The climate change consensus extends beyond climate scientists

[freebeard]

Hitler loved the concept of "Indian reservations", using a variation, that became known as "concentration camps".

Stole the idea for eugenics, too. From the Romans.

Would Polar Coordinates be an acceptable substitute?

Incomplete. It also reduces three dimensions down to two. Cartesian coordinates occupy 3D space. Synergetics is more than geometry, but is based on the vector equilibrium or cuboctahedron, and is quantified by 1/4-tetrahedra.

https://buckyworld.files.wordpress.c...09149490_n.jpg

Look closely and you'll see Metatron's Cube and the Flower of Life. Synergetics is dynamic:


https://vectorequilibrium.com/acervo...r-equilibrium/

It seems rigid and artificial until you introduce Voronoi and fractals, then a more natural world appears. It can be applied to personal interactions: https://duckduckgo.com/?q=synergetic+in+meetings

[oil pan 4]

Originally Posted by aerohead

You read a report (singular)?
Or,you read reports (plural)?
If you have the ability to connect dots,then there will be no reason not to appreciate the urgency of the matter.

I guess I am not reading ipcc stuff with fire and brimstone glasses on.
I read hundreds of pages of the 1,170 page oceans and cryosphere report until I found that it was based in junk science and part of another one that Greta liked to quote that is only a few years old.

That showed me that global warming isn't settled science and that the climate cult definitely isn't reading these reports.

So why are you so worried about the climate based on a report that we know is based on junk science?
Retraced in nature is roughly one step below out right criminal fraud, to me it looks like the difference is in the later they can prove intent.

[RedDevil]

Originally Posted by freebeard

So you didn't watch the video? Anarchism comes in varieties from libertarian to authoritarian as well. Nationalism has good/bad aspects.

I'd expect that from litesoff. Democracies look different from within a constitutional republic.

I don't watch video unless I have to, especially the ones that have a lot of argumentation. I like to read and fact check whatever feels like needing it. Video often makes that hard, if someone spews opinions in quick succession. As the saying goes, one fool can ask (or say) more than 10 wise (wo)men can answer.

My point was that the 'socialism' in NSDAP was a deliberate and hostile attack on socialism rather than an attempt to align with it. You can't blame socialism for being in the NSDAP name; if you do you have fallen for their trap.

Socialism in itself misuses the term social imho, and the same amounts for many political parties. 'Liberal' ,'democratic', etc often hardly resemble what is really going on.
Then, if political parties were honest enough to name themselves 'Greedy Profiteers' it would become rather confusing to keep them apart.

[freebeard]

You can't blame socialism for being in the NSDAP name; if you do you have fallen for their trap.

They chose the name they would be identified by to 'trap' unwary observers? Interesting.

I don't watch video unless I have to, especially the ones that have a lot of argumentation. I like to read and fact check whatever feels like needing it.

I can take the time to enjoy a good rant. I don't necessarily agree — Razorfist still defends Michael Jackson for instance.

Try your feels on his referents.

• Fascism: Doctrines and Institutions, Benito Mussolini, 1933, p. 135
• Origins and Doctrine of Fascism, Giovanni Gentile
• 25-point Nazi economic plan, points 13,14 and 17
• Das Ende Des Kapitalismus , Ferdinand Fried

I don't mind the term 'social' in fact I identify as a social anarchist.

Originally Posted by Wikipedia

Social anarchism[1][2][3][4][5] is considered to be the branch of anarchism that sees individual freedom as being interrelated with mutual aid.[6] Social anarchist thought emphasizes community and social equality as complementary to autonomy and personal freedom through norms such as freedom of speech maintained in a decentralized federalism, balanced with freedom of interaction in thought as well as incorporating the concept of subsidiarity, namely "that one should not withdraw from individuals and commit to the community what they can accomplish by their own enterprise and industry" and that "[f]or every social activity ought of its very nature to furnish help to the members of the body social, [should] never destroy and absorb them", or simply the slogan "Do not take tools out of people's hands".[6][7]

Social anarchism has also advocated that the conversion of a proportion of present-day and future productive private property be made into social property to offer individual empowerment through easier access to such as tools or parts, or a sharing of the commons while retaining respect for personal property.[8] The term is used to describe the theory—contra individualist anarchism—that places an emphasis on the communitarian and cooperative aspects in anarchist theory while also opposing authoritarian forms of communitarianism associated with groupthink and collective conformity and instead favouring a reconciliation between individuality and sociality. For instance, illegitimate authority is removed through inspection and vigilance. While self-determination is asserted as is worker's self-management and education and empowerment emphasized, both individually and through interaction with the community, a do-it-yourself (DIY) mentality is combined with educational efforts within the social realm.

Social anarchism is considered an umbrella term that includes—but it is not limited to—the post-capitalist economic models of anarcho-communism, collectivist anarchism and sometimes mutualism, or even non-state controlled federated guild socialist dual power industrial democracy and economic democracy or federated worker cooperatives in addition to workers' and consumers' councils, replacing much of the present state system yet still retaining basic rights as well as the trade union approach of anarcho-syndicalism, the social struggle strategies of platformism and specifism and the environmental philosophy of social ecology. The term social anarchism is often used interchangeably with libertarian socialism[9] or left-libertarianism[10] and emerged in the late 19th century as a distinction from individualist anarchism.[11]

[redpoint5]

Originally Posted by aerohead

What technological development do you think we lack to address climate change? From what I've read,we have everything we already need to advance to a solution.

Too broad a question, as climate change isn't manifest as a singular catastrophe, but affecting an infinite number of systems in an infinite number of ways.

If we "solving" climate change means being net-zero CO2 while maintaining the level of wealth we have, then the technology does not exist currently. Perhaps nuclear stands a chance and supplying the bulk energy needs, but that remains to be seen, and requires a transition in many sectors of the economy, such as transportation. That opens many other cans of worms because battery technology is terrible in comparison to a petrol fuel tank, for instance.

I sound pessimistic, but only in the short-term. Long-term I expect we'll figure out how to replace fossil energy with other sources.

Originally Posted by aerohead

There's no universal causality established between socialism and the NAZI party.
Hitler nationalized the people,rather than business.Technically,it was a derivative of the 'Third Way', command and control over over privately-owned corporations.

The main point I was making is that Nietzsche philosophy is the basis for modern philosophy, which basically states that there is no intrinsic good. The "good" then is open to interpretation, with the majority of people more or less adopting a John Stuart Mill Utilitarian philosophy, which says that morality is whatever serves the interests of the most people... which has some connection with socialism. It's a relatively small step to posit that the greater welfare would be served by doing away with some smaller group of people.

In my view, socialism is neither good nor bad, just like most any tool. It all comes down to how it's implemented and what the fundamental basis for it is. If the basis is to make everyone equal or the same, then it's evil.

[freebeard]

Too broad a question, as climate change isn't manifest as a singular catastrophe, but affecting an infinite number of systems in an infinite number of ways.

That's Infinity Squared. Unpossible.
We had Synergetic Geometry and molten salt Thorium reactors by the 1980s. What else do we need? The will to eschew sports, religion and pets.

[redpoint5]

I believe the science currently exists to solve some of the bigger issues, but not necessarily the technology or proof of concept.

A molten salt Thorium reactor probably can be feasible, but there's not a full working example of one yet. Then there's the question of economics; can they be built such that the cost per unit energy delivered is economical?

That all remains to be seen, and I expect the future will answer those questions, but at the current moment things are uncertain.

[freebeard]

Really?

Oak Ridge National Laboratory molten salt breeder reactor
The culmination of the ORNL research during the 1970–1976 timeframe resulted in a molten salt breeder reactor (MSBR) design. Fuel was to be LiF-BeF2-ThF4-UF4 (72-16-12-0.4) with graphite moderator. The secondary coolant was to be NaF-NaBF4. Its peak operating temperature was to be 705 °C.[4] It would follow a 4-year replacement schedule*. The MSR program closed down in the early 1970s in favor of the liquid metal fast-breeder reactor (LMFBR),[5] after which research stagnated in the United States.[6][7] As of 2011, ARE and MSRE remained the only molten-salt reactors ever operated.

*This may be a batch-loaded rather than flow-through design.
The operating proof of concept was out-competed by fast breeder reactors, due to externalities.

[redpoint5]

Originally Posted by freebeard

Really?

*This may be a batch-loaded rather than flow-through design.
The operating proof of concept was out-competed by fast breeder reactors, due to externalities.

Inside Bill's Brain talked about TerraPower, the nuclear development project Gates is funding. The documentary didn't get into many specifics, but did make it a point to blame the stallment of the project on the Trump administration. I don't know how true that is. From what I remember of the documentary, TerraPower had regulatory clearance to build a new gen reactor in China, but it was blocked by the executive arm of the US late in the project planning phase.

[freebeard]

The Administration is doing a 'soft-coupling' where the limited trade agreement is to feed them after their crop failures, like we've had to do in times past with the commie utopia to their north, North Korea. So we will sell them food while we choke off the intellectual property.

Scott Adams talked about this. He's trying to get the right people in a room together (basically, President Trump and Bill Gates wold need 15 minutes). To solve the NIMBY problem, I suggest Puerto Rico or The Bahamas.

Terrapower may be a winner, but I like Molten salt because it can be lit off as it is lofted into orbit.