Point of no return?
There must come a time when we pass the point of no return. I believe this happened when Bush was elected. Before this I could see progress being made albeit in very small steps.
Tom, you must have a personal view on how long before the Earth explodes assuming that there is no drastic shift in peoples attitudes. Would you care to share this best estimate with us?
H.K.
I do not know enough (yet) to tell you this.
Note, however, that Dec 2012 marks the "end of the Long Count Mayan Calendar". I cannot resist a thought that this mysterious/unexplainable and seemingly useless "long count" could be a marker for nuclear decay processes in the Earth's nucleus, developed by highly advanced people more than 20,000 years ago. These people are long dead, but those who were left alive got the advice to keep counting until "the beginning of the new world"...
After all, just like the fate of an atom is determined by processes in its nucleus, the fate of a planet should be determined by processes in its core... (Do you remember what happened to theories that ignored processes in atomic nuclei?)
My guess is that Dec 2012 is an estimate for processes in the core that are due to occur naturally. How accurate it is, I do not know. What I know, however, is that since the atmospheric pollution reduces the cooling rate of the planetary interior - it WILL increase the SERIOUSNESS of cataclysms normally associated with a typical planetary pole shift (volcanic explosions, earthquakes, tidal waves, sinking/rising continents, global flood, high winds, etc...).
How fast and how much will the center of the core overheat as a result of its undercooling will depend on the rate of increase of atmospheric polution over the next few years.
It is quite difficult to REMOVE polution that is in place and it is difficult to cool down the core that has already begun to overheat. Hence, what will happen in the next 5-50 years or so will depend on what we do TODAY to address atmospheric pollution. What have YOU done today in this direction?
Tom
Tom,A natural ice age would be a normal healing process for over heating. The ice ages seem to be linked to two things;
1: Volcanic activity.
2: Ocean currents.
Conan
Try reading the core article. If you did, you would notice my explanation that an ice age is actually the "best case scenario".
Please read appendices. Our collective ignorance makes the situation SO much more serious that the very existence of the planet is at risk.
Tom
For goodness sakes so we are going to all explode into bits and pieces. So how the hell do we deal with that. As and individual how can we stop it. Do we make the most of the time we have and just get on with it. We don't give up, I know that but cripeys Tom how do you get on with each day. How do you even talk to people with pifly little complaints which are trivial and self centred and serving? Yes I agree about George Bush too, how the hell did he get in power anyway, also how the heck did John Howard get in, all he does is agree to everything that Bush says and excuse me, bugger the rest of us. How the hell do these people have so much power or say when we are supposed to live in a democratic society and the Government is supposed to be a fair and just system to rule under the ideas and wishes of its people.....Ha!
Kimbra
Einstein summarized the Reality of our society by stating the obvious fact that "the majority of the stupid is invincible and guaranteed at all times..."
Leaders who have no capacity whatsoever to lead anyone anywhere have been chosen by the majority...
Tom
I agree with Tom, and in my opinion the actions of the majority are even worse than the actions of the leaders. At least the leaders are making choices and doing things, however much I may disagree with what they do. The majority on the other hand chooses to do what they are told, not even bothering to try to think of something better to do. Having a developed intellect is not as important as how much you are using and developing what you have. [Greg]
I agree with this criticism, but if the majority of the stupid is invincible and guaranteed at all times, then what is the use of doing anything to help since it is invincible?
M.E.
What about changing the way of choosing leaders?
Image a passenger plane. What would happen if an "elected" captain of a plane had no idea about flying, didn't know what to do and where to go? Wouldn't a plane lead this way sooner-or-later crash?
Would you board a plane lead by such a leader? Isn't it obvious that changing the captain of the plane to someone competent would be the best remedy?
Now imagine that the plane has to fly through some very intensive and unknown turbulence. Wouldn't the actual intrinsic worth of the captain be the key factor that would maximize the chance of survival?
Now, Earth is a sophisticated nuclear powered spaceship with climate control and several billion passengers. Do you know anyone who knows how it works and how to operate it?
In summary - a good leader should be able to show the majority how to make progress and avoid crashing.
Tom
Ok, then HOW would anyone suggest that all the members of the majority could be convinced that it may be a good idea to let 'a smart minority' to choose leaders? But since everyone would need to understand this and since currently 'everyone' collectively is 'the stupid majority', then such a scenario is extremely unlikely. People would always complain out of pure ignorance that 'who gives them the right to choose for everyone else', even if benefits are presented and discussed. You would most likely get the majority concluding that 'this would be like a cult leader chosen by his cult members to represent even the society outside the cult'. So, as you said more-or-less in the freedom, and I think this to be one of the more important statements, 'since intelect is incapable of imagining/exploring/admiting certain possibilities, no intelligent conversation would be possible about these possibilities'. This applies well to the flock - I guess waiting for the majority's intelect to develop is the only option - you can attempt conversation about certain topics forever and hope that one day intelects are advanced enough to even succeed in merely discussing the concepts without ignorant outright dismissal.
rafal
Even the least intelligent plane passenger seems to understand the need for a competent pilot. Everyone seems to agree that verification and approval of pilot skills has to be left to a narrow circle of experts.
Have you ever wondered WHY? A plane crash and its consequences are very easy to imagine...
The difficulty in changing the system of choosing leaders on Earth is that consequences of their lack of leadership are not obvious. Planets do not overheat too often. No one alive has ever experienced any consequences of planetarty interior overheating.
It seems that the only thing that can change the attitude of the "majority" is to EXPERIENCE consequences of incompetent leadership to the point of near-total destruction. At such a point in history - everyone alive will DREAM of someone competent to tell them what to do.
Hence, reaching the point of near-total-destruction seems inevitable. My questions are: Will there be anyone competent enough to instruct cataclysm surviviors how to save the planet? How to find such a person in a hurry? Surely not by a general election as we know it today...
Tom
The method for election used by the people of Mu as described in the Thiaoouba Prophecy should work, and it would be quicker. However, if the Earth is at a point of near total destruction, isn't there going to be a lot of problems with communication due to the large amount of destruction that will have already happened? In the book it says there will be no second chance if people don't listen to those who want to help them. To me this means if they aren't listening now, then they are too foolish to be worth saving.
Greg
Perhaps. I feel hesitant underestimating people's potential to Understand. Many people learn VERY FAST when they realize that symptoms of the forthcoming disaster have become obvious.
The information exchange system seems more robust than any other technology in our society today... I hope that we will be given enough time to learn and change our ways. Is several months enough?
Tom
I think that in the chaos that ensues, you will get the 'current powers' continuing to use their guns and weapons to 'attempt and bring societies into order', just like it was done before the disaster. I don't think anything will change. And if there are some 'emergent leaders' who happen to obtain trust of many people, these groups will still be collectively smaller than the 'preserved majority of the stupid'. In other words, a disaster is likely to set the Earth back a few hundred years, since any 'alternative after-behaviour' would immediately be stamped down by the 'authorities with guns'. And people will still, as before the disaster, be scared of weapons pointed at them. Unless they see masses willing to die for what they think is right. In my opinion, unless someone comes up with a ingenious method to elliminate all weapons quickly, then these weapons will get used on the majority after any disaster. And besides, people would be too disoriented and panicked to 'clearly think and resist' the guns pointed at them. You will get people like the pres. of America trying to convince you that 'we will get through this and be back to normal life' soon, which means continuation of fossil fuel transportation and development of more weapons and fuel-dependent machinery. But not all is lost, perhaps the disaster will be large enough to even rock the powerful current authorities' abilities to try and control what's left with weapons. And then it will still be up to the people (FoC) to decide who they want to listen to. So, best chance seems to be having early plans for how to 'persuade' people later. But then again, not many people seem convinced in the first place that a disaster is likely, and so very few plans (if any) are likely to be made before-hand.
rafal
Don't forget that the situation will be quite different when symptoms and the magnitude of the forthcoming disaster will become obvious. Total incompetence of leadership will become SO obvious that even children will understand it. At such a time, people will actually SEEK competent help, much like plane passengers in danger would seek a competent pilot to fly them to safety.
We live in an era of very fast information exchange. Truth is an extremely powerful thing. It can withstand untold criticism and ridicule - they only help to increase its CONTRAST. At the end - those who criticize and ridicule Truth lose all their authority, just because they have demonstrated that they cannot comprehend Truth. On the other hand, those who seek and explore the Truth about the Universe and the planet and achieve a sufficient degree of Understanding will be able to offer competent and practical advice at the time of trouble. My hope is that the choice (and contrast) for people will be obvious.
As for "guns" or other weapons pointed at people - they totally lose their effectiveness when death due to the global catastrophe seems inevitable anyway. To begin with - those who think of pointing their guns are in exactly the same danger...
When a plane is about to crash - passengers do not try to frighten other passengers with their weapons, do they? What for? On the contrary - pleople who face real danger together are highly likely to UNITE their efforts to save themselves. I think we can count on this interesting feature of Human Nature...
Tom
