The Myth of Progress

[Harvey]

It is an interesting topic. Let's discuss it in a more appropriate thread (here maybe?) to avoid further derailing this one.

[DrEvil]

Will do. I found the research about life I mentioned and posted it in the other thread:
viewtopic.php?f=52&t=42334&p=706179#p706179

[semper occultus]

Paul Kingsnorth

https://paulkingsnorth.substack.com/p/t ... revolution

Older, crustier greenies like me, labouring under the yoke of a pre-modern sensibility which makes us reluctant to eat the sludge and live in the pod, might feel that something has gone terribly wrong with the numbers-obsessed rationalism that underlies this new, corporate-friendly green technocracy. But we have no five point plan of our own, and we can’t peer-review our intuition, so our complaints don’t convince anybody who matters. And now that the localists, the distributists, the deep ecologists, the neo-Luddites, the peasants, the small farmers and anyone else whose human-scale vision actually interferes with the march of Progress have been usefully designated as ‘eco fascists’, we are able to behold the only legitimate form of environmentalism which remains: a globalised, technocratic, ‘progressive’ push for ‘sustainability’, led by intellectuals, entrepreneurs and professional activists, following The Science down a path which just happens to lead to the triumph of the Machine.

[stickdog99]

Our psychopathic oligarchs keep honing their expertise in turning the natural empathy, compassion, and healthy collective inclinations of regular people like you and me against us.

In the past, they have typically relied on our baser instincts to gin up supposed genocidal external threats to get good people to commit evil acts of violence for them. They also appealed to deep seated inclinations such as religion, nationalism, tribalism, family, honor, hard work, ascetism, and sacrifice, again to get good people to do their evil deeds for them.

And while these same forces are all still at play, our psychopathic oligarchs have recently unleashed a torrent of new methods to turn our natural compassion for others, all of humanity, and all similar life forms on Earth against us.

They have taken our healthy, enlightened inclination against personal and institutional prejudice and discrimination and bastardized it to stop people from unifying based on economic class relationships by prompting an increasingly atomic and alienating identity politics devoid of any interest in economic justice or even in protecting basic civil rights of other "identities."

They have taken our healthy, enlightened compassion for the wellbeing of the elderly and comorbid and used this to obtain majority support for muzzling people's faces, keeping healthy people (including children) under continual house arrest, destroying small businesses, censoring scientific debate, ignoring informed consent, and transgressing our rights to bodily autonomy.

And now they are trying to take our healthy, enlightened concern with our entire Earthly environment to get us to support digital identification and central bank digital currency controls on anything we do that our oligarchs command is only "sustainable" when they and they alone get to do it. They have coopted the very admirable concept of sustainability and intend to use it to cement their chokehold of authoritarian control by greenwashing their totalitarian vision of a sustain-o-security (and biosecurity) state with high-minded sounding appeals to healthy environmental collectivism.

My whole life, I and all the people I have considered my political allies been naturally inclined to support any rhetoric focused on protecting the vulnerable, the less fortunate, and the environment. Even now, knowing what I know about all of this, I still find inherent appeal in sacrificing my individual rights for the collective good.

What can we do to stop good people from conflating goodness with dystopian totalitarian control sold to them in an anti-racist, pro-public health, and pro-environment wrapper?

[Grizzly]

What can we do to stop good people from conflating goodness with dystopian totalitarian control sold to them in an anti-racist, pro-public health, and pro-environment wrapper?

I have no answers, but a very astute interpretation. Frightening, even. How they've done this. This is much more than merely 'flipping the script'.

[semper occultus]

They also appealed to deep seated inclinations such as religion, nationalism, tribalism, family, honor, hard work, ascetism, and sacrifice

of all of those progressivism by far most resembles a religion - it is secularised, atheistic religion at this point - science is the theology, climate change the eschatology, net zero the crusade & the options are either heretic or true believer. Rulers & monarchs bow to the new pope in town

[DrEvil]

science is the theology, climate change the eschatology, net zero the crusade

With the small caveats that science works, climate change is real and net zero is a worthwhile goal. I guess you could say religion has (*badum tish*) progressed.

[Belligerent Savant]

.
"Science works". What does this even mean? At all times? Regardless of contextual details?

The scientific process is effective, yes. But Science is prone to capture, compromise, bias, flawed premises and criteria, and political/special interests (etc.).

So science can work, if performed earnestly, but is always subject to revision. And when compromised, 'science' can be the cause of large-scale collective harms no different (worse, given current scales) than historical atrocities committed on behalf of Religion. Indeed, in many respects 'The Science' is the current (secular) Religion of our times, complete with its share of dogma, High Priests, disciples, and brazen zeal.

Climate change, as presented to the masses, is a scam, as is 'net zero'.

The absurdity: those that follow 'the science' most ardently are markedly more susceptible to flawed/deceptive takes wrapped in a shiny veneer catering to their political and conditioned sensibilities. As such, they largely congratulate themselves for their 'progressive' thinking, yet are no more illuminated or aware of the hoodwinking taking place than the peasantry of yore.

LakeLurk
@EvilHeat4

Progressives and leftists are going to slowly back away from climate doomerism in the next decade, but are going to do that thing similar to COVID restrictions where they act 100 percent justified in supporting the wrong ideas and you're still a chud for being right initially.

Much like they feel the advent of the vaccine absolved them of their Covid sins, there will be some climate development that averts the worst-case scenario, therefore "we were right to be panicking" before the thing happened

10:22 AM · Dec 12, 2022

https://twitter.com/EvilHeat4/status/16 ... SQFrHSj-9Q

[stickdog99]

science is the theology, climate change the eschatology, net zero the crusade

With the small caveats that science works, climate change is real and net zero is a worthwhile goal. I guess you could say religion has (*badum tish*) progressed.

Science works for the oligarchs who fund the scientists and climate change and the net zero crusade are really being used to sell us permanently locked down cities, a diet of bugs and lab grown meat, and digital ids and CBCDs that will control every aspect of us peons' lives. Meanwhile, no plans are on any table to restrict the elite's huge militaries and private planes and yachts.

[DrEvil]

.
"Sience works". What does this even mean? At all times? Regardless of contextual details?

The scientific process is effective, yes. But Science is prone to capture, compromise, bias, flawed premises and criteria, and political/special interests (etc.).

So science can work, if performed earnestly, but is always subject to revision. And when compromised, 'science' can be the cause of large-scale collective harms no different (worse, given current scales) than historical atrocities committed on behalf of Religion. Indeed, in many respects 'The Science' is the current (secular) Religion of our times, complete with its share of dogma, High Priests, disciples, and brazen zeal.

It means that we're having this conversation on a screen and not with smoke signals or semaphore flags. Of course it's not perfect, and I'm getting pretty tired of having to spell that out every time I mention science to prevent you from jumping on the least relevant detail. Unlike religion science gives us tangible results. One is fiction, the other is not.

Climate change, as presented to the masses, is a scam, as is 'net zero'.

This is bullshit, plain and simple. You don't have a clue what you're talking about, as evidenced in the other climate thread you started to bitch about Greta's parents having designer furniture and repeatedly confusing probability with direct correlation and weather with climate. At least get a basic understanding of what you're labeling a scam before doing so. You should take the EthicalSkeptic's take on the Dunning-Kruger effect to heart:

The line beyond which, one has become so skeptical, that they have become stupid in the process.

I'm still waiting on you to post that research you've been trumpeting in the other thread btw. You've said repeatedly there's links to good research in the class notes you misrepresented as research and/or a scientific report, so it shouldn't be hard for you to just grab those links and post them already.

The absurdity: those that follow 'the science' most ardently are markedly more susceptible to flawed/deceptive takes wrapped in a shiny veneer catering to their political and conditioned sensibilities. As such, they largely congratulate themselves for their 'progressive' thinking, yet are no more illuminated or aware of the hoodwinking taking place than the peasantry of yore.

Ah yes, the good old "everyone who doesn't see the world as I do is conditioned/brainwashed by propaganda". Couldn't possibly be that you're wrong, it's everyone else. It must be nice being so special, being able to cut through all the biases and blind spots and go straight for the truth. The fact that you're repeating the talking points of a forty year old propaganda and misdirection campaign by the oil industry is just one of those weird, inconsequential circumstances that happen completely randomly, because obviously you are immune to such influences and conditioning.

LakeLurk
@EvilHeat4

Progressives and leftists are going to slowly back away from climate doomerism in the next decade, but are going to do that thing similar to COVID restrictions where they act 100 percent justified in supporting the wrong ideas and you're still a chud for being right initially.

Much like they feel the advent of the vaccine absolved them of their Covid sins, there will be some climate development that averts the worst-case scenario, therefore "we were right to be panicking" before the thing happened

10:22 AM · Dec 12, 2022

https://twitter.com/EvilHeat4/status/16 ... SQFrHSj-9Q[/quote]

This doesn't even warrant a response. Maybe in ten years.

[Belligerent Savant]

It's not 'bullshit'.
And your weak strawman attempts won't change it.
Yes, climate change and net zero as presented by MSM/govts/related entities to the public at large are massive grifts and scams. One of several egregious scams/frauds ongoing in parallel at the moment (and as with these other scams, some have been duped earnestly while others are actively involved in the fraud to various degrees. I appreciate it's a hard pill to swallow, but the 'unpleasantness' doesn't change the reality of it.).

This is not to say the climate isn't probably changing to some degree over time. It appears there may be some change occurring to climate, but highly unlikely to be dire, and such changes may be cyclical.

I'm also all for revisiting current energy/natural resource usage, but as mentioned in some detail in another thread, the proposed solutions as presented to the casual consumer are faulty and net negative to the envrionment (and once more: the notion of a 'crisis' requiring immediate drastic action is dishonest and fraudulent). There are a number of alternative options that aren't being explored or otherwise are actively suppressed. Worse still, the current 'imminent climate change' agendas are insidious and counter to the interests of humanity.

There are far more impactful changes that can be implemented to manage and adjust energy/resource usage by industry/large corporations before there would ever be a need to impose restrictions to movement or commerce by the everyday human.... though it should be noted most wasteful energy/resource usage at the individual level is overwhelmingly incurred by the upper 1%. Any mainstream solutions offered currently by climate alarmists will negatively impact the average human far more than it will the elitists or first-world wealthy, who will invariably utilize various loopholes or other related backdoors. The same way they avoid excessive taxes or other financial penalties via creative tax policy loopholes; the plebes will carry the majority of the burden/load, as it has been for years.

Climate alarmists have been largely wrong ever since this particular grift kicked off in earnest around the 70s or so, but this time there are added agendas in play (social credit scores, 'climate'-based lockdowns or limitations to travel, etc). Some or perhaps most of these proposed 'solutions' will never come to fruition, hopefully. But the plans are in place.

I never claim to have the details right at all times, but the broad strokes as summarized above are evident to anyone that assesses the data soberly.

You have not, demonstrably.

Large-scale cognitive dissonance for years to come, for many.

Bookmark this post. If RI is still around in 5 yrs, let's revisit and see where we are on this, eh?

[stickdog99]

https://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/23073 ... bourhoods/

Traffic filters will divide city into "15 minute" neighbourhoods

ROAD blocks stopping most motorists from driving through Oxford city centre will divide the city into six "15 minute" neighbourhoods, a county council travel chief has said. And he insisted the controversial plan would go ahead whether people liked it or not.

Duncan Enright, Oxfordshire County Council's cabinet member for travel and development strategy, explained the authority's traffic filter proposals in an interview in The Sunday Times. He said the filters would turn Oxford into "a 15-minute city" with local services within a small walking radius.

Mr Enright said: "It is about making sure you have the community centre which has all of those essential needs, the bottle of milk, pharmacy, GP, schools which you need to have a 15-minute neighbourhood."

The aim is to reduce traffic in the city centre and make city living more pleasant, but critics say the plans will negatively affect businesses and the city centre's economy.

A decision will be made on November 29, and is the date for the cabinet decision. following a consultation which closed earlier this month.

But Mr Enright told the Sunday Times: "It's going to happen definitely."

The new traffic filters on St Cross Road, Thames Street, Hythe Bridge Street and St Clements would operate seven days a week from 7am to 7pm.

Two more filters on Marston Ferry Road and Hollow Way would operate from Monday to Saturday.

People can drive freely around their own neighbourhood and can apply for a permit to drive through the filters, and into other neighbourhoods, for up to 100 days per year. This equates to an average of two days per week.

The alternative is to drive out on to the ring road and then back in to the destination.

A maximum of three permits a household will be allowed where there are several adults with cars registered to the address.

[Grizzly]

^^^

Also,
LIVE: Billionaire Peter Thiel Deliver Republican Party Speech at Reagan Library

[DrEvil]

@BelSav wrote:

This is not to say the climate isn't probably changing to some degree over time. It appears there may be some change occurring to climate, but highly unlikely to be dire, and such changes may be cyclical.

This right here is the bullshit. It's every oil funded denier talking point summed up in one short paragraph. Lots of weasel words that give you an out in case it turns out you're wrong, and as usual no evidence whatsoever. How can someone so paranoid be so blind to the well documented actually real conspiracy that you're acting as a mouthpiece for? It's insane.

You've fallen for their propaganda big time, and you have yet to post anything to back your claims. Over the last year you have been unable to post even a single scientific paper backing up what you're saying. You have been able to post declarations by oil industry insiders, stupid-ass tweets, gotcha articles about the weather in Greenland, random class notes and assorted other idiocy, plus several instances of you demonstrating you don't even understand the most basic things about climate change, but no actual science.

For you to be right, everyone else has to be wrong. This isn't one of those areas where there's still a raging debate on whether it's real or not. Everyone who knows what they're talking about already agrees it's real and it's bad, and anyone who pays even the slightest bit of attention to the subject can see for themselves that things are changing. The only debate is how bad and how fast. Most of them lean towards really bad and already happening. The most common refrain I've seen the last few years is how the scientists are shocked at how fast things are going.

And even if you ignore all of that, even if there's just a 1% chance that every climate scientist in the world is correct and we're fucked, that's still more than enough reason to do everything we can to avoid that 1% chance, because the consequences are really fucking bad for hundreds of millions of people, mostly poor people in developing countries. If we take your approach (to be fair, I'm not even sure I know what your approach is, because I've asked you several times and you never answer, but from you postings I'd say it's a safe bet you're not too worried about the consequences of climate change) things will already have gone to hell by the time it's obvious to everyone we need to do something, and that's a stupid fucking way to deal with the ecosystem that supports our entire civilization. You don't play Russian roulette with things like that.

[Belligerent Savant]

.
You're in an echo chamber. There is no uniform consensus on 'climate change' despite your broad-brush and misleading attempts to present this false notion (CORRECTION: there is uniform consensus -- or the appearance of it -- within the dominant narrative echo chamber. Those within the chamber believe anything outside of it is sheer madness, or propaganda by the oil and gas lobbies, without exception; as such, other perspectives are never worthy of consideration. See: Covidians for another example of this mindset within another industry vertical).

And with each passing year the version of 'climate change' as depicted by the dominant narratives-- which you apparently fully accept with minimal/no discernable scrutiny -- are shown to be faulty, if not partly based on ulterior motives/agendas at the upper levels, with its share of grifters and greed-driven operators (not to mention the fact that the proposed solutions: electric cars, solar panels/wind farms are net detrimental to the environment and absolutely NOT scalable/sustainable, and of course the more recent push for ESG/social credit/climate-change inspired lockdowns are simply draconian and fraudulent).

More recently, as already mentioned in prior postings here and elsewhere, it appears 'climate change', or more specifically, 'imminent' climate change, is already being set up as another vehicle for, as Brainsturbator put it in a recent tweet, "...mission creep expansion of planetary technical surveillance and control constricting ever tighter around the biological breathing human. It doesn't matter who 'wins control' when the system itself has the teleology of dead machines."

Whatever you want to believe about 'climate change', it doesn't change the fact that it's being utilized as yet another means for imposing technocratic fascism.

As mentioned in my prior postings, I'm all for oil & gas reduction, starting with multinationals/large-scale entities utilizing the lionshare of such energy (how much oil and gas do you think govt militaries exhaust each year? Or fucking NASA! Think that's going to be curbed anytime soon? Laughable), but any notion of getting to a 'net zero' anytime in our lifetimes, without the usage of nuclear energy (unless of course 'cold fusion' tech is being actively suppressed - ha), is delusional fantasy.

(Side-note: imagine being a fan of net zero AND also of NASA space missions, without a hint of irony!)

How the fuck are the wind farms, solar panels and electric batteries going to be mined and manufactured AND transported/shipped, at the scales proposed/advertised, without significant oil and gas usage?

Can't happen. Not as currently advertised.