From: locklin@titan.ucc.umass.edu (Lupo the Butcher)
Subject: Re: Singin' Those Apocalypse Blues
Organization: Campus Crusade for Cthulhu
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 01:39:39 GMT
X-Posted-From: titan.ucc.umass.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol.ctr.columbia.edu

In article <JOSHUA.92Dec11143746@bailey.cpac.washington.edu> joshua@cpac.washington.edu (Joshua Geller) writes:
>
>In article <1992Dec11.182521.19366@u.washington.edu> 
>grimoire@byron.u.washington.edu (John Greer) writes:
>
>>  In article <1992Dec10.155541.3868@engage.pko.dec.com> 
>>  stanley@verga.enet.dec.com (Hair Eris) writes:
>
>>   >					 but I've come to the conclusion
>>   >that it makes a lot more sense to work to preserve what we (as a
>>   >nation/culture/species/whatever) have now, rather than stand by and 
>>   >watch it all fall apart and then try to re-build it.  
>>   >Don't you think it's worth saving?
>
>>   The problem is this.  Our current civilization is dependent on a system of
>>   economic, agricultural and ecological practices which are unsustainable
>>   even over a timespan of decades.  Even at the present time, we could
>>   change to sustainable ways of living only at the cost of a massive,
>>   wrenching dislocation involving a radical drop in the standard of living
>>   across the entire developed world.  (Figures from one source I've read
>>   recently suggest that we'd have to accept the standard of living of 
>>   Brazil.)
>
>statements of this kind usually only take into account resources available
>on this planet; with the exploitation of extraterrestrial resources there
>is more than enough for everyone on the planet to have a high standard of
>living. if for whatever reason, we do not exploit extraterrestrial resources,
>I will admit things will probably get sort of grim, but I really don't think
>that is too likely (in other words, over the next 50 years or so, I fully
>expect systematic exploitation of off-planet resources to get off the ground).
>these club-of-rome, rifkinesque sayings of doom also fail to take into account
>the development of new technologies (like nanotechnology or fusion power)
>which are also more than likely in the near future.
>
>add into this the decimation of the populace likely to occur in many of the
>worst case nations, for various reasons, and you end up with a situation where
>there are fewer have-nots and more to go around.
>
>>   So here we are.  A small minority of us, maybe, are wiling to accept
>>   the sacrifices needed to ensure a future to this civilization. We don't
>>   have the power to get the majority, who aren't, to follow suit.  
>
>and I, for one, am very glad that you don't. just how, pray tell, would you
>'get the majority ... to follow suit', were you able to? confiscatory taxation?
>set up some camps? just take them out and shoot them? the possibilities are
>endless.
>
>
>josh


I disagree that exploitation of space resources will solve our economic problems
Unless we can get our hands on a non-rocket low-earth orbit insertion system.
Think about how difficult it is to get a couple of tons of space shuttle
into orbit (not to mention the nifty hole in the ozone layer it punches
each launch). Now try to imagine how many shuttle flights it would take
to put EVEN ONE factory into orbit, automated OR manned. If mass driver
technologies were developed (Or extremely strong "space elevator" fibres)
this situation would turn around rapidly.

Fusion as it is envisaged today is hardly the savior its proponents would
have you think. Most of the energy of the fusion reaction is in the form
of nasty radiation, not usable heat. This will create large amounts
of radioactive high-tech apparatus that needs to be replaced often. PLUS
(as it is envisaged today) fusion requires tritium manufacture, which
requires lithium; a rather rare & nasty substance to have around.
Fission power, a lower tech resource, is far more promising as the energy
of tomorrow.

The "club of rome" predictions are basically _entropic_ calculations. I
agree that space industries would invalidate them, but considering the
direction that fundamental research into launch technologies is going (nowhere),
this is not a forseeable occurrence in the near future. Had our species used
the resources we used for the cold war on space technologies instead, we
would be in much better shape for a future in space.

The only other way I can see our species getting itself out of this mess is
the development of some sort of "Von Neumann machines" which would be 
capable of replicating themselves & sending them off to build our space
mines & factories. This would lower the entropic mess we are in...

Incidentally, most of the "Club of Rome" computer models assumed up to
10 times the known resources on earth AND took into account possible
technological advances, such as fusion...

Most of the "Club of Rome" conclusions were invalidated by ideology, not
any computer model, or scientific argument. I would post a large article
on these computer models, if there is interest. (I am not sure it is the
proper place)...

-Scott
Newsgroups: alt.magick