps.
every drop in the bucket. And it's easy to say it doesn't matter when China, India, Brazil and Africa is seen to be doing whatever the fvck they want.
They're all going to have to fall into line else shit is going to catch up to them one way or the other.