My own thoughts are that consciousness is fractal, and is and emergent property of any system that processes information (be that visual, chemical and so on). The more information a system processes, the more conscious it is of its environment. Thus planetary exchange of information gives rise to the global mind.
I wrote a blog article about this; "Life Levelled Up: The Internet and the Awakening of the Planetary Superorganism" LInks are shafted here but you'll find it if you google the title.
The 1000 years to heal...hmm...sounds like what most speak of when they speak of doing whatever to achieve the goal intended...the theory of limitation,this is what I perceive as this mans outlook...However, imagination and the concept of change is limitless.
first of all carbon emissions rise when temperature rise and temperature rise comes from the sun or the galaxy , it is a normal cycle and we can't do shit about it
second of all , our ancestors had larger brains yes because they where living in a much more advanced civilization than we do today just take a look at structures like the pyramids that can not be replicated today
there is no evolution here , we are in a cycle and we are hitting the bottom only to rise
The comings and goings of the sun and the energies that it exposes our worlds to are well documented, and even with the various "cycles" of temperatures in past ages, the current trend of temperature and greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere are horribly anomalous, having a far greater effect than the sun's current input
If you are interested in the matter, read up on it and be honest in your search for truth. This isn't a field of opinion, this is science
There are many entities on this planet that have significantly larger brains than us but an inferior level of intellect, self-awareness, creative process, and what have you.
Also, the pyramids of are easily reproduced by today's standards, and that has never been the issue in regards to them. The "mystery" about them was how the people of that time managed to make them. They were not even close to as advanced as us, and to claim such shows a stark degree of ignorance.
"We're so self-important. So arrogant. Everybody's going to save something now. Save the trees, save the bees, save the whales, save the snails. And the supreme arrogance? Save the planet! Are these people kidding? Save the planet? We don't even know how to take care of ourselves; we haven't learned how to care for one another. We're gonna save the fuckin' planet? . . . And, by the way, there's nothing wrong with the planet in the first place. The planet is fine. The people are fucked! - Carlin.
The Venus Project is the best solution that I have come across. Its not perfect but it is many many times better than what we have now. I encourage everyone interested in these types of videos to research it. We need to rapidly change our circumstances...
Not to sound like a pessimist but there's no such thing as "saving the planet". Its all about saving humanity from itself. We're still mammals after all and by co-existing with other species we will save our humanity, but we're still at risk of our own existence unless we spread beyond our planet so as to avoid total extinction in one killing blow.
The planet on the other hand will do well when we're gone, no matter what humanity thinks it can do to the planet.
@AegisK I think a lot of environmentalists would do better to stress that point. So many people don't care about the planet in any great sweeping sense. They DO however care about themselves and their offspring.
Unless they're one of those people who insist that god is coming soon and ending the world so why bother trying to preserve our planet for future generations. *sighs*
How can the Earth reproduce (animals/plants) when Human beings take these resources, exploit them, and accelerate plant animal desertification and extinction? Human beings with our current population are destroying these natural resources and animal habitats. When and if Human's colonize other planets it will not only substantially decrease the number of people on the Earth but will also allow the Earth to regenerate. Unless you have a different perspective.
@rm02px We don't have to destroy our resources, nor do I think it is "human nature", because most people I know are against pollution and over farming.
So the question becomes, if most people don't like it then why do we do it?
I would argue that it is because of the way our societies are structured. Our economies are based on purpetual growth, and profits. Is it profitable to pollute the environment? Yes, but it is not sustainable.
We desperately need a new, sustainable, social system.
@IHighLikePlane I would want to agree with you, except that I think people are against the idea of pollution, but not enough to give up the gains. They see themselves as only taking a drop out of a gallon tank, not realizing there are millions who are doing the same. No one will say they are for pollution, but they will still drive miles to work over taking public transit. They refuse to grow crops on their land, they still buy plastics. Yes people are against pollution, but not convenience.
@bluefootedpig If there were convenient alternatives that were in accordance with protecting our environment I think people would do them. Even if they currently wouldn't that isn't because of some innate human predisposition. It is because they have been brought up to think of themselves before the welfare of the planet and the human species as a whole. In a society aligned with nature and science these values would change.
Solutions need to come from the ground up, no more patchwork.
@IHighLikePlane I can get behind that, and I am part of that movement actually. My yard (this is my first year) is being terraformed to produce vegetables instead of grass. This will cut down not only on gas to grocery store, gas to transport the goods, improves soil (as i make my own compost), uses less bags, and meanwhile, I am not supporting a store that runs open air coolers with 1000 lights on.
So yeah, I'm all for changing the way we do stuff, but we need more to join.
@bluefootedpig True dat, we've been living like this for too long to give it up so fast. The younger generation has to pick it up where the older generation left it. also I'm included in this younger gen.
@thelastquincy559 Best we can do, in my opinion, is start to live by example, and flaunt it. Grow your vegetable garden in your front lawn so everyone can see. Bring lunches to work, take public transit, and talk to people about it. Even more so if you can spread the word.
What I would really like to see happen, is like have on boxes printed how much carbon was produced to make said product. Or how many total miles were traveled for all the ingredients. They print calories, why not pollution?
We evolved big brains without a need for it? I think O'Hanlon is mistaking us not yet knowing why we evolved it with evolving it without needing it. And AFAIK the most plausible theory right now is that we evolved them because we needed them to function in a social context.
@JobLeonard Our ancestors may well have had bigger brains in order to get us past a threshold in terms of language and learning capacity that started us on the path of specialisation and cooperation we are on today. These days we are able to pass on a great deal of accumulated knowledge to the next generation without the need for such larger brains.
I believe the human species is getting more intelligent by generation.
felpaluche 2 months ago
My own thoughts are that consciousness is fractal, and is and emergent property of any system that processes information (be that visual, chemical and so on). The more information a system processes, the more conscious it is of its environment. Thus planetary exchange of information gives rise to the global mind.
ZernanToledo 10 months ago
@ZernanToledo
I wrote a blog article about this; "Life Levelled Up: The Internet and the Awakening of the Planetary Superorganism" LInks are shafted here but you'll find it if you google the title.
ZernanToledo 10 months ago
@dialoguequent have you checked your info?
we're ok.
roidroid 11 months ago
The 1000 years to heal...hmm...sounds like what most speak of when they speak of doing whatever to achieve the goal intended...the theory of limitation,this is what I perceive as this mans outlook...However, imagination and the concept of change is limitless.
inspirediam 11 months ago
i stoped at time mark 7:00
first of all carbon emissions rise when temperature rise and temperature rise comes from the sun or the galaxy , it is a normal cycle and we can't do shit about it
second of all , our ancestors had larger brains yes because they where living in a much more advanced civilization than we do today just take a look at structures like the pyramids that can not be replicated today
there is no evolution here , we are in a cycle and we are hitting the bottom only to rise
bikos236590 11 months ago
@bikos236590 wrong
roidroid 11 months ago
@bikos236590
Wrong on all accounts
The comings and goings of the sun and the energies that it exposes our worlds to are well documented, and even with the various "cycles" of temperatures in past ages, the current trend of temperature and greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere are horribly anomalous, having a far greater effect than the sun's current input
If you are interested in the matter, read up on it and be honest in your search for truth. This isn't a field of opinion, this is science
ogith 10 months ago
@bikos236590
There are many entities on this planet that have significantly larger brains than us but an inferior level of intellect, self-awareness, creative process, and what have you.
Also, the pyramids of are easily reproduced by today's standards, and that has never been the issue in regards to them. The "mystery" about them was how the people of that time managed to make them. They were not even close to as advanced as us, and to claim such shows a stark degree of ignorance.
ogith 10 months ago
"We're so self-important. So arrogant. Everybody's going to save something now. Save the trees, save the bees, save the whales, save the snails. And the supreme arrogance? Save the planet! Are these people kidding? Save the planet? We don't even know how to take care of ourselves; we haven't learned how to care for one another. We're gonna save the fuckin' planet? . . . And, by the way, there's nothing wrong with the planet in the first place. The planet is fine. The people are fucked! - Carlin.
realgunslinger 11 months ago
@realgunslinger Amen.
LazyOtaku 11 months ago
The Venus Project is the best solution that I have come across. Its not perfect but it is many many times better than what we have now. I encourage everyone interested in these types of videos to research it. We need to rapidly change our circumstances...
tslipsitin 11 months ago
these talks needs more Jaque Fresco
Trickndel 11 months ago 5
Want a solution? Visit the Venus Project dot com
QuantumGh0st 11 months ago 5
I wonder if there's a reason behind that BLUE background in the beginning...
thesoundcanal 11 months ago
RSA, invite Jaque Fresco to talk already!
Iamthenoi 11 months ago 35
@Iamthenoi Seriously though. I wonder if RSA could handle his intellect.
LazyOtaku 11 months ago
o0o
pisanghangus 11 months ago
Not to sound like a pessimist but there's no such thing as "saving the planet". Its all about saving humanity from itself. We're still mammals after all and by co-existing with other species we will save our humanity, but we're still at risk of our own existence unless we spread beyond our planet so as to avoid total extinction in one killing blow.
The planet on the other hand will do well when we're gone, no matter what humanity thinks it can do to the planet.
AegisK 11 months ago 29
@AegisK I think a lot of environmentalists would do better to stress that point. So many people don't care about the planet in any great sweeping sense. They DO however care about themselves and their offspring.
Unless they're one of those people who insist that god is coming soon and ending the world so why bother trying to preserve our planet for future generations. *sighs*
Otokogoroshi 11 months ago
@AegisK
so that's where George Carlin's soul went! Less of course you're just saying a bit of his almost verbatim without credit.
vbearsays 10 months ago
offft... check out the mutton chops
YurtleTheTurtle 11 months ago
audio was terrible. wait, was he talking about gaia an spaceships? then who the heck cares what he said.
valupak 11 months ago
right, then.
ProveItBro 11 months ago
cant really hear what they are saying :\
NietNiels 11 months ago
"reproduction for gaia as a planet will come when we do colonize some other earthly body" - rubbish
triniazn 11 months ago
@triniazn LOLOLOL, have not even seen the video and find that as pwnage.
maosef 11 months ago
@triniazn
How can the Earth reproduce (animals/plants) when Human beings take these resources, exploit them, and accelerate plant animal desertification and extinction? Human beings with our current population are destroying these natural resources and animal habitats. When and if Human's colonize other planets it will not only substantially decrease the number of people on the Earth but will also allow the Earth to regenerate. Unless you have a different perspective.
rm02px 11 months ago
@rm02px We don't have to destroy our resources, nor do I think it is "human nature", because most people I know are against pollution and over farming.
So the question becomes, if most people don't like it then why do we do it?
I would argue that it is because of the way our societies are structured. Our economies are based on purpetual growth, and profits. Is it profitable to pollute the environment? Yes, but it is not sustainable.
We desperately need a new, sustainable, social system.
IHighLikePlane 11 months ago
@IHighLikePlane I would want to agree with you, except that I think people are against the idea of pollution, but not enough to give up the gains. They see themselves as only taking a drop out of a gallon tank, not realizing there are millions who are doing the same. No one will say they are for pollution, but they will still drive miles to work over taking public transit. They refuse to grow crops on their land, they still buy plastics. Yes people are against pollution, but not convenience.
bluefootedpig 11 months ago
@bluefootedpig If there were convenient alternatives that were in accordance with protecting our environment I think people would do them. Even if they currently wouldn't that isn't because of some innate human predisposition. It is because they have been brought up to think of themselves before the welfare of the planet and the human species as a whole. In a society aligned with nature and science these values would change.
Solutions need to come from the ground up, no more patchwork.
IHighLikePlane 11 months ago
@IHighLikePlane I can get behind that, and I am part of that movement actually. My yard (this is my first year) is being terraformed to produce vegetables instead of grass. This will cut down not only on gas to grocery store, gas to transport the goods, improves soil (as i make my own compost), uses less bags, and meanwhile, I am not supporting a store that runs open air coolers with 1000 lights on.
So yeah, I'm all for changing the way we do stuff, but we need more to join.
bluefootedpig 11 months ago
@bluefootedpig True dat, we've been living like this for too long to give it up so fast. The younger generation has to pick it up where the older generation left it. also I'm included in this younger gen.
thelastquincy559 11 months ago
@thelastquincy559 Best we can do, in my opinion, is start to live by example, and flaunt it. Grow your vegetable garden in your front lawn so everyone can see. Bring lunches to work, take public transit, and talk to people about it. Even more so if you can spread the word.
What I would really like to see happen, is like have on boxes printed how much carbon was produced to make said product. Or how many total miles were traveled for all the ingredients. They print calories, why not pollution?
bluefootedpig 11 months ago
@rm02px /watch?v=4Z9WVZddH9w
boumar19721972 11 months ago
We evolved big brains without a need for it? I think O'Hanlon is mistaking us not yet knowing why we evolved it with evolving it without needing it. And AFAIK the most plausible theory right now is that we evolved them because we needed them to function in a social context.
JobLeonard 11 months ago
@JobLeonard Our ancestors may well have had bigger brains in order to get us past a threshold in terms of language and learning capacity that started us on the path of specialisation and cooperation we are on today. These days we are able to pass on a great deal of accumulated knowledge to the next generation without the need for such larger brains.
83N170 11 months ago
jup
Ramsez 11 months ago
So yeah
OblivianarensStudio 11 months ago
@OblivianarensStudio yeah...
zassounotsukushi 11 months ago
@zassounotsukushi ...yeah...
rhighse 11 months ago
@rhighse right...
donLassito 11 months ago
@rhighse yeah...?
tibbeer 11 months ago
@tibbeer well yeah..
Schindlabua 11 months ago
@Schindlabua ... you sure ... ?
greenhell666 11 months ago