Liberal Forum

DeezerShoove » 29 Jul 2022, 7:39 am » wrote: ↑

29 Jul 2022, 7:39 am

I would have guessed "in the 1800's" and that's as close a margin as I would have gone.
Not sure why that becomes an important part of the scarcity topic though.

Also, not sure why you seem so thin-skinned about this. Have a nice day.

It took 300,000 years for population to reach one billion.  Now a billion people are generated every 20 years.  Why such a difference ?  Techno abundance.

if there was no scarcity before as you claim, the population would have exploded long before 1800.  We would have hit a billion in 2 AD
 

Xavier_Onassis » 29 Jul 2022, 9:24 am » wrote: ↑

29 Jul 2022, 9:24 am

Can we agree that technology is necessary for abundance, more so than raw materials?

This is simplistic. Technology made it possible for Americans to exterminate the passenger pigeons, and by 1914 or so, they were extinct. My great-grandfather said they were delicious.  Technology allowed fishermen to deplete the North Atlantic of codfish, and many fishing villages and towns along the coast in New England and the Canadian Maritimes lost their main source of income.
\
On the other hand, technology will eventually provide humans with nearly all their energy, by using solar, tidal, hydroelectric, geothermal, and Thorium and perhaps fusion reactors.   

So the answer is sometimes technology is the solution, and other times, it is a temporary solution that causes greater problems.

 

no, without raw materials technology doesn't move, supply chains aren't necessary, economics never arrived.

SJConspirator » 28 Jul 2022, 9:21 pm » wrote: ↑

28 Jul 2022, 9:21 pm

Wow. The level of intelligence on this board is depressing

You could increase it by saying smarter things.
You seem to be enamored with simplistic solutions and crackpot theories.

SJConspirator » 29 Jul 2022, 9:27 am » wrote: ↑

29 Jul 2022, 9:27 am

It took 300,000 years for population to reach one billion.  Now a billion people are generated every 20 years.  Why such a difference ?  Techno abundance.

if there was no scarcity before as you claim, the population would have exploded long before 1800.  We would have hit a billion in 2 AD
 

You ever do compounding DNA by how the numbers work not including siblings each generation? Pick any starting point since a DNA streaming species existed.

1st generation of evolved DNA came from a separate species. Call it mutation or what ever, there was a specific point of origin. then there had to be a 2nd generation in order to have a 3rd, 4th, 5,th.

Kinetics and reproduction without reproductions the specific DNA streaming doesn't exist again. It is self evident it is a closed system per species and ancestral variants commonly defined as race, creed, color, national origin, etc.

Can your mind keep up with exponential expanding and contracting results? original arrivals became 16 great great grandparents to 5th generation arrivals or there weren't 2dn, 3rd, 4th generations.

Same thing still applies to each added generation with numbers reaching 1 of 6 great great grandparents left behind 8 great grandparent added forward 4 grandparents giving birth to 2 parenting the great great grandchildren of original 16, and each great great grandchild has to evolve forward to reach becoming 1 of 16 great great grandparents forward or not.

you are a conspirator of doubt SJ.

Xavier_Onassis » 29 Jul 2022, 10:12 am » wrote: ↑

29 Jul 2022, 10:12 am

You could increase it by saying smarter things.
You seem to be enamored with simplistic solutions and crackpot theories.

Oh, I'm sorry.  Let me try to be more insightful and profound by posting like you guys

Ahem..

Biden sucks!  Trump RUles!  **** you asshole !  Idiot!

 

"An ocean full of fish".........
Remember maybe about 20 years ago when the Japs were accused of broadcasting sound waves under water [music..?] to attract fish they wanted to catch..?

SJConspirator » 29 Jul 2022, 11:00 am » wrote: ↑

29 Jul 2022, 11:00 am

Oh, I'm sorry.  Let me try to be more insightful and profound by posting like you guys

Ahem..

Biden sucks!  Trump RUles!  **** you asshole !  Idiot!

 

Look at you posing as being outside natural displacement on some higher intellectual plane than your dreary sooner or later to be corpse inhabits space with.

what supernatural entity is your intellectual mind from?

Xavier_Onassis » 29 Jul 2022, 10:12 am » wrote: ↑

29 Jul 2022, 10:12 am

You could increase it by saying smarter things.
You seem to be enamored with simplistic solutions and crackpot theories.

you are one of the stupidest **** here

SJConspirator » 29 Jul 2022, 11:00 am » wrote: ↑

29 Jul 2022, 11:00 am

Oh, I'm sorry.  Let me try to be more insightful and profound by posting like you guys

Ahem..

Biden sucks!  Trump RUles!  **** you asshole !  Idiot!

you cant even parody these people. its literally worse than your parody. 

if they said that, i could actually respect it lol

FOS » 29 Jul 2022, 12:28 pm » wrote: ↑

29 Jul 2022, 12:28 pm

you are one of the stupidest **** here

..but he was Class Valedictorian  at Grambling...!

Cedar » 29 Jul 2022, 2:53 am » wrote: ↑

29 Jul 2022, 2:53 am

I imagine Cro-Magnons had what they needed with their technology. An abundance if you will. As technology advanced we became too damn efficient. There is no longer an abundance, as we deplete the natural resource. We lack abundance because of technology.

That is an argument for better management, not for less technology. 

That would mean more government, you understand.

Because government can actually be extremely smart and useful.
 
 

Xavier_Onassis » 29 Jul 2022, 9:24 am » wrote: ↑

29 Jul 2022, 9:24 am

Can we agree that technology is necessary for abundance, more so than raw materials?

This is simplistic. Technology made it possible for Americans to exterminate the passenger pigeons, and by 1914 or so, they were extinct. My great-grandfather said they were delicious.  Technology allowed fishermen to deplete the North Atlantic of codfish, and many fishing villages and towns along the coast in New England and the Canadian Maritimes lost their main source of income.
\
On the other hand, technology will eventually provide humans with nearly all their energy, by using solar, tidal, hydroelectric, geothermal, and Thorium and perhaps fusion reactors.   

So the answer is sometimes technology is the solution, and other times, it is a temporary solution that causes greater problems.

I'm sure that is the answer to something - just not sure it's the answer to the OP. 
 

Xavier_Onassis » 29 Jul 2022, 10:12 am » wrote: ↑

29 Jul 2022, 10:12 am

You could increase it by saying smarter things.
You seem to be enamored with simplistic solutions and crackpot theories.

Somebody should snap this martian's neck. ^

Cannonpointer » 28 Jul 2022, 10:08 pm » wrote: ↑

28 Jul 2022, 10:08 pm

You seem to have missed the point you are making. It's the point he was making.

hum

 
 

FOS » 29 Jul 2022, 12:29 pm » wrote: ↑

29 Jul 2022, 12:29 pm

you cant even parody these people. its literally worse than your parody. 

if they said that, i could actually respect it lol

I was just having that precise conversation with GW. There's a thing on tik tok where a blue-**** restaurant is offering *** a safe space by creating segregated seating for them. Of course, it's probably a joke. It HAS to be, right? I mean, bringing back SEGREGATION, in the name of wokeness? I'd be the wokest mother **** - sit over there, ***. It ain't emotionally safe for you here. 

But that's the thing. We both knew that it might really be a thing - that it COULD really be a thing!  
 

Cannonpointer » 29 Jul 2022, 3:02 pm » wrote: ↑

29 Jul 2022, 3:02 pm

I was just having that precise conversation with GW. There's a thing on tik tok where a blue-**** restaurant is offering *** a safe space by creating segregated seating for them. Of course, it's probably a joke. It HAS to be, right? I mean, bringing back SEGREGATION, in the name of wokeness? I'd be the wokest mother **** - sit over there, ***. It ain't emotionally safe for you here. 

But that's the thing. We both knew that it might really be a thing - that it COULD really be a thing!

well that is what i call progress.

Like most early humans, the Cro-Magnons mostly hunted large animals. For example, they killed mammoths, cave bears, horses, and reindeer for food. They hunted with spears, javelins, and spear-throwers. They also ate fruits from plants.

Fish was not in the diet...

there was no scarcity

 

SJConspirator » 28 Jul 2022, 11:41 pm » wrote: ↑

28 Jul 2022, 11:41 pm

Do you know what year the population of earth reached 1 billion People?  Try to guess, before you google.  If you have the balls, post your guess here BEFORE you google.

you used to be cool....laughing on here, talking about pimp hand, ho hand, nig, bitchslap,

what happened...that makes you think you are smarter or above most on here?
 

Xavier_Onassis » 29 Jul 2022, 10:12 am » wrote: ↑

29 Jul 2022, 10:12 am

You could increase it by saying smarter things.
You seem to be enamored with simplistic solutions and crackpot theories.

 

Cannonpointer » 29 Jul 2022, 2:52 pm » wrote: ↑

29 Jul 2022, 2:52 pm

That is an argument for better management, not for less technology. 

That would mean more government, you understand.

Because government can actually be extremely smart and useful.

The discussion was does technology lead to abundance, I’ve demonstrated that isn’t always the case. Technology allows us to abuse the resources.