TH!NK post
This article is archived. Comments are closed.
Eat this: There are NO LIMITS to growth!!!
Published 12th November 2009 - 32 comments - 3267 views -
"There are no limits. We will reach for the sky" Turn on the song and then start reading...
Let us hear a different point of view...
DON'T GIVE UP
In the discussions here someone said "we have only one Earth, so our resources are finite and the growth must end one day FOREVER". We must stop the growth, because it is not sustainable. These malthusian ideas were revived in 1972 by the famous book "Limits of Growth".
How narrowminded! Why don't you ever raise your head on a cloudless night? You will see countless stars shining above. This is the future of our species.
There are no "Limits to Growth". The 1972 book by the Club of Rome is just a bad piece of fiction. A Jehovist doomsday rant.
To me it seems, that the environmentalists are a bunch of scared pessimists. They have no vision. They say, we must stop growth, because it brings problems. They give up, when our industrial revolution hits the very first environmental obstacle. Come on. Cheer up!
It reminds me of a scene from the commedy "Hot Shots 2". The hero is trying to liberate a kidnapped scientist Dexter (played by Rowan Atkinson) from a POW camp. And Rowan says weeping: "Sadly, I cannot go with you. It is hopeless. They tied the laces of my shoes together."
Such trivial obstacles must not stop us!
No no limits, we'll reach for the sky!
No valley too deep, no mountain too high
No no limits, won't give up the fight
We do what we want and we do it with pride
GROWTH FOR THE SAKE OF GROWTH
Yes, we could give up and stop growing. But such existence is pointless. To live just to survive to the next day like the rainforest savages? Moving in circles? What is the meaning? Sitting on your hands for the rest of eternity?
We must keep the growth of population and production. The ULTIMATE PURPOSE of existence is to grow. Read Richard Dawkins - he defines life as a "self-replicating entity". A replicator. Which means, that those, who are against Growth, are against life itself. Edward Abbey once said, that "growth for the sake of growth" is the philosophy of a cancer cell. He apparently knew very little about biology. Growth is the basic attribute of all life forms, for God's sake!
SOLAR
Gladly, we can keep growing, because our resources are NOT LIMITED. An endless source of solar energy is right above your head. It has been powering Earth vegetation for billions of years. And it can power our machines for eternity.
EARTH RESOURCES
And another almost endless source of materials is under your feet.
The resources inside our own planet are unimaginable. We have just only scratched the surface of the Earth crust. We have not yet really started the real drilling. And we are able to drill deeper. The Kola superdeep bore in the USSR was a pioneering experiment and they got 8 km deep. (http://thexodirectory.com/2009/02/kola-superdeep-borehole-worlds-deepest.html). The whole planet we sit on is made of various minerals and metals we can use. Plenty of stuff for millions of years of industry maybe.
I would also like to point out, that the estimates of "how much tin we have left" (as an example) are pointless, because they are based on the "so far discovered reserves". But since we do not know how much reserves we will discover in the future, the predictions are worthless. Let me give you a test question: How much tin is 35.3 km below the Earth surface? You do not know, of course. Never been there.
In 1972 the "Limits to Growth" prophecy predicted we run out of tin by 1987, out of zinc by 1990 and petrol by 1992. Haha.
And if your protest against the idea, that we should plunder our Earth even deeper than now, hear this. Earth has no purpose. Its only meaning is to serve to us and our growth. Things have value only if there is a someone, who uses them.
(image from: http://scign.jpl.nasa.gov/learn/plate1.htm)
E.T. EXTRA TERRESTRIAL
Anyway, if we run out of natural resources here, we can move to the universe. It is full of asteroids, planets, hydrogen, ore, minerals, plasma and everything. We will never be able to consume it all.
Once we have consumed the Earth, we can throw its remains into a litter bin and go elsewhere (this must sound like a heresy to Gaia go many of you).
Are you sceptical about our ability to leave our planet? Come on! History of life is the history of colonisation of environments, that once were thought uninhabitable. Once we left oceans and learnt how to live on dry land. I can imagine they also had their malthusi-mentalists billions of years ago: "We, the single-cells organisms, can never leave the oceans. Because oxygen in the atmosphere is poisonous to us. And the volume of oceans is limited, so growth is not sustainable."
Now the next step in the evolution of life is to go to the space (Armstrong actually already made the first step). Earth is our cradle. But you cannot spend the whole your life in a cradle. You must grow up.
Overpopulation problems? Out there are of billions of uninhabited vacant stars and planets. Endless "Lebensraum". The growth of population has no boundaries. It will take billions of years before we colonise the whole universe. Probably we will never reach the end. Yes it will change human species severely, but we can grow forever.
PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE - A DIFFERENT LOOK
It is very advisable to colonise other planets. In the interest of safety. If one Earth is destroyed, mankind will still survive on the other ones. A backup. Never put all your eggs into one basket, you know.
To achieve that, we need to continue the growth of scientific knowledge. We need to learn how the climate and ecosystems work. Otherwise we cannot duplicate our environment on other planets (so called "terraformation"). Political mannipulation, soviet-central-planning, regulations, bureaucracy and censorship of science by the green religion does not help. Stop bullying the scientists! We need them.
(Terraformed Mars: A possibility if we do not listen to the bullshit about "limits to growth")
There is only one real danger. If the environmentaliss force mankind to stop the Growth, it may delay progress for centuries. We would lose a lot of precious time.
Imagine, Earth is destroyed by some asteroid in - let us say - 2409 A.D. - and we have not yet colonised any other planets. So human species will die out BECAUSE OF ENVIRONMENTALISTS, who forced us to stop growth as something, that is alegedly "not sustainable". How will you feel, when we all have died because of YOU?
The Precautionary Principle tells us, that we must leave this planet as fast as possible. Which requires growth. Of science, production, everything.
Let us boldly go where noone has been before... Space is the final frontier.
SONG LYRICS: 2 UNLIMITED: "No Limit"
[R:] Let me hear you say Yeah!
Let me hear you say Yeah!
[A:] No no, no no no no, no no no no, no no there's no limit!
No no, no no no no, no no no no, no no there's no limit!
[A:] No no limits, we'll reach for the sky!
No valley to deep, no maintain to high
No no limits, won't give up the fight
We do what we want and we do it with pride
[R:] Let me hear you say Yeah!
[R:] Hard to the core, I feel the floor
When I'm on the stage, yo, yo'll ask for more
I'm on the ass, I know the last
I work real hard do you like my cash
Tick tick ticka tick take your time
When I'm goin' I'm goin' for mine
Open you ears and you will hear it
I tell you this 'cause there's no limit!
[A:] No no, no no no no, no no no no, no no there's no limit!
No no, no no no no, no no no no, no no there's no limit!
[A:] No no limits, we'll reach for the sky!
No valley to deep, no maintain to high
No no limits, won't give up the fight
We do what we want and we do it with pride
[R:] No limits allowed, cause there's much crowd
Microphone check as I choose my rhyme
I'm playing on the road; I've got no fear
The sound for my mouth is the rap you hear
No valley too deep, no mountain too high
Reach the top, touch the sky!
They tried to diss me cause I sell out
I'm making techno when I am proud!
[A:] No no limits, we'll reach for the sky!
No valley to deep, no maintain to high
No no limits, won't give up the fight
We do what we want and we do it with pride
Comments
This article is archived. Comments are closed.
About the author
Vitezslav KremlikCzech Republic
Translator
I have a M.A. in history. I specialised in how regular solar cycles cause climate change again and again over history. This then affects humans, causes mass migrations, brings social movements to life (like environmentalism) etc. After CLIMATEGATE I launched a website www.klimaskeptik.cz, which has an English section as well.
Visit websiteView all posts
Related posts
Popular posts
- TCKTCK: Got only 10 years to save ourselves!
- Denmark cries in Sea of Blood, 950 Whales and Dolphins KILLED…
- Micro pigs - the ultimate sweetheart energy saver
- If you want to see nude people click here
- Do we really care about our planet? Think twice before answering.
- Bunnies for fuels: not a good story to share in a grade school classroom
- Evolutions in the history of Environment Part 2
What did you have for breakfast today, Vitezslav?
Your view of all environmentalists as sceptical towards technology is utterly wrong. There are plenty of environmentalists that think we can consume as much energy as now but from wind and solar, or use elecric cars like we use cars now.
Anyway, to me it seems you are thinking in the same way as the Stalinists - humanity is worth everything, a human being nothing.
What do I care if humanity can survive by throwing earth in the litter and emigrate to outer space. The thing I am fighting for is that the people today will survive, and manage to raise their children.
“In the end we are all dead”, as Keynes said… whatever we do must focus on the individuals living today, not on an abstract humanity.
‘No valley to deep, no maintain to high’
I think you mean ‘No valley too deep, no mountain too high.’ It would make much more sense.
Cancer is also cell growth run amok. And I doubt we should pursue with that one.
However, except the fact that you write as if there’s no other way except your way, I agree that growth will not stop. But it shouldn’t be extreme, it should be balanced and sustainable.
Well, I just wanted to point out, that our resources are not limited. And we will not run out of them. So the book “Limits to Growth” is wrong.
I hope that there environmentalists, who share my view. But there others who want to abandon technology as sometheing “not sustainable”.
Anyway, “you cannot think in understatements.”
Our growth so far HAS BEEN sustainable. Even now it is sustainble. We are discovering new resources even before we run out of fossil fuels. The food supply is growing faster than world population, so the growth is sustainable. So why do we have environmentalism?
Yes why? It seems you are a born optimist
Space colinization I think is still sci-fi, in spite of having discovered alternative energies, the IEA is predicting the demand for oil to increase. Do you have any number of the increased food production? I am not an expert, but other people paint a darker picture
With unlimited energy, we can make as much water as we want, but the environuts get in the way.
This is a sci-fi post. Detailed comments to follow.
But @Mike, what is it with you? Why do you use this word so often? ‘environuts’.
Is it because they don’t listen to idiots like you?
Sorry, my link was a little outdated, I willpost this one in stead, as food for thoughts: http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=32900&Cr=fao&Cr1=crop
Again, what matters to the individuals, and not to the system, is not how much food is actually produced, but at what price it is accessible. One of the major problems right now I think is that the price of food is closely dependent on the price of oil (do you remember 2008?).
Another factor, highlighted by the UK Department for Environment, Food and Rural affairs is that stocks are diminishing, making food markets much more volatile. (See page 36 in the Food statistics in your pocket 2009 publication https://statistics.defra.gov.uk/esg/publications/pocketstats/foodpocketstats/default.asp)
But if you are right, all is well. I guess a few “sceptics”, taking time to worry about the big issues won’t hurt.
@Mike, I will allow myself again to be impolite and stress that using words like “environuts” is quite contrary to the rules of discussion that you applauded elsewhere...
Food:
Lomborg shows, that food production is rising faster than population globally. If you do not trust him, look here: http://www.lomborg-errors.dk/chapter5.htm
“The claim that the proportion of starving has fallen in all regions since 1970 is approximately correct, except that the data for Subsaharan Africa from 1970 onwards show a rise.”
Our species has boomed from thousands to 7 billion. I think 7 billion people surely eat more food than thousands of people.
Yes, Jack you are right. Computers, telephones, airplanes, rockets… it is all scifi. You don’t believe in their existence. Sure, and the Moon landing was just a hoax.
Environut Definitions on the web:
1. Crazy people that will put the environment before human life, and don’t realize that “saving the environment” wont do us any good if you have killed us all off.
2. Usually a leftist environmentalist-driven-to-insanity. This person will go to any lengths to further the environmental agenda, which means they will do anything to accuse the United States and evil, conservative, Republican human beings of destroying the planet. The tools they employ to do their bidding are more often than not clueless, sympathetic citizens and politicians whom they mislead into thinking either the United States or humans are largely to blame for harming “Mother Earth”. They use baseless arguments, erroneous studies, contrived statistics, and ideological propaganda to justify global “climate change”, extinction of certain species of animals, animal abuse, and/or environmental and/or ecological harm caused by man-made pollutants and by the mere existence of mankind. Champions the extremist views of Al Gore.
Synonymns for idiot in the dictionary:
fool, ass, halfwit, dunce, dolt, ignoramus, cretin, moron, imbecile, simpleton; informal dope, ninny, nincompoop, chump, dimwit, dumbo, dummy, dum-dum, loon, dork, sap, jackass, blockhead, jughead, bonehead, knucklehead, fathead, numbskull, numbnuts, dumb-ass, doofus, clod, dunderhead, ditz, lummox, dipstick, thickhead, meathead, meatball, woodenhead, airhead, pinhead, lamebrain, peabrain, birdbrain, jerk, nerd, donkey, nitwit, twit, boob, twerp, schmuck, bozo, turkey, chowderhead, dingbat
One word = Mike
also, a mentally handicapped person.
Mike, Jack. this thread is about natural resources. You are off-topic, when discussing psychiatry.
I’m sorry, Vitezslav, I’ll try to be as polite as I can, but only one word comes to my mind: this is insane.
You refer to unlimited resources, yet you only speak of energy, no mention of the ecosystem, the biodiversity, arable land, water… I wonder if you took biology and environmental systems classes back in college, because it seems to me that you are missing some very basic science of life.
First of all, life is a complex system and organisms need specific conditions in order to survive. A planet full of carbon, zinc, oil, diamonds and minerals is pretty much useless without life and biodiversity. Oh, yes, not to mention that you speak of our planet as if it was just a place to burn, use and dump, before we move on to another planet and destroy that one as well, then move to another one…
Are you even listening to yourself?
Listening to hmself? He is listening to 2 unlimited. And trashing the planet in his posts. Oh boy!
This guy has some of the weirdest theories I have heard in my life.
“You are off-topic, when discussing psychiatry.”
I don’t know about that but I’m laughing here :-D
Well, I am also rolling on the floor laughin. We have just discovered how to make energy from stars. We are sitting on an a gigantic ball of minerals. Surroundind with endless space. This planet has never seen a species with such tremendous adaptation capabilities.
... And at this very moment of history you greenhorns come in and start scaring us because it will be 2°C warmer. LOL
History never before has seen a more hilarous movement, than environmentalism.
To Federico about biodiversity: Life is able to adapt. It is able to mutate. When we destroy some species, another species - more resistant to the new conditions - will take their place. Learn something about evolution!
I have studied evolution, and for what I can see much more than you did. Evolution is a long, slow and gradual process, it takes millennia to undergo significant changes, sometimes even millions of years.
Life can adapt quickly? OK, try to put your head under water and stay there. After 10 minutes, came back and tell me if you adapted yet.
Federico, “try to put your head under water and stay there. After 10 minutes, came back and tell me if you adapted yet.” ??? This is not Darwinism. This is not even Lamarckism or Saltacionism. What was that?
Federico, what about Darwin’s Finches?
http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2006/07/17/1688507.htm?site=catalyst&topic=latest
What about all the influenza-viruses that mutate again and again before our eyes “live”?
More resilient mutants are born in every generation. Once the species is hit by some bad conditions, only the mutants survive and become majority. It is called a “Bottleneck”.
Also I would like to inform you, that already now genetic engineering is able to BUILD new species with new attributes. We can design GMO crops to fit the new environmental conditions.
AFter all, if temperatures rise, many species will just move as the climate zones move. So don’t panic.
What? You studied evolution? In the 17th century? (sorry, that was rude).
Im all in for the “Vitzeslav-tries-to-evolve-his-lung-nderwater” experiment
Seriously, reading Vitzeslav totally growthomanic posting makes me believe that hes just posting extreme counter-theories to climate change theories while knowing better, just to have some fun with our answers.
So whether this is true or not, I guess we shouldnt comment anymore on his postings. Either because we got better time than to bring him some joy or because he really believes in what he is publishing there, which is actually not worth commenting cause its so absurd.
Georg, could you explain, which of my statements are not reasonable? If you just make ad-hominem attacks, it is just you who loses dignity.
Anyway, if you quit the discussion, it just proves you are out of arguments. You lose, Georg. Sorry for that.
But I understand that amidst believers an infidel looks like crazy. Bible also says “A fool in his heart says,there is no god.”
Now what should I additionally say to your “cmon, lets dash all the resources out of earth and once its plundered, lets go space travellin”.
Its utopic in a bad way and every 3-year old with a glimpse of intellect would understand that endless growth on expense of nature would be the doom of mankind.
Its you whos being naive and not even having a tiny bit of understanding for the complex correlations of life.
I cn’t take you seriously in any way, so I see no sense in further arguing with you - Ive stated my position. Good bye.
Georg. Still you did not explain WHY my vision of growth is incorrect. Name calling and angry exclamations are impolite. Behave yourself!
I have shown you, that we have plenty of natural resources (new inentions, genetic engineering, solar energy, mining the Earth, mining asteroids, settling other planets). Since you lose and have no arguments, of course you have to say “good bye”.
So whether this is true or not, I guess we shouldnt comment anymore on his postings. Either because we got better time than to bring him some joy or because he really believes in what he is publishing there, which is actually not worth commenting cause its so absurd.
I think you may be right. It’s my Socratic disposition, that even the most non educated person in reality can develop critical thinking and solve complex problems, if properly stimulated.
Then again, if somebody is purposefully plying dumb, there is no sense in arguing.
Vitezslav, you are confusing casual mutation with speciation, and speciation with long term evolution. Three very, very separate things.
Seriously, either you are playing dumb or you proved to have no knowledge of logic, deductive reasoning, biology, chemistry, botanic, general physics, astrophysics, evolution, and most scaring of all: history, your M.A.!
It’s not like I don’t want to argue with you. It jut feels like you who either do not read or do not understand my answers.
It’s just…parts of it could also be a very ironic post written by an enviromentalist…
Georg,
“we shouldnt comment anymore on his postings”
Are you kidding? This post perhaps better promotes green causes than my own do!
As you, David, says, Vitezslav could be a mole placed by the TH!NK organizers. If I were to write a parody of an anti-green extremist I couldn’t have done much better than this.
As you, David, says, Vitezslav could be a mole placed by the TH!NK organizers. If I were to write a parody of an anti-green extremist I couldn’t have done much better than this.
I’ve been thinking that since the very beginning. And then I started to wonder if they are doing a sociological study on our reactions, see if we did engage in the discussion, who lost their cool, who kept it polite, who said “this is a waste of time”, “no, we would keep arguing until the end”, categorise the various stages of acceptance an denial, creating a psychological profile of a very specific audience.
In either cases, it would be an interesting dissertation.
Look, if one alarmist came to a climate-skeptical forum he would be labeled a commie (watermellon) and nuts (environuts). And WE would analyse your psychology.
If your goal is to do social-engineering, discussions are truly a waste of time. Opposition just stands in your way.
But if you want to discover more information…
Look, if one alarmist came to a climate-skeptical forum he would be labeled a commie (watermellon) and nuts (environuts). And WE would analyse your psychology.
used car parts
Haven’t heard this one. But seems nice.