The Human Thirst for Knowledge - Blessing or Curse?

  • Thread starter Joel
  • 208 comments
  • 27,218 views
The further complication I have with buying into this as any kind of nearby crisis is that the ODAC report is refuting a BP report. While BP's main business is in oil they have hedged their bets in research of all kinds of alternative fuel sources. Sure, creating panic isn't the way they should go, so predicting the same as ODAC isn't ideal, but they are sending money out the door in research for other things than oil. With that in mind BP's best benefit would not be in extending out their prediction, but rather shaving 5-10 years from it. It isn't enough to create panic, but it is enough to make it seem like alternative fuel research needs to move faster. And we all know that governments respond to crisis with money. BP could maneuver this in a way to raise oil prices and receive funding for their research.

Instead, they moved it into a direction that doesn't quite make sense if they are lying.

The other thing I find questionable, is that with how BP's review is compiled compared to the article's claims. It is a statistical review and the accusation is that all the various companies and countries to provide statistical data are not being truthful. That would require quite a conspiracy between multiple governments and corporations. Out of all these groups of people not one has blown the whistle with convincing evidence?
 
That's not what happens when a resources is considered scarce. People don't suddenly stop investing in it because they're afraid that it will run out, they buy MORE of it because they know they'll have some when everyone else runs out.

So there's no reason that claiming your resources are scarce hurts your bottom line. If anything, they should bias a little low. Not so low as to make yourself look bad compared to other companies, but low enough to make people think oil should cost more.

Best example of this is Debeers (spelling?) and the diamond market. I learned a good deal about this in a Geology/Political Geography class I took a few years back. Diamonds themselves are not nearly as rare as people think that they are. Debeers just intentionally limits the amount of diamonds allowed onto the market at any given time in order for the price to stay at the level that they want. They actually have warehouses full of diamonds, in the UK I believe, that are sitting in storage for this very reason.
 
They actually have warehouses full of diamonds, in the UK I believe, that are sitting in storage for this very reason.

*carefully plans diamond heist*
 
Best example of this is Debeers (spelling?) and the diamond market. I learned a good deal about this in a Geology/Political Geography class I took a few years back. Diamonds themselves are not nearly as rare as people think that they are. Debeers just intentionally limits the amount of diamonds allowed onto the market at any given time in order for the price to stay at the level that they want. They actually have warehouses full of diamonds, in the UK I believe, that are sitting in storage for this very reason.

De Beers changed their business model about 10 years ago, they used to work on a supply controlled business model but after the world got wise to their unethically practises they switched to a supply/demand model. They make more money now then they did when they rocked the supply controlled model. De Beers still has a pretty good monopoly on the diamond trade though since it's made up of a ton of companies, it has something like 40% of the market share.

And they more than likely hold the diamonds in Luxembourg, not the UK. I'm guessing you saw the movie Blood Diamond, huh?

Diamond prices are ridiculously high though, I work in a jewellery store and the amount we mark up diamonds is staggering and I know the people we buy them from mark them up just as much. The reason prices are so high is because you have to go through several people in order to get the diamonds and each time you get some stupid mark up on them. We found it's cheaper to buy our diamonds from dealers in Israel since they tend to be cheaper then dealers in Africa.

Oh and most diamonds you buy are more then likely conflict diamonds although no one would ever admit that. It's just the way it works since a lot of governments control the diamond trade in their countries.
 
It is amusing that a routine event on a dinky and unimportant island 1000 miles away can stop modern commercial aviation over much of the northern hemisphere.
 
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8494225.stm

As our Sun awakens from its sunspot minimum, you can expect some adverse effects to our GPS system.
Good thing I prefer that Google Maps app on my phone.

But, in case I do need my GPS:
Sat-nav receivers will be blinded for tens of minutes, probably a few times a year at the solar maximum.
"We can look at the measurements from the last solar maximum," Professor Mitchell said.

"If we project those forward, it varies quite a lot across the Earth; looking at the UK it will be about 10-metre errors in the positioning."

The errors would be much more long-lasting than the "blindness" problem, lasting hours or even days.

"Ten metres out is probably going to be OK for a sat-nav system in a car, but if you're using the system for something safety-critical like ships coming into harbour for navigation or possibly in the future landing aircraft, you're looking for much greater accuracy and more importantly, much greater reliability."

Bob Cockshott, a director of the government-funded Digital Systems Knowledge Transfer Network, said that for most consumer applications such as sat-nav for cars, the problem will be more troublesome than dangerous.

"You might find for a number of hours or even a day or two you couldn't go out surveying or be able to dock your oil tanker at the deep-ocean oil well," he told BBC News.

"It's more at the annoyance level than something that's going to bankrupt your business."
Oh no. Whatever shall we do.

As for docking ships: Do it like you did before, by eyesight. Most skill sets I know of make you do important tasks the old school way before allowing you to become 100% reliant on technology. If the cargo shipping industry failed to do this then they are idiots. Things other than solar activity can cause disruptions in a ship's sat-nav capabilities.

Good lord, they make it sound like they are the 16-year-old cashier when the computer goes down.



And I highlighted the guy's name because...well...I'm just really immature.
 
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/...roton-smaller-standard-model-quantum-physics/

Apparently the most basic laws of physics will have to be re-written due to the new discovery that Protons, among the building blocks of atoms, are even smaller than we thought.

"The size of a proton is an essential value in equations that make up the 60-year-old theory of quantum electrodynamics, a cornerstone of the Standard Model of particle physics. The Standard Model describes how all forces, except gravity, affect subatomic particles."

"It's possible the smaller proton means the Rydberg constant hasn't been correctly measured. This value describes the way light gets emitted from various elements—a key component of spectroscopy, which is used, for instance, to tell which kinds of elements exist in galaxies and the vast interstellar gas-and-dust clouds called nebulae."


Respectfully submitted,
Dotini
 
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38600414/ns/health-kids_and_parenting/

Apparently something in the lifestyle of modern humans is adversely affecting the health of children.
Considering this study wasn't looking for this and the data is just a side effect I think any assumptions now are premature.

And then the obvious demographic differences should definitely be looked at when a proper study is done. Why are white girls from Northern California so much less likely to be affected by this than black girls from Harlem?
 
Yes, it's probably wise to ignore reports of children with health abnormalities. Likely it's only better reporting and nothing out of the ordinary.

Anyway, here's another report about non-disaster related electrical blackouts.
http://www.cnn.com/2010/TECH/innovation/08/09/smart.grid/index.html?hpt=C1

Even though they say these increasing commonplace blackouts can have adverse impacts on human health and our local and national economy, it's probably prudent to dismiss these reports as merely artifacts of reporting.
 
I'd have to say the main reason these blackouts have become so commonplace (I can't recall the last blackout in my area caused my demand) is because the demand for electricity has gone up drastically, and it's extremely difficult and expensive to expand power production. The cheapest, easiest, and most efficient way to do so is to probably build more coal-fired power stations and make use of a readily available resource. I assume global warming scare tactics and pollution regulations have made it extremely difficult to construct new coal stations. While they are some of the highest polluting things around, they're probably much more efficient than running a fleet of gas-powered generators in your back yard.

What's going to happen when the country's fleet of electric vehicles rises and they become commonplace? That will surely happen eventually. So it looks like we've got electric cars and electric everything becoming more popular as a result of global warming regulations, and easy power production becoming more difficult because of those same regulations. Hmm. Sounds like someone could be planning to make you struggle for electricity in order to keep you under their thumb, dependent on them for survival. If they're not planning it then they'd surely take advantage of the opportunity when it arose.

Blame the government.
 
Somewhere I've read that all modern high efficiency electric motors require Neodymium for the magnets, and that Neodymium is mined currently only one place on Earth: China.
 
Yes, it's probably wise to ignore reports of children with health abnormalities. Likely it's only better reporting and nothing out of the ordinary.

Since when has early maturation been a health abnormality? I thought it was common knowledge that good nutrition allowed for faster development?

Even though they say these increasing commonplace blackouts can have adverse impacts on human health and our local and national economy, it's probably prudent to dismiss these reports as merely artifacts of reporting.

Can't sleep = poor health. Just wait until next summer, when old people start dropping like flies again, from the heat.
 
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-robbins/female-infants-growing-br_b_676402.html

Here's a report that infants in China are growing breasts between 4 and 15 months. But this is just another report to file and forget, as it's likely quite normal and been happening all along, merely an artifact of improved reporting. Certainly nothing of interest or importance to prudent parents.

Actually, it is not.

Mind you... puberty at 8 years of age is not shocking, as even in the poorest of environments, some girls do hit puberty at such a young age (which explains why the youngest grandmother ever (in Africa) was a teenager).

I have friends who had their menarche before they hit their teens... or even tweens. With better health care and nutrition, even more girls may experience this. Lump early maturation under the same heading as "people are getting taller" and "people are getting fatter". Both caused by better health care and richer diets. Only one of the three is really problematic.

We may express surprise and dismay that young girls are maturing so fast, but we forget human history: couples by 12-14, babies by 14-16, death in the 30s to 50s. It's western mores and the long training period needed to prepare children for an adult life in modern society that force us to push those dates back by five to ten years. And the fact that better health care allows us to live into our 70s-80s and still have children in our late 30s and 40s.

Now that last part is cause for concern, as very late pregnancies can be linked to an increase in the incidence of Down's and Autism.

Now breast development and sexual maturity in toddlers is abnormal. China is the Wild Wild West when it comes to health regulations. Which makes me glad I don't buy milk from China... or any other food items, for that matter. Or toys... or kitchenware... or...
 
Last edited:
Yes, it's probably wise to ignore reports of children with health abnormalities.
I said nothing of the sort, and you know it. In fact, I believe I suggested properly studying the phenomenon.

Anyway, here's another report about non-disaster related electrical blackouts.
http://www.cnn.com/2010/TECH/innovation/08/09/smart.grid/index.html?hpt=C1

Even though they say these increasing commonplace blackouts can have adverse impacts on human health and our local and national economy, it's probably prudent to dismiss these reports as merely artifacts of reporting.
How is an outdated electrical grid a sign of problem from human endeavors? If anything, further advancement in technology would prevent this.

Of course, even though this has an impact on human health, that should be a sign that without human technological development there would be a much larger impact as none of these people would have the electricity to stay safe at any time during this heat wave.

This story is a sign that the human thirst for knowledge is a blessing, and that certain factors whioch have held it back from improving in certain areas are limiting how far that blessing can go.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-robbins/female-infants-growing-br_b_676402.html

Here's a report that infants in China are growing breasts between 4 and 15 months. But this is just another report to file and forget, as it's likely quite normal and been happening all along, merely an artifact of improved reporting. Certainly nothing of interest or importance to prudent parents.
Formula based on cow milk? Some cases using whole cow milk for infants? Having a 5-month-old, I can tell you right now that it is suggested you avoid that, and that is without considering the hormone risks. In fact, the latest suggestion is that breast milk alone is best for the first six months.

Of course, the author of this article is attempting to sell his new book, as seen in the last paragraph:
To learn how to steer clear of potentially dangerous foods and household products, and how to make healthier, safer, cost-saving choices, read The New Good Life: Living Better Than Ever in an Age of Less. For more information about my work, and if you like, sign up for my email list, please visit my website, johnrobbins.info.
I also notice that in every case he presents of this phenomenon it is in areas that at the time had third-world quality medicine. Odd he doesn't mention that fact. I mean, I am sure dietary recommendations and practices in areas where swine flu and bird flu were a death sentence were far different than they are in places like the US where the above diseases meant a week off work.

I guess that is the "journalism" you get on a political commentary blog. There is clearly nothing close to improved reporting involved here. More like a cleverly disguised advertisement.
 
http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-...iner~y2010m8d10-Why-hemp-could-save-the-world

We could have saved the world with industrial hemp, according to this article.
Um, hemp is legally used in industries today. It was only prohibited to be grown in the US. Many US industries import hemp from other countries. In fact, the US is the largest importer of hemp in the world.

What legalizing the growing of hemp would do is provide a replacement crop for tobacco farmers and possibly allow a larger acceptance in the US of biodiesels. Other than that though, there isn't a lot that article mentions that couldn't already occur.

What I love is that she blames "oil mongers" for making hemp illegal without giving examples or evidence equal to what she had to say about William Randolph Hearst and his logger buddies.
 
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/09/100905161908.htm

Self-assembling and self-repairing solar technology may be just a few steps away from freeing mankind from the chains of oil and coal.

Will technology dig us out of the hole technology has got us into? Usually I'm skeptical of this, but here I'm willing to look anew.

Well... I'd argue about what dug the hole. Technology is just a shovel. It's the guy carrying it who decides whether to dig a pit or build a road.

-

About time we saw some progress in bio-mimicry in terms of solar cells.
 
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/...s-power-and-communications-Liam-Fox-says.html

Get ready for a multi-year return, if not to the stone age, then to the 18th century. Or so implies this report.
While I understand the need to safeguard against a solar flare being able to do this I think that they will have trouble gaining any public support because in the past few years every large solar flare has been met with "ZOMG, we're gonna die!" It is only a few steps away from reaching [insert animal name] flu status of over-hyped warnings vs actual outcome.
 
While I understand the need to safeguard against a solar flare being able to do this I think that they will have trouble gaining any public support because in the past few years every large solar flare has been met with "ZOMG, we're gonna die!" It is only a few steps away from reaching [insert animal name] flu status of over-hyped warnings vs actual outcome.

Yes, it is the boy crying "wolf". Still, we will have no one to blame but ourselves when when are hoist on the petard of our own technology.
 
Still, we will have no one to blame but ourselves when when are hoist on the petard of our own technology.
Well, your options are continue living in the 18th century or innovate and hope that some freak natural occurrence doesn't happen to wipe your technology out in the fraction of time you spend on one technology before finding another one that won't be affected the same way.

Personally, I take innovation and technology moving forward any day. The alternative would be severely worse than any disaster crippling us temporarily.
 
Well, your options are continue living in the 18th century or innovate and hope that some freak natural occurrence doesn't happen to wipe your technology out in the fraction of time you spend on one technology before finding another one that won't be affected the same way.

Personally, I take innovation and technology moving forward any day. The alternative would be severely worse than any disaster crippling us temporarily.

Everything you say is supremely reasonable and desirable. Even so, I must question the sustainability of certain technologies, and the morality of others.
 
Everything you say is supremely reasonable and desirable. Even so, I must question the sustainability of certain technologies, and the morality of others.
Technology isn't static. Innovation breeds innovation. Sustainability is only a short-term (decade or so) concern. Well, it should be unless governments are involved.

As for the morality, that is a subjective issue. For instance, I have no problem with taking resources from animals. Others do.
 
Back