Replicators
|
|
Thread rating:  |
Claude Hopper - 03 Jul 2008 12:37 GMT Another more advanced race in the universe may have developed self replicating artificial life forms. What if they come here?
 Signature Claude Hopper ? 3 :) 7/8
Willie.Mookie@gmail.com - 04 Jul 2008 01:24 GMT On Jul 3, 7:37 am, Claude Hopper <boobooililili...@roadrunner.com> wrote:
> Another more advanced race in the universe may have developed self > replicating artificial life forms. What if they come here? > > -- > Claude Hopper ? 3 :) 7/8 Humans and other animals are self-replicating. Yet they find themselves limited to a range. Humans are unique, in that they use technology to extend their range. That is, they do not adapt to the environment, humans adapt the environment to their needs by using technology.
Humans originally sprang from the same thread of life from which low- land apes appeared. They are well adapted to tropical jungles. Yet, through the technology of fire and clothing and housing, humans have extended their range to the ends of the Earth.
It might be possible that if humans become space faring, they will have adapted the inhospitable environment of space to support them. With the development of interstellar transport - humans could spread across the cosmos.
One interesting thing about human rates of reproduction, they rise with rising living standards, until about $10,000 per person per year is reached, then reproduction rate fall - above $32,000 per person per year, reproductive rates fall below replacement levels.
Is this a general tendency of reproductive systems?
I think it is.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bathtub_curve
Any population of devices will have a rate of 'infant mortality' - where defects built into the device work themselves out and 'kill' the operation of the device. This will be high at first, and then fall off with time.
Any population of devices will have a rate of wear out failures - where defects accumulated over time will cause the device to fall inoperative. This will be small at first and rise exponentially with time.
Any population of devices will have a rate of random failures - this will be constant.
This imposes a life span on the device.
And determines how many resources are applied to repair, versus how many resources are applied to reproduction - and the rate at which the population will grow, and the resources needed for that growth to take place.
This is preciselly the same thing we see in human populations. We have infants that die - we have elderly die - we have people of all ages die randomly - in much the same way. We also see that if insufficient resources are available population growth rates are low, and can fall below replacement levels. We also see that there is an optimal rate of resource usage that maximizes population growth rate. Above or below that optimal rate, population growth rates can fall - sometimes below replacement levels.
Consider, that below $10,000per person per year, medical care and education are in short supply, so life becomes shorter and more brutish. Above $10,000 per person per year, something else is going on - living conditions are adequate and reproductive rates decline at folks engage in non-reproductive behavior with their greater wealth. Above $32,000 per person per year, reproductive behavior falls below replacement levels - and populations decline.
Any reproductive machine system - will likely follow the same sorts of rules. That's because the machines will have a limited life. During its useful life that machine will require the consumption of resources for their maintenance over time. Maintenance resources will compete with reproductive behavior. Any system sophisticated enough to reproduce itself will be sophisticated enough to make this decision - repair or replace?
This is true of any reproductive system... whether biological or machine.
Tapping into the resources of the solar system - and the star systems beyond - increases the availability of resources well beyond that available on Earth.
Consider that the crust of the Earth is mined to a depth of about 1/10 mile - even though vertical shafts and drill holes have gone far deeper. Generally speaking the ocean floor is not mined. Even so, the volume of material that may be accessible to humanity that's 1 mile deep and covers the entire surface of the Earth comprises 196 million cubic miles. This is equivalent to a SINGLE asteroid 720 miles in diameter. - about the size of Ceres.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asteroid_belt http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuiper_belt
There are over 100,000 small objects in the solar system with a total mass several thousand times larger mass, and since depths are limited by pressure and temperature - far greater depths are possible on objects with small gravities. So, the moon may be mined to a depth of 36 miles, Mars 9 miles, Mercury 9 miles, dwarf planets are mined all the way through - due to their low surface gravity. Again, thousands of times the material wealth is available to a space faring species than a planet bound species - even in their own solar system.
Trillions of star orbiting stations, in close orbit around a star, that use light pumped laser beams that convert a sizeable portion of a star's radiation to laser energy supports interstellar commerce by using laser light sails. Speeds up to 1/3 light speed have been shown to be possible. Mass flow rates sufficient to support large interplanetary populations are supportable between stars using this technology. Coordinating von-neuman machine populations with radio telescopes or laser communications, with an interstellar internet is also feasible.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beam-powered_propulsion
So, millions of times the materials available to planet bound populations are possible to star-faring self reproductive machine systems.
This means that it is likely that populations will be limited - because at very high levels of 'income' or 'wealth' - reproductive rates for a population of self reproductive machines fall below replacement levels - and any species, whether biological or machine will be 'rich' well above the level where reproductive rates fall below replacment levels.
Even systems that are engineered to maintain 'wealth' at a level that maximizes reproductive rates - are unstable in the long run. That's because either resources run out, or resources run up - since the relation between resources, reproduction and maintenance is not stable.
Long growth cycles fail due to resource shortages or resource run up - and we find populations limited to specific places and times depending on the history of the population and the arrangement of resources - and the ability to get at those resources.
Humanity for example - if unconstrained by resource shortages - can maintain 4% to 8% economic growth rates while population growth rates have fallen below 1% per year - and are declining with rising living standards. Assuming we successfully tap into solar energy and other solar system resources over the next 50 years to end our commodity shortages, we will see by the middle of the 22nd century, human numbers will peak - even with vastly increased life spans (due to random deaths) due to age control - and then begin a slow inevitable decline from about 9 billion - by about 0.1% per year.
Add into this mix a capability of expanding at 1/3 light speed - and we see a sphere of human influence expanding by 33 light years per century. This is like an explosion - and the number of humans are like the pressure of a gas in an expanding explosion - what happens - is that the density falls to zero with a finite radius - in about 300 years - which is only 1/3000 the diameter of the milky way - one of only 100s of billions of galaxies in the cosmos.
Increasing speeds beyond 1/3 light speed makes matters worse as far as population density. That's because time dilation SLOWS reproduction of populations in transit - and the volumes are much larger - with far large rnumbers of stars for a smaller number of total population to inhabit.
Increasing speeds beyond light speed - if such is possible - makes matters worse still wrt population density. That's because ftl travel opens up the possibility of time travel, and that opens up the possibility of entering parallel universes - this vastly increases the number of 'destinations' - vastly increasing individual wealth - slowing population reproduction - and against this declining population - more destinations mean lower density.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_travel http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Many_worlds
In the ideal case all of space and time is available to everyone - and not only 100 billion stars in each of 100 billion galaxies - but also all of time - and all parallel universes accessible from the past - are available to everyone. Assuming a perfect method to instantly transport to anywhere in this vast space - reduces density at any one spot - while also reducing reproductive rates - by increasing personal wealth (of machine or animal) slowing the urge to reproduce accentuating the urge to maintain.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermi_paradox
This is the answer to Fermi's famous query - Where are they? They are here, but at such low densities, the cosmos has absorbed them all. Small machines, or small animals - whether they be the size of puppies or dinosaurs - the age of field mice or the age of sequoias - are absorbed in a vast spacetime continuum of the cosmos facing the difficulties of resources, reproduction and maintenance.
Time travel and faster than light travel are synonomous. Large supermassive black holes at the center of each galaxy, may be capable of supporting a large population of faster than light travel - and time travel - vehicles.
http://www.geocities.com/theophysics/tipler-rotating-cylinders.pdf http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supermassive_black_holes
Colliding dozens of iron-56 isotope wedges at 1/3 light speed using laser light sails may produce engineered microscopic black holes and black hole dusts. These engineered black holes may operate together to tap the zero point energy to create additional engineered black hole dusts - creating a sort of self replicating machine system. Such dusts could implement time circuits, gravity drives and a number of other interesting technical systems. Such machine systems flying through supermassive black holes at each galaxy's center, has all of space time available to it. These machines, tapping the abundant zero point energy of the universe, will quickly fall below replacement levels as any amount of materials they seek become available.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero_point_energy
I believe that the human race could rise to nearly 9 billion people and then expand as described. We might organize our affairs to reclaim all humans everywhere - in a human recovery project - creating a heaven on Earth - and send out fleets of time travelling robots to recover every personality in history - and reproduce them with all others in their time line - similar to that described here ...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riverworld
Given the nature of exponential growth - this only DOUBLES the number of humans in each time line. That is, we grow from 9 billions to 18 billions. So, it does little to change the impact - and it does much to increase wealth and the number of destinations available to all individuals.
We see this in the natural world. Consider algal blooms. A species of algae is well suited to survive and reproduce in the ocean. Under the right conditions several reproductive growth cycles occur without interruption - and we have an algal bloom. But as soon as conditions are not right - the bloom disappates into the ocean.
Same thing here on a cosmic scale.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Algal_bloom
BradGuth - 04 Jul 2008 06:30 GMT Artificially extended range or scope is technically doable for accommodating our frail DNA.
What upper/lower limits are you suggesting possible?
- Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth
On Jul 3, 5:24 pm, Willie.Moo...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Jul 3, 7:37 am, Claude Hopper <boobooililili...@roadrunner.com> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 203 lines] > > read more » Willie.Mookie@gmail.com - 04 Jul 2008 12:55 GMT > Artificially extended range or scope is technically doable for > accommodating our frail DNA. That's why the golden age of interplanetary exploration for humans will await the development of space colony sized vehicles, capable of withstanding the radiation.
> What upper/lower limits are you suggesting possible? That depends on many details we do not know at present. Consider locusts, or field mice, or an ant colony, or an algae mat. Under typical conditions they grow into a stable sized aggregate of individuals - with their reproductive and maintenance activities in balance with their available resources. Yet, on occassion - under the right conditions, any of these creatures can come to dominate the landscape and spread far and wide - then there is the inevitable collapse - with a lot of widely spread individuals - getting by in widely spread colonies.
At the limit, with what we know about physics and technology, we'll reach a technological singularity in about 32 years - if our technical culture survives that long. Somewhere around that time - EVERYTHING that can be done, WILL be done - technologically.
If we manage our affairs rightly - we could have humans with their machines, spread throughout the larger cosmos - that encompasses all the time lines that are accessible by human technology with the first portal being constructed before 2035 and Earth denuded of nearly all humans by 2050. This will be the best case scenario. In this case, no more than 20 billion humans, with about 40 billion ETIs that we sweep up along the way - will be spread among 10,000 billion billion stars in this universe - with some exchange between other universes - before they all settle down in 'hot spots' throughout the cosmos.
Worst case scenario?
Two dozen Russian loose nukes are set off by terrorists throughout the Western World, China immediately pulls the plug on the US economy, and demands all raw materials suppliers supply their industrial infrastructure first until the emergency passes. The Western economies go into a free fall. Asian opinion is that the dominance of the West is over. Pakistan suffering a retaliatory strike from Israel (See below) uses this opportunity to attack India with nuclear weapons, and India retaliates. Meanwhile, North Korea uses its cache of nuclear weapons to decimate South Korea. China invades the pennensula to restore order. Militarized gangs in the USA and Europe - using Chinese firearms have defacto control of all major cities in the West. At the outbreak of terror attacks, Israel launched a series of pre-emptive strikes against all muslim centers, and covertly waged advanced biological warfare against its own muslim population with genetically engineered viruses. China covertly releases similar viruses over US and European cities, viruses that are far more deadly to Caucasian populations than Occidental.
Japan protests China's hi jacking of the world's commodity markets, and China invades Japan until the crisis passes. In response, America attacks China, and China retaliates in kind.
Of the 6.6 billion humans alive before the first attacks, 5.2 bilion have died by the following afternoon. A week later, another 1.0 billion will have died in the affected regions.
This will have been the worst week in human history.
By mid afternoon the week following the terror attacks - Australia, South Africa, Brazil and Chile are now the centers of human populations. South Africa with its coal to liquid technology, and Brazil with its Ethanol technology, will be the new energy centers of the world. Australia with its coal and iron will be expanding its capacity.
South Africa announces that it has a handful of nuclear weapons and imposes a global ban on further hostilities. The surviving 500 million humans will at best have been put back to 1950s level of technology and income - and it will be in decline as the biosphere absorbs the massive shock of nuclear warfare. As radiation levels rise in the Southern Hemisphere, and farm productivity falls, and birth defects rise - living standards gradually erode over the next 600 years - until post-technical human tribes roam the most hospitable regions of the Southern Hemisphere.
Highly modified post-technical humans will rise to the 19th century level of technology in the following 5,000 years - as the ecology recovers and adapts - and a variety of post-human technical species spread again but the easily accessible resources that our 19th century forebears found so abundantly on Earth - will have been long gone - and the technical know-how available to these post-human descendants - will be insufficient to make use of the resource remnants 20th and early 21st century humans left.
Along this path, the path toward technological singularity is broken - and humans are irradiated out of existence, while their post- technological off-spring, struggle along with draft animals and wood and rope - bows and arrows - and so forth.
Total number of post-human technological primates - will likely stabilize at 50 million - depending on details - among a handful of distinct species - non of them quite human at a level of 18th and 19th century humans - building at most an ancient Roman or Greek infrastructure - with rare flashes of 20th century details - technological fetishes some will call it - all on the back of slave labor.
In this world, there may exist some true wizards - who exercise the power of ancient lost technology - but mostly for the amusement of Kings, and to awe the faithful..
Willie.Mookie@gmail.com - 06 Jul 2008 19:57 GMT These two scenarios are not either/or - but are described to denote the range of possibilities open to us. We are near to both - paradoxically enough - it all depends on where we intend to go over the next 30 years. We are travelling near a cliff in the dark, and we will undergo massive change in very short time frames. That change can either be positive or negative again depending on our intent as a species.
BradGuth - 06 Jul 2008 21:43 GMT On Jul 6, 11:57 am, Willie.Moo...@gmail.com wrote:
> These two scenarios are not either/or - but are described to denote > the range of possibilities open to us. We are near to both - [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > can either be positive or negative again depending on our intent as a > species. I 100% agree, that we and others have to seriously piss and get off that pot before that nighttime cloaked cliff takes us all by surprise.
We clearly do not have the time nor the surplus in resources to fool around with the sorts of off-world agendas that can't deliver their goods in a timely and affordable manner.
Terrestrial energy of mostly proven renewable alternatives, including your PV-->H2 and your improved coal gasification-->synfuel, along with a good many failsafe thorium reactors is way the hell and gone past due, as well as our having an extensive and robust national energy grid that is absolutely essential. Instead, we are doing a real bang up job of pissing off Muslims as we inflate the cost of most everything under the sun. Go figure.
Silly us two crazy guys for caring about the future of humanity and that of salvaging our frail environment.
- Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth
Willie.Mookie@gmail.com - 10 Jul 2008 00:58 GMT > On Jul 6, 11:57 am, Willie.Moo...@gmail.com wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > > - Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth Raising the temperature of reactors decreases their cost. High temp nuclear reactors have been a non-starter for 50 years - despite this fact. This should be examined, along with a detailed examination of Three Mile Island accident at the precise time Jimmy Carter proposed doing something important to end our reliance on energy. The solutions were there - they were not implemented.
Check it out;
President Carter calls for a new energy conservation program that includes limiting oil imports, reducing oil use by utilities, fuel rationing for motorists and the study of other forms of fuel generated using high temperature nuclear reactors.
This was patented in 1977
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/4021298.html
Which would make liquid fuels for about $0.05 per gallon at that time.
then,
The China Syndrome is a 1979 thriller film which tells the story of a reporter and cameraman who discover safety coverups at a nuclear power plant. It stars Jane Fonda, Jack Lemmon, Michael Douglas, Scott Brady, James Hampton, Peter Donat, Richard Herd, and Wilford Brimley.
then,
A major accident at the Three Mile Island nuclear plant near Middletown, Pennsylvania. At 4:00 a.m. a series of human and mechanical failures nearly triggered a nuclear disaster. By 8:00 a.m., after cooling water was lost and temperatures soared above 5,000 degrees, the top portion of the reactor's 150-ton core collapsed and melted. Contaminated coolant water escaped into a nearby building, releasing radioactive gasses, leading as many as 200,000 people to flee the region.
then,
The jury rendered its verdict of US $505,000 in damages and US $10,000,000 in punitive damages.
Not reported generally;
On appeal, the judgment was reduced to US $5,000. In 1984,
It was all a put up job - to block this from happening, to preserve the value of oil in the ground for the oil companies;
"Our children will enjoy in their homes electrical energy too cheap to meter," he declared. ... "It is not too much to expect that our children will know of great periodic regional famines in the world only as matters of history, will travel effortlessly over the seas and under them and through the air with a minimum of danger and at great speeds, and will experience a lifespan far longer than ours, as disease yields and man comes to understand what causes him to age."
Lewis L. Strauss, Director AEC Speech to the National Association of Science Writers, New York City, September 16th, 1954 [New York Times, September 17, 1954]
BradGuth - 06 Jul 2008 21:23 GMT On Jul 4, 4:55 am, Willie.Moo...@gmail.com wrote:
> > Artificially extended range or scope is technically doable for > > accommodating our frail DNA. > > That's why the golden age of interplanetary exploration for humans > will await the development of space colony sized vehicles, capable of > withstanding the radiation. I agree, that a robust spacecraft/shuttle with an extra surround of 10+ meters worth of water, beer or whatever else might come in handy (including LH2 or just good old h2o2) should do the trick.
> > What upper/lower limits are you suggesting possible? > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > collapse - with a lot of widely spread individuals - getting by in > widely spread colonies. Stick with the immortal cockroach. If they survive than perhaps eventually our frail DNA can become as robust and as rad-hard as that of the cockroach.
> At the limit, with what we know about physics and technology, we'll > reach a technological singularity in about 32 years - if our technical > culture survives that long. Somewhere around that time - EVERYTHING > that can be done, WILL be done - technologically. That's a whole lot quicker than I would have thought possible, especially the way so much of our best talents and limited resources has been going as fast as it can into the nearest toilet.
> If we manage our affairs rightly - we could have humans with their > machines, spread throughout the larger cosmos - that encompasses all [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Worst case scenario? We'll have to survive * WWIII * before those faith-based cosmic wars of the universes.
> Two dozen Russian loose nukes are set off by terrorists throughout the > Western World, China immediately pulls the plug on the US economy, and [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > viruses over US and European cities, viruses that are far more deadly > to Caucasian populations than Occidental. There's always ship loads of our commercial DDT that'll make all oceans into dead zones, and those pesky little amounts of VX that'll nicely finish off most of whomever still kicking.
> Japan protests China's hi jacking of the world's commodity markets, > and China invades Japan until the crisis passes. In response, [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > the world. Australia with its coal and iron will be expanding its > capacity. I think Antarctica is going to become invaluable real estate, especially with most of its snow and ice gone by the end of this century, although a perfectly ice free Greenland might also be another good enough second choice unless the craters caused by those nuclear bombings are too frequent and too deep and irradiated to do much of anything with.
> South Africa announces that it has a handful of nuclear weapons and > imposes a global ban on further hostilities. The surviving 500 [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > power of ancient lost technology - but mostly for the amusement of > Kings, and to awe the faithful.. Our perpetual faith-based shock and awe will always be No.1
Too bad those way smarter than us ETs are just smart enough to keeping their safe distance until there's no fight left in those few and far between humans.
- Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth
Willie.Mookie@gmail.com - 07 Jul 2008 04:04 GMT The technological singularity is 32 years away. We can be derailed, we can be slowed. Even so, at present we're on track - despite apparent difficulties.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technological_singularity
This is the nature of a Dirac function. Exponentially increasing exponential growth transitions an infinite scale in a finite period of time, and any very large scale - in a comparable period of time.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirac_function
Willie.Mookie@gmail.com - 07 Jul 2008 04:12 GMT At a recent conference in Saudi Arabia, the Saudis said they worried that $140 per barrel would cause those in the West to develop technologies that make oil obsolete well before they run out of oil. The major oil companies worried about the same thing, which is why it was not generally reported in the news. As far as the public is concerned, there are no solutions to our energy problem, except pay increasingly high prices. Which is ludicrous.
I have spoken with the White House, and Congress, and the Pentagon, since 2004 - and I have said the same thing. A strong COMMITMENT from the leadership of this nation to a workable alternative energy program that delivers synfuel at $25 per barrel - would IMMEDIATELY be discounted by speculators, and producers alike, and quickly bring oil in under $25 per barrel. Just the announcement of a program to deliver $25 per barrel oil, and a national commitment to make enough synfuel to export it at this price, would immediately reduce the cost of oil.
So, why hasn't the leadership done this?
SDI helped defeat the Soviets, even though SDI wasn't built. Same here. The day the President commits this nation to low cost energy, is the day energy prices come down.
So, why hasn't the leadership done this?
Well, I think it has to do with debt to equity. Just as a minor decrease in equity caused by the collapse of the subprime loan market killed Bear Stearns - so too, will a relatively large decrease in oil prices cause the collapse of presently strong - oil companies - because with their escalating cash and revenue - oil companies have increased their debt loads, and if the price of oil in the ground collapses, their equity situation would quickly lead them bankruptcy despite strong cash flows and the ability to service debts.
BradGuth - 09 Jul 2008 06:01 GMT On Jul 6, 8:12 pm, Willie.Moo...@gmail.com wrote:
> At a recent conference in Saudi Arabia, the Saudis said they worried > that $140 per barrel would cause those in the West to develop [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > collapses, their equity situation would quickly lead them bankruptcy > despite strong cash flows and the ability to service debts. If those in charge are still corrupt and dishonest, given public and corporate powers and benefits as they are allowed to exclude evidence and only telling us whatever they alone chose to provide, it seems your valid arguments or rant on behalf of cleaner and cheaper energy is rather pointless, especially pointless if you have no intentions of ever revising history in order to reflect the whole truth(s) of what got us into this horrific global mess that only the truly rich and powerful seem to directly as well as indirectly (aka trickle-up) benefit from.
- Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth
Willie.Mookie@gmail.com - 14 Jul 2008 20:48 GMT > On Jul 6, 8:12 pm, Willie.Moo...@gmail.com wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 46 lines] > > - Show quoted text - While it makes you feel better about yourself to say everyone more powerful than you is corrupt and dishonest - that doesn't make it so. See? Most people are fair and honest - and they are in a position of power because they're better than you. The moment you accept that the moment the excesses of your madness will disappear - and at that moment, you will actually have the capacity to do something useful in the world.
Claude Hopper - 09 Jul 2008 13:05 GMT > At a recent conference in Saudi Arabia, the Saudis said they worried > that $140 per barrel would cause those in the West to develop [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > collapses, their equity situation would quickly lead them bankruptcy > despite strong cash flows and the ability to service debts. We have no leaders. Those people in Washington are just lining their pockets with oil money bribes.
BradGuth - 09 Jul 2008 21:09 GMT On Jul 9, 5:06 am, Claude Hopper <boobooililili...@roadrunner.com> wrote:
> Willie.Moo...@gmail.com wrote: > > At a recent conference in Saudi Arabia, the Saudis said they worried [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > We have no leaders. Those people in Washington are just lining their > pockets with oil money bribes. That’s true enough, in that far too many folks in WDC and their vast army of public funded associate brown-nosed minions and clowns are either in on the take or instrumental in promoting and/or insuring the absolute maxim rate of inflation. Either way, they are all in some degree or manner the bad guys and gals that we need to get rid of before we get to pay the ultimate price of having to survive their WWIII.
Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth
Willie.Mookie@gmail.com - 10 Jul 2008 00:35 GMT > On Jul 9, 5:06 am, Claude Hopper <boobooililili...@roadrunner.com> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 49 lines] > > - Show quoted text - As always you over-rate the strength of lies and the liars who tell them since it explains to you your total lack of success in life. This is a psychological problem you have, and bears very little on the fact that lies are not supported by reality, and the liars weaken themselves by the lies they tell. Entire societies that buy into a consensual reality that is different than mundane reality are at risk of common mode failure. The USA is at risk for this reason by the very people who have been given the task to safeguard the USA. They are blinded and have caused the USA to make unwise choices over the past 50 years. Sometimes this has been exploited by special interests to feather their nest - but that is not the main problem. The main problem is that there is no procedure for secreate agencies to vet and review their decisions on an ongoing basis - or challenge the status quo with valid information that runs counter to historically accepted errors.
BradGuth - 10 Jul 2008 01:59 GMT On Jul 9, 4:35 pm, Willie.Moo...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Jul 9, 5:06 am, Claude Hopper <boobooililili...@roadrunner.com> > > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 52 lines] > As always you over-rate the strength of lies and the liars who tell > them since it explains to you your total lack of success in life. Listen here you Zionist/Nazi and puppet warlord lover, in spite of smartass but oddly do-nothing constructive folks like yourself, it seems my life is extremely full of success, and to think I'd got this way without my hardly telling those sorts of nasty lies upon lies, of which apparently you see nothing wrong with doing on a regular basis, as well as otherwise covering the butts of others that lie is just good brown-nosed business as per usual.
> This is a psychological problem you have, and bears very little on the > fact that lies are not supported by reality, and the liars weaken [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > are blinded and have caused the USA to make unwise choices over the > past 50 years. Zionist/Nazis were never the least bit blinded, as they knew exactly what their global domination task and goal was all about. They just needed a better puppet warlord and the likes of their brown-nosed minions and clowns to help pull everything off.
> Sometimes this has been exploited by special interests > to feather their nest - but that is not the main problem. The main > problem is that there is no procedure for secreate agencies to vet and > review their decisions on an ongoing basis - or challenge the status > quo with valid information that runs counter to historically accepted > errors. The well proven methods (cloak and dagger if need be) of our DARPA that got us into the vast bulk of this energy and other resource starvation mess, could have just as easily accomplished ten fold as much technological good as they otherwise might have done bad for us. Instead, we seemed to have gotten all but ten fold as much bad as good out of our Zionist/Nazi DARPA and of their vast brown-nosed cult like intellectual/physics/science and mainstream media cartels to boot.
Without full accountability for the good as well as the bad, plus our having to accept those continual lies upon lies that can only beget other lies, is what we're now somewhat stuck with generations of this insider crapolla with more of the same to come. It's also what's keeping your new and improved PV-->H2 and other synfuel technologies from seeing the light of day, so to speak.
- Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth
Willie.Mookie@gmail.com - 10 Jul 2008 19:29 GMT > On Jul 9, 4:35 pm, Willie.Moo...@gmail.com wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 56 lines] > > Listen here you Zionist/Nazi and puppet warlord lover, I am none of these things - to the extent this statement means anything.
> in spite of > smartass but oddly do-nothing constructive folks like yourself, I have nothing to do with your life - so, this statement makes no sense whatever.
> it > seems my life is extremely full of success, Really? How many really beautiful woman have fallen in love with you? How many children have you raised? How many degrees have you earned? How many people have you truly helped? How many people care deeply about you? How many friends do you have? How many languages do you speak? What things do you know you are really good at? How many musical instruments do you play? How many parties have you been the life of?
> and to think I'd got this > way without my hardly telling those sorts of nasty lies upon lies, of > which apparently you see nothing wrong with doing on a regular basis, This is a common psychological technique. You say nasty things about me - in order to feel better about yourself. This says more about you than me friend.
> as well as otherwise covering the butts of others that lie is just > good brown-nosed business as per usual. I'm doing nothing of the kind. Obviously, secret agencies are charged with maintaining the safety and security of their sponsoring State. They use any means necessary to achieve their goals. While some have exploited this to become wealthy - this is manifestly NOT the reason for the existence of such secret agencies. Plainly if we are to make rational decisions we need to think clearly about things. The problem with secret agencies is the common mode failure they have in not being able to clearly vet new information that impacts deep seated epistimologies - especially in an area where info war is directed at epistimology. This will ultimately lead to failure of the system - unless something is done to open it up to some corrective feedback.
A famous example of this, though the details of their thinking are obscure to history, are the Easter Islanders who continued to build large stone heads in the face of famine and privation for some weird reason.
> > This is a psychological problem you have, and bears very little on the > > fact that lies are not supported by reality, and the liars weaken [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Zionist/Nazis were never the least bit blinded, Yes they were - that's why they failed.
> as they knew exactly > what their global domination task and goal was all about. They only thought they knew - in the end, they were wrong.
> They just > needed a better puppet warlord and the likes of their brown-nosed > minions and clowns to help pull everything off. The United States got most of the military assets of the British Empire as part of the lend lease act during world war two. The USA adopted a policy to maintain large disparities of income between the USA and other nations during the nuclear age observing that wealthy nations were never attacked by poorer nations and nuclear weapons programs were expensive. The idea was to avoid a nuclear pearl harbor.
The USA maintained this disparity by dominating the retail and finance functions, leaving manufacturing to its allies, and resource functions to its friends. Its enemies the USA isolated. To maintain low commodity prices the USA instituted means to regulate the politics of resource rich countries installing and/or supporting leaders that allowed the USA and its allies to obtain resources at steeply discounted prices.
The USA also institutionalized its intelligence operations to support these ends, and also exploited some of the rules of empire - though not all - as practiced by the British Empire previous to World War One. Basically, by keeping regions tied up in local conflicts they do not participate on the global stage, leaving global affairs to the USA solely. Those that seek to have a voice in global affairs are ridiculed and ultimately, isolated from the USA trading regime and otherwise undermined until they collapse economically. This happened with the Soviet Union. China avoided this fate by working with the USA - however there is evidence China is exercising its supportive role to undermine the USA in a variety of ways that the USA cannot credit without questioning assumptions it has long been proven unable to question. USA economic collapse may be very near indeed.
Now some of this sort of sounds lke some of your rantings, but my comments are based on sound knowledge of history and present world affairs. Yours is based on fear mongering and your rants do more to prop up the present USA hegemony than question it - since what you say is so obviously the result of a deranged mind.
> > Sometimes this has been exploited by special interests > > to feather their nest - but that is not the main problem. The main [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > The well proven methods (cloak and dagger if need be) of our DARPA DARPA has little to do with say NSA or CIA - except perhaps when a technical gizmo seems useful to the latter. Of course it does form the leading edge, some like to say bleeding edge, of technology that allows the DOD to maintain a large disparity of capability - which classifies large segments of scientific knowledge - at the applications level.
> that got us into the vast bulk of this energy and other resource > starvation mess, No, the energy company themselves have worked tirelessly to limit our choices and they have managed to efficiently do that. Energy generation, primary energy production, and since Enron, even energy project financing, cannot take place in the West without the approval of major energy companies. This high degree of regulation means that innovation is slow, and risk taking outside standard project models is nil. Meanwhile, every lever is pulled to keep truly competitive technologies off the market - like high temperature nuclear reactors - which can indeed make energy too cheap to meter - and such reactors driving fundamental chemical process - which can also make hydrogen at low cost from water - and that hydrogen is useful in a variety of ways.
> could have just as easily accomplished ten fold as > much technological good as they otherwise might have done bad for us. The major energy companies are not the sources of innovation - they kill innovation. Are they evil? No! They are doing what large companies ALWAYS do. Look at the history of IBM and Microsoft. Did IBM create the PC revolution? No. They followed kicking and screaming after. They outsourced their operating system, and left it to their vendors to develop this market - and eventually outgrow them. Why? They lacked imagination. This from the innovative company that urged all its employees to THINK! The energy companies are not so innovative, why would you think they'd be more creative in supporting fundamental shifts in energy production? We shouldn't!
Look at the history of disk drives. There are sound fundamental reasons that large platters on disk drives are better suited for highly capable disk drives than smaller platters. This analysis - which is quite accurate - was used to stall any move by disk drive manufacturers to go to smaller form factors. 12 inch to 8 inch 8 inch to 4 inch 4 inch to 2 inch and so on... Smaller form factors have other NON TECHNICAL reasons for their market success. Yet in EVERY case - it was a NEW STARTUP company that championed the move. This among highly innovative companies that owed their existence to beating out their larger form factor rival!! Think about it. Main frame disk drive manufacturers were not the ones that built disk drives for minis. Mini disk drive manufacturers were not the one that built disk drives fo rmicros. Micro disk drive manufacturers were not the ones tha tbuild disk drives for desk tops. Not the ones that built disk drives for lap tops. If these companies can't sh.t can obsolete hardware - why the hell do you think its some vast conspiracy that a major energy company doesn't shitcan tens of billions of dollars of generators? in a highly regulated slowly innovating marketplace? We shouldn't.
This is why we're screwed. No vast conspiracy need be imagined. We need a vast conspiracy to do the things necessary to avoid ultimate collapse and we need it NOW. This includes, taking control of the commodity markets, particularly energy and control their rise in price - using high technology to gather resources off-world. Terrestrial solar is the first step- there are others. This also includes taking control of manufacturing with tele-robotic labor. Keep the factories in the USA, and use US workers to manage tele-robotic laborers, and developing human level robotics on a rapid course - and using access to materials and goods made in the USA to maintain USA's position in the world going forward.
> Instead, we seemed to have gotten all but ten fold as much bad as good > out of our Zionist/Nazi DARPA and of their vast brown-nosed cult like > intellectual/physics/science and mainstream media cartels to boot. Info war became very serious after the 'failure' of Vietnam. Rather than address the issues Vietnam raised wrt USA policies, leadership preferred to look at the strategic failures - and view Vietnam as a failure to control American opinion. So, efforts were launched to control the epistimology of the global culture through the global information environment - favorable to the USA. The degree this undermined the ability of the global culture to develop naturally and positively going foward - was not critically examined - or usefully addressed. Infowar is a strategic win, but as all consensual realities that are different than mundane reality, its a deeply hurtful loss of features in the information environment that brought long term stability growth and progress.
> Without full accountability for the good as well as the bad, plus our > having to accept those continual lies upon lies that can only beget > other lies, is what we're now somewhat stuck with generations of this There is one thing that consenual reality cannot affect - that is mundane reality. The real world moves on oblivious to our beliefs about it. In the end those who tell lies and believe in lies are the ones who are harmed by the lies. There are honest lies we tell ourselves and one another - then there are dishonest lies. In any event, if we open ourselves to self correcting processes that allow mundane reality to inform us - we are safer than if we do not. At present we are operating with brand-new tools in a totally unknown environment - it would be naive to think we will not fail in some sense - it would be naive not to think there is some chance of ultimate failure and collapse of the present system of nation states.
> insider crapolla with more of the same to come. It's also what's > keeping your new and improved PV-->H2 and other synfuel technologies > from seeing the light of day, so to speak. I don't know, progress is always difficult - and while the current environment is less capable than say 50 years ago due to infowar that's taking place today - I would say they're only factors - the ultimate determinant of success is the quality of the people in the fray. Blaming things I cannot control for my presumed failure is not a way to succeed. Its not a useful set of thoughts for someone who wants to succeed. More useful is to recognize the factors involved - such as negative attention from majjor oil companies is a possiblity - but recognize that it is indeed a factor not a cosmic force that is unchangeable - as you like to believe.
> - Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - BradGuth - 11 Jul 2008 05:02 GMT It seems you are still defending the old guard and their Zionist/Nazi mainstream status quo, plus cloaking on behalf of all that associated brown-nosism that got us into this mess in the first place, except nowadays operating under pretend-Atheism and using different names that makes it seem as though all them original bad guys and their second/third generations have been entirely removed from our system.
You also keep isolating those big energy cartels from their political and faith-based partners in crimes against humanity, and otherwise as having been nailing our frail environment to the wall. In spite of what you are telling us, there are a few good guys and a serious bunch of bad guys. Unfortunately it's still doing a damn fine job of keeping those few of us capable of making a positive/constructive difference out of their mainstream picture, by preventing the Mooks’ and others from achieving sufficient headway. They see to it that public matching or greater funding goes to their fossil and conventional nuclear forms of spendy energy, and otherwise see that others are only getting more than their fair share of mainstream banishment and as much naysay flack as they can muster.
Even if going all-out green/renewable and using as much thorium as possible, plus somehow out of all this hocus-pocus energy crusade we manage to maximize our national grid capacity and improve upon its efficiency, we're now looking at a bare minimum of 10+ years before any of that cheaper, renewable, cleaner and safer energy gets to the commercial and private end-users, and that’s based upon reverse inflation and those faith-based morons in charge of our private parts and most of our hard-earned loot not starting their WWIII.
What are the odds of our seeing reverse inflation plus no chance of WWIII? (1000:1 against?)
- Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth
On Jul 10, 11:29 am, Willie.Moo...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Jul 9, 4:35 pm, Willie.Moo...@gmail.com wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 198 lines] > > read more » Willie.Mookie@gmail.com - 17 Jul 2008 12:46 GMT What things seem like to you Brad is of no interest to me or anyone since it has nothing whatsoever to do with reality. It has been clear for sometime now that you have been responding to the fears and voices in your head, which have only tangential relations to mundane reality.
BradGuth - 18 Jul 2008 02:32 GMT On Jul 17, 4:46 am, Willie.Moo...@gmail.com wrote:
> What things seem like to you Brad is of no interest to me or anyone > since it has nothing whatsoever to do with reality. It has been clear > for sometime now that you have been responding to the fears and voices > in your head, which have only tangential relations to mundane reality. And this analogy coming from our resident bipolar and usually out of context wizard of Oz, William Mook.
- Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth
Willie.Mookie@gmail.com - 18 Jul 2008 14:41 GMT > On Jul 17, 4:46 am, Willie.Moo...@gmail.com wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > - Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth I made a statement of fact - not an analogy. haha.. You really ought to get a dictionary an use it son. An analogy compares something to something else - an analogue - I didn't compare anything to anything in my earlier statement! haha - I merely made a clear statement - What you think doesn't interest me or anyone because what you think is not soundly based in reality. I offered the further opinion that it is clear that you respond not to reality but to fears and voiced in your head, which only have sketchy relations to reality. - no analogies were offered AT ALL!
haha..
BradGuth - 20 Jul 2008 19:07 GMT Willie.Moo...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Jul 17, 4:46 am, Willie.Moo...@gmail.com wrote: > > [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > > haha.. That's true enough, because unlike yourself, I'm sort of stuck in a perpetual rut of my having to use the regular laws of physics, and otherwise having to deductively interpret from the best available science that's peer replicated. Perhaps instead I should be using the same DARPA approved drugs for proper mind control that you're taking.
- Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth
BradGuth - 11 Jul 2008 13:36 GMT On Jul 10, 11:29 am, Willie.Moo...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Jul 9, 4:35 pm, Willie.Moo...@gmail.com wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 198 lines] > > read more » It seems our local, state and federal government doesn’t really care about private, corporate or faith-based crime and corruption (much less of their own kind running amuck), as long as it doesn’t look embarrassing to government or otherwise impede the flow of our hard earned loot from going into their pockets and offshore bank accounts of those special interest groups in charge of our private parts.
Apparently you can lie, cheat and steal as much as you like, as well as perpetuate and/or allow illegal (aka unregulated/untaxed) drugs, flood our markets with bogus products and services, skew most everything that’s of banking or market investments and otherwise perpetrate as much collateral damage and carnage of the innocent as long as it’s faith-based, w/o remorse and see that government gets a piece of the action or job security with full retirement and spendy medical benefits in return.
More than half of the employed and retired population is of local, state and federal government, as civil service or specifically contracted on behalf of any one of those. It’s a no-win situation that can not be sustained, at least not honestly.
We can not seem to even provide for our own energy without going to war or causing some kind of other global grief and inflation.
Advancements in serious energy science and our national infrastructure has been put on hold for the past few decades, and I do not believe we have yet another do-nothing decade to spare. Spending our hard earned loot and devoting our best talents and limited resources to off-world exploration/investments that can’t possibly return or otherwise benefit us by even ten cents on the dollar is a luxury that few of us can afford.
Instead, we have to focus on what’s obtainable in the short run, and worth our investment(s), that is unless the status quo of social/ political faith-based war for profit is all that matters. At some point we have to become self sufficient and ideally better than most at doing things, because the reserves and surplus of most everything that matters has been outsourced or having gone south, so to speak.
Of folks going to/from Mars is simply not within the public short-term or long-term interest. Sorry about that.
- Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth
Willie.Mookie@gmail.com - 17 Jul 2008 12:44 GMT Brad, you take the corruption of our government and business as an article of faith - and do not question it. In your view everyone is dishonest and self-serving. The reality is that people are generally honest and selfless. Society couldn't work otherwise. Those folks charged with maintaining the long term security and stability of the USA recognize this, and where it is a weakness in our international relations, seek to use any means necessary to restore balance and end this weakness. This leads to some embarassments over time - which people like you - people who need to see others as inferior to feel better about themselves - use to spin huge lies - to salve their ego. Such lies do not change reality however. The reality is we need to look clearly at the common mode failures we are creating for ourselves and do something different. I don't have the answer, but I can see the problems clearly. As far as you are concerned, I have told you several times;
1) don't post in my threads; 2) don't post at all 3) lay off the internet for a year 4) crawl out of your momma's basement, get a job, and live life
Then after a year, see how you feel about wasting time on the internet. If you feel better about yourself WITHOUT thinking negatively of others - THEN - you might have something useful to say. Otherwise, you're just a freak.
BradGuth - 18 Jul 2008 02:30 GMT On Jul 17, 4:44 am, Willie.Moo...@gmail.com wrote:
> Brad, you take the corruption of our government and business as an > article of faith - and do not question it. In your view everyone is > dishonest and self-serving. That's rather odd, because I've never once said or having implied any such notions. Why are you telling and otherwise perpetrating this obvious lie?
> The reality is that people are generally > honest and selfless. Society couldn't work otherwise. Those folks [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > negatively of others - THEN - you might have something useful to say. > Otherwise, you're just a freak. Silly words coming from such a confirmed and thus certified liar.
- Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth
Willie.Mookie@gmail.com - 18 Jul 2008 14:46 GMT > On Jul 17, 4:44 am, Willie.Moo...@gmail.com wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > That's rather odd, because I've never once said or having implied any > such notions. haha... yes you do - all the time! It forms the subtext of EVERYTHING you say.
> Why are you telling and otherwise perpetrating this > obvious lie? The obvious lie is the one you're telling yourself right now. lol.
> > The reality is that people are generally > > honest and selfless. Society couldn't work otherwise. Those folks [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > > - Show quoted text - See? By calling me a liar you feel better about yourself don't you? Of course you do! That's why you do it! haha.
Like i said, if you'd get away from all this stuff, and actually do something with your hands, plant a garden and weed it - I always find that relaxing, especially when I do it with my baby's momma in our backyard in Berne - with the baby playing nearby - then eating in - a nice home made dinner - you both fix - just being there without saying too much, or thinking too much - there's a joy in that a beauty - that you are missing out in your life with all these poses and lies and bullshit you spew.
Get away from it all Brad - restore some sanity - then see if you ever want to come back. .
BradGuth - 19 Jul 2008 04:19 GMT On Jul 18, 6:46 am, Willie.Moo...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Jul 17, 4:44 am, Willie.Moo...@gmail.com wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 58 lines] > want to come back. > . What part of your being systematically bipolar and a faith-based biased liar do you not understand or appreciate?
- Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth
Willie.Mookie@gmail.com - 19 Jul 2008 20:19 GMT > On Jul 18, 6:46 am, Willie.Moo...@gmail.com wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 67 lines] > > - Show quoted text - I understand what you say Brad. The point is, nothing you said of me here has any basis in reality. None of its true. What does that make you? That's right! The very thing you accuse me of being.
Brad, this is a common psychological technique of mentally ill folks. They project what they hate most about themselves onto others - often without any real basis -and then call them names, and as a result feel much much better about themselves.
That's why I am telling you to quit the internet for a year or so - quit calling people names - quit even thinking about the bullshit you always think about. That way, the negative pressure builds up in you and you'll deal with it - once and for all.
Rather than constantly seeing boogey men under every rock and behind every tree - that threaten your life and you can do nothing about - except call them the most vile names that reflect the fears of what you are - to feel momentarily beetter - you'll have to deal with the real source of your unease - and be a better person as a result.
Good luck with all that!
BradGuth - 20 Jul 2008 19:00 GMT On Jul 19, 12:19 pm, Willie.Moo...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Jul 18, 6:46 am, Willie.Moo...@gmail.com wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 71 lines] > here has any basis in reality. None of its true. What does that make > you? That's right! The very thing you accuse me of being. But unlike your next to Godly perfect Republican suck-up self, I have perfectly valid excuses for most of my misunderstandings and mistakes.
> Brad, this is a common psychological technique of mentally ill folks. > They project what they hate most about themselves onto others - often > without any real basis -and then call them names, and as a result feel > much much better about themselves. But I don't hate them good guys, not even the good Jews, Catholics, Muslims or most any other good hearted faith-based kinds of folks that'll at least police their own kind.
> That's why I am telling you to quit the internet for a year or so - > quit calling people names - quit even thinking about the bullshit you [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Good luck with all that! Same goes double extra special for you, along with your dark side membership in that Zionist/Nazi New World Order of promoting your intentions on behalf of stroking that upper most 0.0001% wealthiest and most powerful class of this badly overpopulated and rather badly polluted Earth, that which you and others of your all-knowing kind keep insisting upon being in charge of, but only as long as the rest of us village idiots get to pay for everything that's on your to-do wish list.
- Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth
Willie.Mookie@gmail.com - 10 Jul 2008 00:30 GMT On Jul 9, 8:06 am, Claude Hopper <boobooililili...@roadrunner.com> wrote:
> Willie.Moo...@gmail.com wrote: > > At a recent conference in Saudi Arabia, the Saudis said they worried [quoted text clipped - 36 lines] > > - Show quoted text - That is true to some extent, but its not as simple as that. It is true that no one in the alternative energy business has created a technology that can compete even in theory with the revenues generated by pumping oil. I have. So, that gives legislators a rationale to bail from a sinking ship.
The situation is not unique in history. The history of Britain is replete with self serving leaders in times of crisis. We muddled through and progressed. There is no reason to suspect that we won't succeed here. Consider the time of King James and the Barons that forced him to limit his powers - and sign the Magna Carta. There are 9.5 million millionaires in the world today. Collectively they control 38.2 trillion dollars - most of that liquid. This is the basis of all national wealth. They are recognizing that their collective business interests supercede national interests, and I believe within the next decade or so they will organize to limit and restrict the power of nation-states to wage war, collect information, and dispense disinformation - and create an environment that is beneficial to them and their business interests, and in this way, create a safer saner world than possible with power elites at placed at odds with one another merely because they are on opposite sides of a national border. This transformation will be accelerated by resolving the crisis with respect to commodity price increases and reduced availability of key commodities. In general this will be resolved by tapping into resources off-world. Terrestrial solar is the first step. There are others. Space solar, and asteroidal capture are immediately doable after the first step. Asteroid mining with telerobotically operated space factories - and the same GPS guided technology - implemented at a far lower cost - will allow deorbiting finished products directly to consumers from space. Solving the energy problem - which has been delayed for 35 years - will finally release the world from energy supply constraints, and profits flowing toward the investors in the new infrastructure will be reinvested in creating additional off world assets that supply an expanding global economy of unprecedented proportions - exceeding $1 quadrillion per year - in current dollars - in a generation.
BradGuth - 04 Jul 2008 06:26 GMT On Jul 3, 4:37 am, Claude Hopper <boobooililili...@roadrunner.com> wrote:
> Another more advanced race in the universe may have developed self > replicating artificial life forms. What if they come here? > > -- > Claude Hopper ? 3 :) 7/8 They will be very surprised we're still alive and kicking. Either that or they'll artificially laugh their CPUs to death, as they replicate those replacements for the human species that's simply too snookered, dumbfounded and faith-based bigoted for their own good.
However, Earth is not exactly an energy rich planet, at least not compared to Venus.
- Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth
|
|
|