Jump to content
Science Forums

TheBigDog

Members
  • Content Count

    3,966
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    50

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    TheBigDog got a reaction from Turtle in Kites & kiting   
    A birthday gift for my hard shelled friend. Here is a gem of a picture from around 1977. My dad with his 14' box kite. I think I mentioned it earlier in the thread. This picture just surfaced while my sister is cleaning out her basement. Cool stuff.

  2. Like
    TheBigDog got a reaction from Turtle in Trans Quantum Inertial Drive   
    Good to talk again, Craig. I think I might stick around for a little while. This has always been a good place to sort out some thoughts.
     
    Yes, the story is always the trick. I got so bogged down in the fictional science that I never got to the drama and characters. And of course that is where the story really lives. I want to start with a simple story that obscures the layers complexity underlying. Each subsequent story will fill in some blanks while open views to deeper mysteries. Doesn't that sound terrific! Now all that is left is the simple task of getting it all onto paper. How hard can that be?
     
    And in other news, life has been good to me. Just finished an epic vacation with the two youngest boys. 8040 miles and 20 states in 22 days. I was even in Turtle's neck of the woods.
     
    But this is about the old Space Voyage, so I will make at least a little effort to stay on topic.
     
    I like the autonomy of a spaceship being self powered and self directed. All we have to do is sidestep some inconvenient laws of the physical universe using some hypothetical quantum trickery and we are off to the races. I want to write the technology almost like a conspiracy theory where there are enough threads of truth woven in that you can cling to them while ignoring the impossibilities that they are convincing you are possible. The beauty is that I believe some of these things will ultimately come true, we just have not figured out how to make our science violate our current understanding of reality.
     
    More tomorrow. I have to get to bed.
     
    Bill
  3. Like
    TheBigDog reacted to phillip1882 in Capitalism, The Communism Of Economic Systems?   
    okay, i don't even know where to be begin.
    umm no. not even close.
    have you looked at the rampant corruption in various governments, all over the world, who have tried socialism?
    there's no way to control trade, in a fair balanced way such that everyone is better off. screw the rich, and you lose investments in large scale projects. screw the poor, and you lose the most vital resource in manufacturing and construction.
    i assure you freedom means that people are capable of making mistakes, both rich and poor alike.
    freedom also mean voluntary transactions, win-win negations, and a better standard of living for all. how much fairer do you want a system to be?
    over 90% of the things you have today are here because of capitalism, not socialism.
    the poorest person in America has more capabilities and resources at his disposal than the king of France did in the 1800's, and the vast majority of it was developed during the period of time with the least government regulation. what does that tell you about capitalism?
  4. Like
    TheBigDog got a reaction from C1ay in Trans Quantum Inertial Drive   
    Has is really been two years since I posted here? Maybe I need to start a new topic....
  5. Like
    TheBigDog got a reaction from sigurdV in Solutions to energy needs   
    We are making progress on the cable.
     
    http://www.engineeringtalk.com/news/nex/nex108.html
     
    And it would be a requirement for the super powerplants. Along your idea, how about using retired navy ships with nuclear powerplants as power supplies for cities. The navy could operate them as training grounds for recruits. Already paid for, safe, and available. Just dock them, staff them, and wire them up.
     
    Bill
  6. Like
    TheBigDog reacted to CraigD in Poll About Human Sexuality   
    Welcome to hypography Remunigerin!
     
    Please familiarize yourself with hypography’s site rules. These rules help us to maintain a standard that makes our forums more enjoyable, enlightening, and educational for everyone.
     
    Per the rules, your claim
    needs to be backed up using links and references, especially since it’s a strange claim. You need to cite an article or paper (preferably with a url linking to it online) in a publication endorsed by well-trained psychologists supporting your claim.
     
    Quoting the wikipedia article sexual orientation, “sexual orientation is usually discussed in terms of three categories: heterosexuality, homosexuality, and bisexuality (asexuality is increasingly recognized as a fourth)”.
     
    What you’re describing aren’t usually considered the major, or “four big” classifications of sexual orientation, but are sexual interests conventionally classified as psychiatric disorders, referred to broadly as paraphilia. In this context, an important distinction between sexual orientation and interest is that orientation is considered innate and enduring, and thus not to be treated as a disorder, but accepted as a normal personality trait, while compulsive sexual interest is considered a disorder, and should be psychiatrically treated, not accepted as a normal personality trait.
     
    Note, importantly, my use of the adjective compulsive in classifying a sexual interest as a disorder. Psychiatrically healthy people may experience interest in sexual activity involving prepubescent children (pedophilia) or animals (zoophilia), but no in a way that compels them to act on their interest in defiance of social norms. A unhealthy person, such as a pedophile, suffers uncontrollable compulsive thoughts about sex with prepubescent children, which may drive him to act out his interest by having sex with children, or procure illegal materials such as child pornography, which may lead to the injury of children, and/or criminal sanctions.
     
    Until you’ve established the legitimacy of your hypothesis that paraphilia are major sexual orientations – which I don’t believe you’ll be able to do, because, to the best of my knowledge, psychiatry and scientific evidence doesn’t support such a hypothesis – I don’t think you should conduct a poll on the subject.
  7. Like
    TheBigDog got a reaction from Kayra in Moneyless society : Would it benefit society?   
    Consider what allows your unpaid contribution to happen. Then consider if the unorganized free donation of time could create or sustain the complexity and dynamic reality that is the infrastructure of the Internet.
     
    The Internet is built by big money from big players. Someone is paying for all of it. Much of it seems free, but the price is always being paid by some entity or another for you to use it without dipping into your pocket.
     
    Value for value. Money is just a medium of exchange. It serves someone's purpose to let you do the for free the way you do, so they pay for it for you. When the value you bring no longer serves that person's purpose this ends and you need to find some new way of using the Internet for free.
     
    Bill
  8. Like
    TheBigDog got a reaction from modest in Perfecting Perpetual Wheel   
    The biggest challenge with the perpetual wheel is getting back into the physical universe in which we live while it is still running. In a dream universe it not only keeps running, but accelerates perpetually until it rotates at a speed exceeding light. As soon as you bring it back here it begins to decelerate again.
     
    Bill
  9. Like
    TheBigDog got a reaction from Boerseun in The Mach-effect Drive   
    This is a new one for me. I will have to give it some study... Thanks Boer!
     
    Bill
  10. Like
    TheBigDog reacted to Tormod in The Achievement Thread   
    This thread is a place to show off something you're happy about and want to share with your friends at the Science Forums. Have you done something you didn't think you could do? Finished something you worked hard for? Won an award? Or just something you feel proud about? Post it here, and please share pictures if you have any!
  11. Like
    TheBigDog reacted to CraigD in Moral Compass - how do you stay on course?   
    My “moral compass” has been spinning pretty wildly of late.
     
    Most of my life, I’ve followed what seemed a simple and rational code, a generalized version of the Golden Rule: help, don’t hurt, your neighbors; define “neighbor” broadly, beyond meaning just your own people, species, or biological kingdom. Therefore, I expel intruding bugs rather than poison or squash them, and absolutely would not kill another person, even to protect my own life, limb, or property.
     
    At the same time, over the years, my concept of what “hurting” and “helping” has become more complicated. I understand that, for most ecosystems, preserving individual plants and animals, and even whole species, is one of he worst things one can do for the overall health of the system – wetlands, prairies, and woods are not unchanging, but cycle through different configurations, Predators, parasites, extinctions and aggressive habitat invasion an essential parts of the process. Nature likes it rough. Nature likes disease, death, ruthlessness, and a whole host of things that are abhorrent to me. In nature, the Golden Rule does not guarantee kindness. It seems not an unreasonable conjecture that human culture “likes” exploitation, war, and a host of things I, with my simplistic, emotional moral system, condemn.
     
    In the end, I find comfort amid the conflict these differing points of view produce in me from a surprising (to me) source: several short essays from the 120 invited contributors to The Edge annual question 2005: "WHAT DO YOU BELIEVE IS TRUE EVEN THOUGH YOU CANNOT PROVE IT?". While many of these essays are very optimistic and exhausting of humanity, these were not the ones I found comforting. Rather, it was the essays, primarily from neuropsychologist and AI researchers such as Robert Provine, and Alex Pentland, suggesting that human consciousness may be, for lack of a better description “highly overrated”. If this is so – and I believe it is – moral questions – and the quandaries their contemplation can produce – are of less consequence than they seem. The distinction between human, animal, and inanimate processes is less significant than I have long assumed. My own importance in the universe is less than I intuitively believe.
     
    Practically, I live no differently after this epiphany than before – I still strive to be kind and helpful to all living things, and avoid thoughtless actions – but the question “how do you stay the course” is now transformed, for me, to “is the course we follow really within our conscious ability to stay, or stray from?” A theist might describe me as having surrendered my will to God. As a naturalist, I would describe it as just as becoming more humble.
  12. Like
    TheBigDog got a reaction from JMJones0424 in The Way I See It, You Can Divide A Number By 0 And Get A Whole Number Answer   
    I often find myself dividing zero when deciding where to invest the money I have saved at the end of the month. Which is a far cry better than figuring out how to take zero and divide it out into enough piles to pay all the bills.
     
    Bill
  13. Downvote
    TheBigDog got a reaction from IDMclean in The Way I See It, You Can Divide A Number By 0 And Get A Whole Number Answer   
    I often find myself dividing zero when deciding where to invest the money I have saved at the end of the month. Which is a far cry better than figuring out how to take zero and divide it out into enough piles to pay all the bills.
     
    Bill
  14. Like
    TheBigDog reacted to Qfwfq in The Way I See It, You Can Divide A Number By 0 And Get A Whole Number Answer   
    Actually it is an indeterminate form in the 0 divided by 0 case, otherwise it is infinity. It only makes sense to define these in the calculus of limits, which is not what Zac is doing.
  15. Like
    TheBigDog reacted to Boerseun in The Way I See It, You Can Divide A Number By 0 And Get A Whole Number Answer   
    A pretty simple way of looking at it, is to imagine making piles of stuff - if you want to divide ten by two, you get to make two piles and split the number you're dividing equally into the two piles, leaving you with two piles of five each, which will be your answer. The amount of equally divided stuff in a single pile will be the answer to your original question, 10/2. So, 10 (original number) / (divided by) 2 (the number of piles) = 5 (the number of stuff in a single pile after you've divided it).
     
    When you want to divide by zero, it looks like this 10/0 = CAN'T BE DONE. Look closer:
     
    10 (original number) / (divided by) 0 (the number of piles) = CAN'T BE DONE (the number of stuff in a single pile after you've divided it - which is now impossible, because there are no piles to count the content of.)
     
    Sorry if this explanation comes over a bit juvenile-like, but it kinda gets the point across.
  16. Like
    TheBigDog reacted to scotter59 in Can Steam Replace The Internal Combustion Engine ?   
    Here is a company that seems to be developing a steam solution Cyclone - modern steam engine.. and this pdf whitepaper on the modern steam engine in an automobile.
     
    As is stated in the white paper by James D. Crank steam has been a contender for centuries as a mode of transportation, the technology was not there to make it as effective as the Internal Combustion was. The technology is now available and with the EATR robot in the works.....
     
    Have a petition here, I would not like to see this idea be bought up by some automobile corporation and shelved. Personally it would be nice to have a power source that is less complex, more adaptable than the current internal combustion engine.
  17. Like
    TheBigDog got a reaction from DFINITLYDISTRUBD in Anyone There Quited Smoking?   
    I quit after just three cigarettes. Of course my cover charge only covered one night, and I was out of singles. Did I tell the whole story? I don't think it is appropriate. If I were you I would just quit. Find leverage on yourself to keep you from sliding back. You don't quit once, you quit every day for the rest of your life. Make the first day tomorrow.
     
    Bill
  18. Like
    TheBigDog got a reaction from modest in Terraforming Other Planets?   
    The oceans of Mars did not turn to permafrost, they evaporated and blew away into space. Some remnant of the ancient water supply remains as permafrost. Remember that Mars has been dry for most of 3 billions years. It was not geologically inactive during that time, so underground water had ample opportunity to make its way to the surface and evaporate. Even ice evaporates (or sublimates) when exposed to atmosphere. 3 billion years is an awful long time for any substantial supply of water to have remained in such a dry atmosphere.
     
    Bill
  19. Like
    TheBigDog reacted to lawcat in Moneyless society : Would it benefit society?   
    I don't see how there will be no need for labor. I disagree with the premise that there will be no need for labor. I also find the conclusion, anything you do it is because you choose, irrelevant. Anything I do now is because I chose. Heck, if I choose I can start building rockets or perform heart surgery, but who would let an idiot do that. We will always need specialists. IMO, the demand for specialists sets the value, not the choice of profession. Speciailized labor -> value -> money.
     
     
    Not alienated from private to private, but alienated from private to community. It is still alienated. The only unalienated labor is selfemployed labor.
  20. Like
    TheBigDog got a reaction from Michaelangelica in The Science of Godzilla   
    I have spent the weekend watching monster movies with the boys. Much of it dedicated to my old pal Godzilla. We watched Godzilla Raids Again, the 1955 sequel to the original, which was made before the 1956 version of Godzilla which had added scenes with Raymond Burr to make it more marketable in the US. Another thing I found interesting is that in the original they actually killed Godzilla. In the sequel is another monster of the same type (a 400 foot tall Tyrannosaurus Rex) that they call Gigantus; they buried him in ice on a remote island.
     
    But I digress...
     
    This thread is to speculate about the source of Godzilla's powers. Namely, his breath. As far as I can tell it is a sort of super heated electro energy beam. Maybe some sort of highly energized plasma. It appears that he "charges up" through the large things that grow out of his back, like he is taking in electrical energy from the atmosphere. Or it could be that he is using an internal chemical reaction that makes the stuff on his back glow as he prepares the breath. I don't think it is internal chemical as he would have to eat something, and we never really see him eat anything at all.
     
    So I am going with electro-energized-plasma-breath with the electrical energy being drawn from the atmosphere through the large protrusions on his back. I am not sure what type of energy output it is but considering how it melts tanks I would say it is in the google-watts range.
     
    What do you think?
     
    Bill
  21. Like
    TheBigDog reacted to coldcreation in Redshift z   
    The entire universe, whatever its extent, is a gravitational well if you will. So in trying to answer your hypothetical little bang, even though your edge is not consistent with cutting edge technology based observations, yes, light would be redshifted on its way toward you on the edge of your torus.
     
    Remark, light is redshifted from the perspective of any observer even without an edge. The question is what is what causes the décalage towards the less refrangible end of the spectrum.
     
    All ‘tired light’ scenarios are ruled out by observational data; there is no significant scattering, refracting, or absorption on the line of sight. Absorption would cause part of the incoming energy to be extracted into the interstellar or intergalactic medium; as a result, dimming would occur over a broad range of the spectrum. Scattering alters the direction of the photons, but the wavelength would remain the same. Refraction would cause a change in the direction or a bending of the wave, as light propagates through matter.
     
    The only possible causes are Doppler shifts due to the recession of objects away from the observer, or due to a general relativistic phenomenon of spacetime dilation that increases with distance. Why should it increase with distance? After all, viewed from Earth, gravity fields diminish with distance according to the inverse square law. And why should light, as it passes through the hills and valleys of spacetime, be just as blueshifted as redshifted.
     
    Einstein’s general principle of relativity characterizes the metric properties of space by the gravitational field (curvature). We are familiar with the idea that local gravitational fields are analogous to hills and valleys (in two dimensions), which are obviously not flat. The average quantity of curvature in a homogenous field is nonzero. Light rays follow ‘curved’ geodesic paths that depend on the variations in the fields they traverse, locally. The actual departure from linearity is derived from the propagation of light as it crosses every hump and wrinkle in the metric. All the matter and energy in the universe introduces a deviation from globally flat space, thus redshift is greater with distance. It would no doubt be ludicrous to envisage an infinite (or finite) Euclidean universe where local non-Euclidean features merely cancel other curved protuberances in the spacetime metric.
     
    General relativity impels us to reassess the geometrical configuration of the large-scale spacetime manifold as it does with the properties of the local environment. Redshift z needs to be reassessed.
     
    The redshift shows us that light (emission throughout the entire spectrum) is being affected by the nonzero mass-energy density of the universe. The displacement of spectral lines towards the red is truly a large-scale gravitational phenomenon. The reshift is observational proof that space is not flat.
     
    Note that an observer located on the edge of our visible universe sees too the redshift increasing with distance from her point of reference. So z is entirely a relative phenomenon. Clocks tick slower there from our perspective and they tick slower here from her viewpoint. Cool.
     
    Coldcreation
  22. Like
    TheBigDog got a reaction from Boerseun in Albert Einstein wanted world government.   
    It is not often that a post gets under my skin really badly, but this one did just that.
     
    First, to the points of JM and Boer that were countered in this post; when comparing how China got to its current cultural/governmental state you cannot dismiss the last 3000 years of history and focus only on the last century as you have chosen to do. It was a long journey of violence and oppression that took China from a collection of warring states to a single government. And Africa would need to go through a similar journey to get to a similar place. And to Boerseun's point, all you end up with at the end is strongest strongman ruling through brute force. Which is not too far off from China's government, despite what their state propaganda and foreign apologists may tell you otherwise.
     
    Stuff may be getting done in China, but saying that is the greatest "ends justify the means" bullshit I can imagine. China's economy is fueled by western consumption of manufactured goods. IIf the west stops buying from China they collapse. America could gear up the manufacturing that is coming from China in a short while and would deal with the higher consumer costs as a medium sized bump in the road. China's economy cannot exist without western buyers of their manufactured goods; period.
     
    China's economic advantage comes from borderline slavery of the manufacturing workforce. In China it is every person's constitutional duty to work to the satisfaction of the state (Article 42 of the Chinese Constitution). Safety is a notion, not a mandate and is subject to cost/benefit analysis that would make the most hardcore western industrialist cringe. There is construction as shown off by the 2008 Beijing Olympics, but westerners are strictly forbidden from visiting much of China, with the state controlled media and PR arm presenting to foreign nationals and nations only what they want to be seen.
     
    There is law in China, but there is no protection from the state. The Chinese Constitution speaks of the rights of the people, but the highest law is the continuance of the Socialist State. People can own things in China, but the state owns all the land and can do with it whatever the state see as most beneficial. You can own a home, but if the state wants to use the land for anything they simply do so and the individual does not need compensation, they simply submit to the better judgment of the state. Prior to the 1997 handover of Hong Kong from GB to China the Chinese government amended their constitution to allow very carefully worded free enterprise. They did this because they were smart enough not to kill the goose that lays the golden eggs. But the businesses that are allowed to run have no legal protection from state takeover other than benevolence of the central communist dictatorship. The same communist dictatorship that in 1987 lived up to the ideals of their then five year old constitution when crushed the demonstration in Tienanmen Square with brutal military force on their own unarmed peaceful citizens. The fact that they have learned to exploit their workforce more effectively and are wearing their sheep's clothing while they allow their world strategic economic position to grow into their advantage does not change who they are and how they will ultimately operate. And they are morally as bankrupt as the government of Mao and the cultural revolution who so brutally punished free thinking in China that the pain is remembered by a hand shy population to this day. Tienanmen square was another vicious newspaper across the nose to tuck the people's tail between their legs and remember who their master is. Nothing about the Chinese government has changed since Mao except the window dressing.
     
    I am stunned that nobody speaks out against posts like yours more vociferously. China violates every moral and ethical code I would presume from your writings that you hold dear, and yet you describe them through the vision of rose colored glasses. You say you don't advocate a central Communist government, but you speak only praises of them while denouncing the US for what it spends on its Presidential elections (??). What is the price of democracy? Think on it a while before you go shooting off that China is a little less economically efficient, but the corruption of the US makes it as bad. Think about human rights. Think about real freedom of speech, of press, of religion, of the right to gather peacefully, and of any other basic human right. Try reading the Chinese Constitution (CONSTITUTION OF THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA). How does that fit your ideals. Read it carefully. Like Article 25. "The state promotes family planning so that population growth may fit the plans for economic and social development." In the US we debate the constitutional rights of the unborn versus a woman's right to choose to keep a pregnancy. In China the state can control not only your right to choose, but your right to conceive - and that is in their Constitution! In China there is freedom of religion as long as it does not interfere with the teachings of the State. So all religion is welcome as long as it is socialist. The rights of the people are at the whim of the state; that is tyranny. Note how very carefully worded the Chinese Constitution is to disallow "unlawful" violations of individuals rights, which simply means the word of the laws of the government defines the limits of the rights of the citizens of China. And no good socialist would put themselves over the needs of the state; another part of the Chinese Constitution.
     
    Even a benevolent tyrant is a tyrant.
     
    In Africa you have culture thousands of years old that conflicts with the moral and ethical standards of modern eastern and western societies. We cannot force people to live in a way they simply do not want to. We can educate them, but simply pouring money into a brutal tribal culture makes them just a brutal tribal culture that can afford more effective weapons. Over thousands of years the different countries that make up modern China were conquered and oppressed by one government after another, until their culture adapted to one of seemingly accepting oppressive rule. The current government has every intention of making that culture last for a long long time. The African continent has never been conquered and ruled by a single dictatorship like China, and is a very long way from accepting that from happening. No country is powerful enough to overthrow all the others, and a meddling world would not stand by and let it happen anyway. So that is a road that simply does not look like it would happen.
     
    So how do you do it? How do you develop a world government for a people who do not desire anything more than a local warlord? You mentioned in one of your earlier posts that some countries might have to forgo the right to emigrate in order to protect proper population balance. So right off the bat you are promoting an inequality of rights as part of your solution. Who determines the balance of equality? The only way it can happen through domination of the world government over the member states.
     
    The EU works because of the economic, political, historical, cultural phenomena that is modern Europe. The United States was built from the same combination of phenomena that happened over the past 300 years in her geography. Each region of the world will take different paths toward larger government entities as regional needs demand it. Ultimately global needs will come into play and I believe that a peaceful ascension to a world government may someday happen, but we are centuries away from it. The ONLY way to make it happen faster than that is by brute force, and that is a world I will fight to my last breath, as my children will, and theirs.
     
    Bill
  23. Like
    TheBigDog got a reaction from Turtle in Need for personal feedback   
    You've made jokes? :phones:
  24. Like
    TheBigDog got a reaction from JMJones0424 in Albert Einstein wanted world government.   
    It is not often that a post gets under my skin really badly, but this one did just that.
     
    First, to the points of JM and Boer that were countered in this post; when comparing how China got to its current cultural/governmental state you cannot dismiss the last 3000 years of history and focus only on the last century as you have chosen to do. It was a long journey of violence and oppression that took China from a collection of warring states to a single government. And Africa would need to go through a similar journey to get to a similar place. And to Boerseun's point, all you end up with at the end is strongest strongman ruling through brute force. Which is not too far off from China's government, despite what their state propaganda and foreign apologists may tell you otherwise.
     
    Stuff may be getting done in China, but saying that is the greatest "ends justify the means" bullshit I can imagine. China's economy is fueled by western consumption of manufactured goods. IIf the west stops buying from China they collapse. America could gear up the manufacturing that is coming from China in a short while and would deal with the higher consumer costs as a medium sized bump in the road. China's economy cannot exist without western buyers of their manufactured goods; period.
     
    China's economic advantage comes from borderline slavery of the manufacturing workforce. In China it is every person's constitutional duty to work to the satisfaction of the state (Article 42 of the Chinese Constitution). Safety is a notion, not a mandate and is subject to cost/benefit analysis that would make the most hardcore western industrialist cringe. There is construction as shown off by the 2008 Beijing Olympics, but westerners are strictly forbidden from visiting much of China, with the state controlled media and PR arm presenting to foreign nationals and nations only what they want to be seen.
     
    There is law in China, but there is no protection from the state. The Chinese Constitution speaks of the rights of the people, but the highest law is the continuance of the Socialist State. People can own things in China, but the state owns all the land and can do with it whatever the state see as most beneficial. You can own a home, but if the state wants to use the land for anything they simply do so and the individual does not need compensation, they simply submit to the better judgment of the state. Prior to the 1997 handover of Hong Kong from GB to China the Chinese government amended their constitution to allow very carefully worded free enterprise. They did this because they were smart enough not to kill the goose that lays the golden eggs. But the businesses that are allowed to run have no legal protection from state takeover other than benevolence of the central communist dictatorship. The same communist dictatorship that in 1987 lived up to the ideals of their then five year old constitution when crushed the demonstration in Tienanmen Square with brutal military force on their own unarmed peaceful citizens. The fact that they have learned to exploit their workforce more effectively and are wearing their sheep's clothing while they allow their world strategic economic position to grow into their advantage does not change who they are and how they will ultimately operate. And they are morally as bankrupt as the government of Mao and the cultural revolution who so brutally punished free thinking in China that the pain is remembered by a hand shy population to this day. Tienanmen square was another vicious newspaper across the nose to tuck the people's tail between their legs and remember who their master is. Nothing about the Chinese government has changed since Mao except the window dressing.
     
    I am stunned that nobody speaks out against posts like yours more vociferously. China violates every moral and ethical code I would presume from your writings that you hold dear, and yet you describe them through the vision of rose colored glasses. You say you don't advocate a central Communist government, but you speak only praises of them while denouncing the US for what it spends on its Presidential elections (??). What is the price of democracy? Think on it a while before you go shooting off that China is a little less economically efficient, but the corruption of the US makes it as bad. Think about human rights. Think about real freedom of speech, of press, of religion, of the right to gather peacefully, and of any other basic human right. Try reading the Chinese Constitution (CONSTITUTION OF THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA). How does that fit your ideals. Read it carefully. Like Article 25. "The state promotes family planning so that population growth may fit the plans for economic and social development." In the US we debate the constitutional rights of the unborn versus a woman's right to choose to keep a pregnancy. In China the state can control not only your right to choose, but your right to conceive - and that is in their Constitution! In China there is freedom of religion as long as it does not interfere with the teachings of the State. So all religion is welcome as long as it is socialist. The rights of the people are at the whim of the state; that is tyranny. Note how very carefully worded the Chinese Constitution is to disallow "unlawful" violations of individuals rights, which simply means the word of the laws of the government defines the limits of the rights of the citizens of China. And no good socialist would put themselves over the needs of the state; another part of the Chinese Constitution.
     
    Even a benevolent tyrant is a tyrant.
     
    In Africa you have culture thousands of years old that conflicts with the moral and ethical standards of modern eastern and western societies. We cannot force people to live in a way they simply do not want to. We can educate them, but simply pouring money into a brutal tribal culture makes them just a brutal tribal culture that can afford more effective weapons. Over thousands of years the different countries that make up modern China were conquered and oppressed by one government after another, until their culture adapted to one of seemingly accepting oppressive rule. The current government has every intention of making that culture last for a long long time. The African continent has never been conquered and ruled by a single dictatorship like China, and is a very long way from accepting that from happening. No country is powerful enough to overthrow all the others, and a meddling world would not stand by and let it happen anyway. So that is a road that simply does not look like it would happen.
     
    So how do you do it? How do you develop a world government for a people who do not desire anything more than a local warlord? You mentioned in one of your earlier posts that some countries might have to forgo the right to emigrate in order to protect proper population balance. So right off the bat you are promoting an inequality of rights as part of your solution. Who determines the balance of equality? The only way it can happen through domination of the world government over the member states.
     
    The EU works because of the economic, political, historical, cultural phenomena that is modern Europe. The United States was built from the same combination of phenomena that happened over the past 300 years in her geography. Each region of the world will take different paths toward larger government entities as regional needs demand it. Ultimately global needs will come into play and I believe that a peaceful ascension to a world government may someday happen, but we are centuries away from it. The ONLY way to make it happen faster than that is by brute force, and that is a world I will fight to my last breath, as my children will, and theirs.
     
    Bill
  25. Like
    TheBigDog reacted to Zythryn in "Pete'sPlace" blog and other global warming skepticism websites   
    Ok, well that is getting somewhere. Let's focus on the first, anthropogenic CO2 is causing global warming.
    First, that isn't quite accurate. Would you agree to:
    'anthropogenic emmision of CO2 is leading to a build up of CO2 in the atmosphere which is leading to a number of consequences, ONE OF WHICH is a increasing trend in the global average temperature'?
     
    And if so, is there a particular aspect of the above theory that you find particular fault with?
×
×
  • Create New...