I think this is the beginnings of an economy based on perpetual growth and fossil fuel energy running headlong into geological energy constraints. Basically I see an undulatory downward path for the rest of my life. From here out, I think any rallies in our economic condition are going to be met with spiking commodity prices that knock us right back down.
Joined: Feb 03, 2005 Posts: 134 Location: Austin, Texas
Posted: Wed Apr 13, 2005 10:23 pm Post subject:
Actually, the offical "party-line" version of the events surrounding 9/11 (you know...15 guys freshly out of flying school armed with box cutters under the evil-but-brilliant leadership of a guy in a cave) is in and of itself a conspiracy theory (with very little hard evidence to support it). This outlandish story would be laughable were it not given creedance by the U.S. government, sustained by its corporate media, and fully supported without question by the vast majority of its citizens who look to their "leaders" to determine what Americans should know, how they should feel, what range of debate is acceptable, and which questions, lingering doubts and conflicting evidence should be dismissed outright, lest an individual be labeled "a conspiracy theorist," "unpatriotic" or simply "crazy."
Airline Pilot, Since when has Occam's razor been applied to political science? It's a scientific concept. Tell a historian you believe Occam's razor should be applied to their area of study and see the reaction you get.
Joined: Jan 16, 2005 Posts: 321 Location: Delft, Netherlands
Posted: Thu Apr 14, 2005 2:01 am Post subject:
Ludi wrote:
Nano wrote:
However, I would be more in favour of another utopian vision: a low-energy, pacifist society protected by a very harsh, well-armed (high-energy) military. Perhaps something like the old caste system of ancient India. Maybe something like that will work again in the future?
What do you mean by "work?" This kind of system just makes everyone a slave to the military.
To be clear: With the decline of oil, you'll agree we're certainly heading for a return of slavery sooner or later, so yes, it does. However, in the Indian system the ruling military itself was subordinate to the highest caste: the priest caste. This caste kept the military in check and thus prevented/limited atrocities among the servile merchant and farmer castes. There are similareties with the european fuedal systems of the middle-ages of course.
I think it was quite a good system as far as pre-industrialised societies go. History certainly supports it, the Indian empire being one of the longest running of all empires. If you don't like it, Ludi, what do you suggest instead?
Joined: Jan 16, 2005 Posts: 321 Location: Delft, Netherlands
Posted: Thu Apr 14, 2005 3:08 am Post subject:
Doly wrote:
Nano wrote:
With the decline of oil, you'll agree we're certainly heading for a return of slavery sooner or later
Nope, I don't agree. The end of cheap oil certainly doesn't mean the end of all energy sources except human muscle.
Rest assured in time it will. Industrialisation and cheap oil liberated the slaves. Depletion and the end of cheap oil will eventually shackle them again. For good this time!
It won't officially be called slavery of course. It will be called terminal indebtedness, or something. People will work to pay off loans and mortgages they can never repay, or they'll work and live on land that doesn't belong to them. That sort of thing. Just wait and see. I give it 20-50 years before it will again be commonplace among the working class, just like in the middle ages. After that, the term 'freedom' will have become meaningless for all but a few rich, well-armed landowners. I pity myself and my children and I will try to get them set-up on the good side of the bars, but it won't be easy!
Rest assured in time it will. Industrialisation and cheap oil liberated the slaves. Depletion and the end of cheap oil will eventually shackle them again. For good this time!
I agree completely. People have been using more and more energy every year for millenia in order to improve their lives. More free time, easier labor, you name it. We've been heading in this direction since the first man or woman found that they could get a reliable food source for themselves and their children if they take some seeds and plant them themselves. It's all going to go backwards. There have been plenty of backwards steps in this progression over the centuries, caused by war, plagues, what have you, but this time will be different.
Pre-industrial societies were more warlike than post-industrial societies. War will become more and more common and tragic. The collapse is going to be unimaginably horrible.
Airline Pilot, understanding Occam's Razor requires basic logic and common sense. These are something conspiracy theorists lack, either by birth or by choice.
I have worked with government employees off and on for many years. The idea that so many US government employees would be in on a plot to murder thousands of Americans is so incredibly preposterous that it would be laughable, if not for the fact that some nuts actually believe it.
Joined: Jan 16, 2005 Posts: 321 Location: Delft, Netherlands
Posted: Thu Apr 14, 2005 7:52 am Post subject:
PhilBiker wrote:
I have worked with government employees off and on for many years. The idea that so many US government employees would be in on a plot to murder thousands of Americans is so incredibly preposterous that it would be laughable, if not for the fact that some nuts actually believe it.
It only takes one or two top officials to formulate policy in such a way that it appears wise and bona fide to the lower ranks, but is in reality a preparation for unspeakable atrocities in the future. Let's say I decide to put more policemen on the streets 'to protect the public', or train the military personnel to 'capture terrorists from their houses at night'. What I'm actually doing is preparing those personnel for war on the civilian population, only I'm packaging it in a fluffy, agreeable way so that all is in place for the moment I enact martial law and let them loose in earnest.
I don't necessarily subscribe to that vision, but I can see how it could be done without a 'great conspiracy' to be in place.
Airline Pilot, The most whacked out, convoluted, highly implausible, theory, is the official explanation of 911. True believers in the status quo, with their tin foil caps of officialdom, ALWAYS get sucked in with this nonsense.
Joined: Apr 05, 2005 Posts: 2583 Location: South of Atlanta
Posted: Thu Apr 14, 2005 10:25 am Post subject:
All of us in this industry knew that this was possible. The intelligence community knew it too. The failure was in the ability to connect the dots for a badly decimated covert infrastructure. Nothing whacked out about it at all really. If we in the cockpits had gotten ONE warning in the weeks/months prior things would have been vastly different in the skies that morning. They had this intel (about using aircraft as weapons) and failed to let the very folks who might be able to do something about it know. We are still failing miserably with the flight deck duty officer program. Sorry but can't go into detail about that one.
Airline Pilot, I don't think anyone holds the airline's responsible for 911 Opinion is mixed about the ease with which people who had never flown or trained in large airplanes could have pulled this off. This is a very fair source of suspicion. Even if this issue was clarified successfully, there are several other areas of suspicion to resolve. Wouldn't you agree?
Joined: Apr 05, 2005 Posts: 2583 Location: South of Atlanta
Posted: Thu Apr 14, 2005 10:56 am Post subject:
I have read the thoeries and persoanlly I've come up with the realization that I'm not surprised this wasn't tried sooner. Yes there are some areas of suspicion and I will never say something isn't possible. In my realm of experience though I just can't get my arms around the fact this was all contrived. Just becuase I have an opinion doesn't make it right. At this point, I don't think it was anything other than a very succesful terrorist attack, well thought out, and with consequences they knew would result from it.
I'm actually quite surprised we haven't seen a nuke yet.
That's entirely fair, A Pilot. I actually have a hard time with entertaining the notion that it's completely contrived too, (and I'm a nut!)
What leads me to believe that it could have been designed, is just that. If I have trouble thinking it's contrived, most Americans with any degree of education, schooled firmly in the idea that "conspiracies can't happen" would find it damned near impossible to entertain that idea.
Taken a step further, the entire situation easily boils down to two questions: Could it be reliably assessed beforehand, that the educated class would be completely averse to the idea of premeditation and conspiracy?
I would say yes--I think the understanding of group psychology by people within intelligence agencies and other agencies with access to sophisticated computerized modelling systems is very advanced, and could reliably predict that the idea of conspiracy would be dispicable to the class that shapes public opinion.
My second question is--If my conclusions about the first question are correct, wouldn't this provide a very safe arena of operations for conspirators?
Joined: Apr 05, 2005 Posts: 2583 Location: South of Atlanta
Posted: Thu Apr 14, 2005 2:43 pm Post subject:
I agree totally. It's important to consider all sides of an argument and come to your own conclusions based on the merits of the facts. Its actually pretty hard for a lot of folks to do. Especially when someone who is diametrically opposed to thier way of thinking has something to add to any particular topic.
It's important to consider all sides of an argument and come to your own conclusions based on the merits of the facts. Its actually pretty hard for a lot of folks to do. Especially when someone who is diametrically opposed to thier way of thinking has something to add to any particular topic.
Right...... Definitely butt heads with human nature and your own personality type on that.
But what happens after you've considered all sides of an argument and come to your own conclusions based on the merits of the facts? Then you should take action based on those conclusions, right?
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
News
Discussions
Resources
Members
Forum FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
