Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff
"The Winnowing" is a science fiction short story by Isaac Asimov. The story was written at the request of William Levinson, editor of the US publication Physician's World, but when the latter ceased publication, the story was returned to the author, who then sold it to Analog. It appeared in the February 1976 edition.
In the year 2005, the world's population of six billion is suffering from acute famine. The World Food Organisation decides on desperate measures to decrease the population by a process of triage. They propose to do this by adding selective poisons to certain food shipments to grossly over-populated areas.
They blackmail biochemist Dr Aaron Rodman into cooperating with their scheme, proposing to utilise his development of LP - a lipoprotein which when incorporated into foods will cause random deaths.
The scheme is planned but Rodman is finally unable to go along with it. At a meeting between himself and senior government officials and members of the World Food Council, he feeds them with sandwiches laced at random with the LP, so that they too will die at random. He carefully matches the LP in the sandwiches he eats to his own metabolism, so that he will die quickly and not be guilty of involvement in the scheme.
barracuda wrote:The Easter Islanders could easily have prevented the catastrophe which overcame them. They were destroyed by their religious practises and by effects of climate change uncaused by man.
I love you too, man.
Nanotube-exposed seeds sprouted up to two times faster than control seeds and the seedlings weighed more than twice as much as the untreated plants. Those effects may occur because nanotubes penetrate the seed coat and boost water uptake, the researchers state. "This observed positive effect of CNTs on the seed germination could have significant economic importance for agriculture, horticulture, and the energy sector, such as for production of biofuels," they add.
Sounder wrote:We seem to treat reality as one big collection of objects. Having this static view of the world is to declare that there is essentially no benefit in using ones imagination.
After all, the cake has already been baked.
That is the basis of authority?
smiths wrote:1,000 billion? what a miserable ball of shit it would be then ...
vast numbers of the worlds population live in urban jungles made up of huge tower blocks row on row,
yeah sure, we could somehow magically come up with limitless amounts of steel and build 200 storey apartment blocks everywhere to house billions more but what the fuck is the point,
it would be horrible, who wants t end up with a globe that looks like a giant prison colony,
and as for schemes like flooding the deserts to creat more food hasnt anybody learnt yet, all these kinds of schemes come with massive negative unforseen consequences,
huge numbers of people currently starve all the time, and that is set to get worse,
the low hanging fruit gains we made in the seventies in agriculture are done,
food production will be reduced over the next twenty years, not increased,
cheap available energy is running out and has unleashed major problems,
the forests and the oceans that are left are under immense pressure
the only way forward is a pull back from humans and a limiting of modes of life,
and the record shows that people dont volunteer for that shit
Sounder wrote:We seem to treat reality as one big collection of objects. Having this static view of the world is to declare that there is essentially no benefit in using ones imagination.
The problem is greed, growth ("economic Ponzi") and competition.
Well, smiths, you have to like people. Humans are the only species that despise themselves, which I find ridiculous, and the bottom of much grief. If you don't like people, then no wonder depopulation seems like a good idea. I happen to like people, myself. Lots of them might be a lot of fun - if they all liked each other.
Sounder wrote:We seem to treat reality as one big collection of objects. Having this static view of the world is to declare that there is essentially no benefit in using ones imagination.
cuda wrote...
Exactly. I would say that imagination is the correct way forward.
We have been goaded on by psychopathic leaders for so long that killing other humans is accepted as a solution to a whole slew of problems. Formalizing Dualism finalized the divorce of the heart and the intellect. I think it was done consciously because the participatory consciousness, that held sway till the Middle Ages, did not validate an exploitive ethic.
Nothing of fundamental relevance to the human condition can happen until this beast is slain.
That may be laughable now but the point remains that any relative truth framework may look complete if one is looking from within said system. Even now, how many possibilities of science are missed because of the anthropomorphic conceit and bias that accepts that if something cannot be measured, or established to have extension in space, can then be said to not exist. Science is as much a social construct as is religion.
We use imagination to soften the hard edges of rationality, but we also need the rational to contain flighty elements within imagination.
barracuda wrote:smiths wrote:1,000 billion? what a miserable ball of shit it would be then ...
Well, smiths, you have to like people. Humans are the only species that despise themselves, which I find ridiculous, and the bottom of much grief. If you don't like people, then no wonder depopulation seems like a good idea. I happen to like people, myself. Lots of them might be a lot of fun - if they all liked each other.vast numbers of the worlds population live in urban jungles made up of huge tower blocks row on row,
yeah sure, we could somehow magically come up with limitless amounts of steel and build 200 storey apartment blocks everywhere to house billions more but what the fuck is the point,
Your dystopian vision of communist worker hive housing, though, is not the only straight line future approximation possible. The surface area of the earth is about 127,500,000,000 acres, not counting peaks and valleys, so it's not as if we're out of room.it would be horrible, who wants t end up with a globe that looks like a giant prison colony,
You speak as if there is no such thing as beautiful architecture, or organic methods of integrating humans within their environment.and as for schemes like flooding the deserts to creat more food hasnt anybody learnt yet, all these kinds of schemes come with massive negative unforseen consequences,
huge numbers of people currently starve all the time, and that is set to get worse,
the low hanging fruit gains we made in the seventies in agriculture are done,
food production will be reduced over the next twenty years, not increased,
cheap available energy is running out and has unleashed major problems,
the forests and the oceans that are left are under immense pressure
the only way forward is a pull back from humans and a limiting of modes of life,
and the record shows that people dont volunteer for that shit
I think even you'd agree that is not the only way forward. There are many directions to consider.Sounder wrote:We seem to treat reality as one big collection of objects. Having this static view of the world is to declare that there is essentially no benefit in using ones imagination.
Exactly. I would say that imagination is the correct way forward.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 169 guests