https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Um7pMggPnug

Interesting site with a bizarre take on the world.

Many people here are hard science people though...

I'm more of a creative person with more fantasy like views of the universe so some of it was very interesting to me.

Happens when you experience paranormal phenomenon first hand and have seen UFO's. When science cannot currently explain something all your left with is your imagination.

No one believes me but it has drastically changed my world view since and I don't often talk about it.

Apoc, you might find this material interesting:
http://rense.com/Datapages/tompkinsdata.htm

Its too bad we can't stop oppressing and fighting each other...

The problem is a complex and interesting one, say we did have unlimited energy. All the frame work is already in place for that energy to be misused and potentially make the world a far worse place than it already is simply because people tend to not agree with one another over many complex subjects.

This is the main problem, not necessarily energy supply. We are so creative that we have trouble letting go of our own perspectives and this leads to conflict when different perspectives collide with one another. Energy is only a means to speeding things up that already exist. So energy alone will not solve the problem, and oppression won't work either or won't work for long to control it (without war) as it has in the past especially if unlimited energy is introduced into the scenario and more than one ruling system has access to it.

Once you introduce unlimited Energy into a scenario where oppression has been used to prevent wide spread disputes and wars, whom ever has the unlimited energy becomes capable of total oppression and control of other peoples perspectives (especially with current existing technologies). This would essentially enable the current already existing framework of the scenario to simply move forward much more quickly, but not necessarily guide it in a peaceful direction. With the current framework in place and existing technologies all unlimited energy would lead to is the formation of a single Totalitarian Government over time that would probably split and have internal conflicts.

Then once unlimited energy is here, and as technologies move forward and energy is no longer a constraint on the current technologies it will only be a matter of time before our technology and power combined with our naturally disputed nature would lead to partial or complete destruction of ourselves as a species. The problem isn't necessarily unlimited energy however but it seems to be a mixture of our disputed nature and current existing dangerous technologies that unlimited energy would allow us to use to possible (excuse the crudeness of the statement but) "blow ourselves up".

That's the problem... Its almost like Nuclear weapons and when they were introduced and used and they make the situation even more volatile. Not only do you have to worry about unlimited energy weaponry but you have to worry about all the other countries with nukes who will kill for such solutions.

To make things worse is that Fossil fuels are running out, and people won't take the plunge into renewable's yet because it means losing certain levels of power and control and huge financial losses to convert an entire planet into a renewable energy system. Then there is also the looming future of atmospheric pollution from everything, not just fossil fuels.

The only logical solution I see is to push for full implementation of clean renewable's and to bar the usage of anything that is harmful to the environment so we have enough time to colonize another planet somehow before this one becomes too unstable because we can't go on living here due to population and disputes. On top of that what we really need is a dedicated space program that will find more naturally habitable planets and devise methods of reaching them safely and populating them. Without accomplishing such things we are most likely going to wipe ourselves out, or be wiped out by that 1 in a million natural disaster that could destabilize the planet.

We have all our eggs in one basket right now and it has me concerned because the best ways to fix that exist, but they can also lead to our own destruction if improperly used or implemented.

There are no shortages for things to worry about, The thing is if free energy where more available to everyone, good and bad iI think there would be less bad because most peoples lives would get some what easier,  less stressful,  more time to enjoy. It would take away the leverage that the energy controllers have over the common people. When you have a balance you have more of the ability to keep the other side in check.

Here's a simple solution Apoc, "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you."  If you're the kind of person that would stick the muzzle of a loaded pistol in your mouth and squeeze the trigger, then we all have a problem, unless...  The hammer drops.

Here's where we've made a big mistake--we let psychopaths run around our world completely unchecked.  These psychopaths loath for power and control and eventually they get it, because we let them.  We "turn the other cheek" when we should not.  These psychopaths are simply defective, but we care so much about life, we let them live, we let them rule us and we pay for it dearly.  We cannot rehabilitate them.  Their minds are broken, their hearts flourish with demons.

Until we are able to go directly to the root of the problem and fix it, we must have an equalizer--some way to make the psychopath think twice before he or she destroys us all.

Anyway, once the real problem is fixed, everything else will work just fine.  You needn't worry about the ramifications of free energy or abundant everything.  Just be careful of putting the cart before the horse.

Quote

If you're the kind of person that would stick the muzzle of a loaded pistol in your mouth and squeeze the trigger, then we all have a problem, unless...  The hammer drops.

Not sure I understand what you mean here, there's a problem if someone tries to shoot themselves and they don't die but if the "hammer drops" meaning the gun goes off there is no problem? What were you trying to say here?

I completely agree with "do unto others as you would have them do unto you"

"putting the cart before the horse" is what I'm worried about because of the psychopaths that are in charge who will do just that.

Quote from Apoc4lypse on March 4th, 2018, 03:58 PM

Not sure I understand what you mean here, there's a problem if someone tries to shoot themselves and they don't die but if the "hammer drops" meaning the gun goes off there is no problem? What were you trying to say here?

What I'm saying is psychopaths don't play by a fixed set of rules.  They're willing to do things to themselves you or I wouldn't do to ourselves or others.  So the simple "golden" rule works, just not with a psychopath.  And I'm sorry, if a psychopath threatens to kill him or herself, I'm not going to get in their way.  Let the hammer fall.  On a larger scale, look at suicide bomber.  I'd have no problem letting all the suicide bombers in the world strap on some explosives, walk out into the middle of the desert somewhere and push the button.  It's when they walk in a crowded space full of people (both psychopaths and non-psychopaths) that's when we need something to even the score.  As long as we play by the twisted psychopaths ever changing rules, we lose.

Quote from Apoc4lypse on March 4th, 2018, 03:58 PM

I completely agree with "do unto others as you would have them do unto you"

"putting the cart before the horse" is what I'm worried about because of the psychopaths that are in charge who will do just that.

Again, we need some sort of equalizer.  If the fruitcakes have all the weapons and we have none, well, we're meat on the table.  That's a given.  See, we've done the hard work to make a lot of the weapons that exist now, but like naïve little children, we gave those weapons to the worst possible recipients, the psychopaths.  We need to pull our dingbat heads out of the ground and start thinking about what we're doing as a collective.  We need to properly identify who gets what and make sure we don't change our minds or get coerced into letting something we know is wrong to slide right past.  I feel for all those research scientists working for defense contractors that really are smart, work hard, apply their skills, only to feed the beast, not the average joe.  They need to stop and think, "Nothing good is going to come of this", and refuse to move forward.  They don't and every day the world has one more toy to hold us all hostage with.

https://jaysanalysis.com/2016/07/31/star-trek-beyond-distinctions-sjws-in-space/

Quote

In regard to the connection to RAND, Opsecnews states:

According to the TrekPlace website Harvey P. Lynn, Jr. (?-1987), a member of the prestigious RAND Corporation, provided Star Trek original series creator Gene Roddenberry with scientific and technical advice during preproduction of the series.

On the Rand Corporation’s website the question is asked whether a RAND researcher designed the initial bridge of the Enterprise. The answer given is, “A Rand researcher, Harvey Lynn, was consulted, but as a private citizen, not as part of a RAND project.”

However in an interview from 1965 Jeffrey Hunter, who played captain Christopher Pike in the Star Trek pilot “The Cage” and preceded William Shatner as first captain of the Enterprise stated “The things that intrigues me the most is that it is actually based on the Rand Corporation’s projection of things to come. Except for the fictional characters, it will be like getting a look into the future and some of the predictions will surely come true in our lifetime.”

Matt Watts and Apoc4lypse I agree with your perspectives. I have communicated with companies that claim their main slogans
"renewable green energy is our highest priority" and "we are 100% committed to break through clean energy technology".
They do not live up to their slogans. Many will not respond and turn the other cheek. They are self absorbed to their own projects
even if the innovations are mediocre or time worn. Not only that but progressives switch to luddites like turning off a light bulb.
I know business people who have wealth and income. They are self absorbed they mostly think they have the best ideas.
Unfortunately the ones I know are non technical so they turn to hearsay from some third person instead on an open minded
evaluation. They conclude before even looking it is probably not worth their time. Besides they have the best ideas and that is
all working for them. They shut out larger problems any answer will do. I still think that there are a few who will be open minded
before the horse leaves the barn but they are few and far between.