Thanks for responding guys.And first to Naglfar,i prefaced my objectivism with "try" because im quite aware of my limits.And Alec i did not mean to derail the topic.My first post was directly to it...and well you see where we are now,with the knee-jerk personal insults and all.
Now i might just indulge this nonsense;whom the author of the video could find no one(outside his drum circle i gather)that could poke a hole in his theory.Which it isnt really a theory is it.Since a theory is more like a scientific law than a hypothesis. A theory is an explanation of a set of related observations or events based upon proven hypotheses and verified multiple times by detached groups of researchers. One cannot create a theory; he can only create a hypothesis.And the author,wisely knows that what he speaks is completely unproven and untested,so he uses the terminology "arguments that lead to a conclusion"...heh.In the scientific world we call this BS.So,back to the shrinking ozone sized holes in his argument.
1.His ..ahem..argument faulted right from the get-go.For if his conclusions where inescapable.Then the hardened skeptic and the panicked activist wouldnt be having this discussion now,would we.
2.The childish "well just in case" solution of just taking the first emotional action prescribed by either side of the debate...ends debate.Lets give the right to lifers the same power of preconcluded arguments shall we.It would really make that whole question of "when life begins" moot.Care to take this delusional reasoning into social,economic,geo-political realm?
3.The puerile,4 possibility only matrix was hilarious......
3a.2 choice,2 outcome control variable world supplied by acme lol
4.Trying to inoculate himself from contention by saying that "no one can know for absolute certainty...";charlatans have more guile and dont give their feelings,that they find inescapable and terrifying,before they say that they have no dog in the fight.
5.This is fun
6.This fellow,who just said that know one knows with absolute certainty what the world will do,admits that all reasonable people might be wrong in their understanding of the issue,then quantifies and qualifies 2 certainties and 1 inevitable outcome if things arent done his way.Reason has left his argument,without out even getting to the marrow of his argument.
7.Box 1...he either doesnt understand,obfuscates,or is ignorant of the implication of a global depression of that magnitude.Mabey China will stop building 3 coal firing plants a day.And let the 11 to 19% growth of its economy fault,and send its hundreds and hundreds of millions of 2 males to 1 female government regulated births back to the fields and tuck all that new discovered power back into a rice patty.Is this moron literally retarded.The monster China(whos general has already said it will take on the USA when it is ready) and its voracious hunger are held at bay by the consumer relationship with the west,and its massive investment in US bonds and dollar.WHEN THAT PRETENSE IS GONE ITS WAR.And the race for more resources in this catastrophe of box 1 will end in the utter annihilation of what resources are left,at a rate of 100 fold of what it is now.Does he think the Danes will let their country be swallowed by the sea,the russians loosen their grip on both the polar caps,or the american citizen go without ANYTHING?Politicians in their bid to keep us happy and them their power would strip mine the earth to its core if they had to....so if you are up for an east vs. west free-for-all for plunder and control,choose box 1.
8.Box 2 ,this option clearly the oddball seems like it would still get the smiley face if "true" and "false" where switched.But that would really screw up his premise of do something just in case.
9.Box 3 is good in its conception.But this is not a democratized world.Where we can all agree on and implement methods of conservation,research,regulation,preservation and just plain old good stewardship of our home.The mid east cannot stop the flow of oil,for the ruling families would perish and cast the region back into the hands completely into the hands of the mullahs.Think there is a problem now?Wait till then.China will never abide by any treaty that would stifle its fearsome rise to global hyper-power.Its natural resource needs alone will dwarf that of the west in a few years.Perhaps you could have a sit-in at Tiananmen Square?And i doubt those countries like Malaysia and Viet Nam and India will hit the breaks on development,and relegate the people just crawling out of the 19th century to satisfy 1.5 degrees.But without question,the hostile socialist countries would agree to such things.For it would equal the field(in their minds) with the proven dominator of politcal systems:capitalism.These hostile countries can say anything and sign anything without fear of reprisal from the plebiscite.
(Amazing what state-run media and bureaucratic control from top to bottom of civil life can do huh Chavez,Jong Il,et al).
10.Box 4 and granting extremes...umm ok.Since his box 1 did not even cover the extreme(i didnt either,i just gave a veridical conclusion).But for fun we will use it as the extreme.hehe The counter-point in box 4 would go from "Econ Pol Soc Enviro Health catastrophies" to the earth blows up like the death star.His box 1 seemed palpable to the horror of 4.But with a better understanding of the actuality of 1,4 would have to correspondingly grow in aspect to keep its horror factor.
11.Asking the choir to think outside his box and add intermediates and complexities to the dichotomies and come to a different conclusion is like asking a parishioner at a southern baptist revival to study the necronomicon to find fault with the bible.C'mon.
12.Concluding to himself now.Unknowingly sounding silly and obstinate,he still thinks no one could poke holes in his arguments. =)
...this is more fun than the new crysis demo i put off to write this.
and yes Naglfar i was purposefully being inordinately existentialistic for the sheer fact altering global climate through good intent would probably take a little astral travel.So why stop there right?
and Alec i am a fan of Nietzsche also....I wonder if during Hegel's and Nietzsche's discussions,if Nietzsche rebutted with ad hominems and refuted with suggestions of suicide.
Or movies like Soylent Green, A Boy And His Dog, The Road Warrior, The Omega Man and so forth... Oh, I highly recommend them all!
