AllDeaf.com
Mobile - Perks - Advertise - Spy - Who Quoted Me  
Go Back   AllDeaf.com > Deaf Community > Current Events
LIKE AllDeaf on Facebook FOLLOW AllDeaf on Twitter
Reply
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Unread 02-02-2005, 09:44 AM   #1 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Nusentinsaino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 462
Send a message via AIM to Nusentinsaino Send a message via MSN to Nusentinsaino Send a message via Yahoo to Nusentinsaino
2050 is probably the end of the world.

At the rate of consumption we are using today in America, The world will expire by the year 2050, That might be just an exggareration, however it makes a point.

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines02/0707-02.htm
Nusentinsaino is offline   Reply With Quote
Alt Today
All Deaf

Beitrag Sponsored Links

__________________
This advertising will not be shown in this way to registered members.
Register your free account today and become a member on AllDeaf.com
   
Unread 02-02-2005, 09:56 AM   #2 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Crazymanw00t's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: San Mateo, CA
Posts: 818
I am not surprised.
Crazymanw00t is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 02-02-2005, 12:50 PM   #3 (permalink)
Registered User
 
CoolieFroggie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,349
I don't think so.. Techinques will be more improving to make all of planet stay strong..
__________________
"Greetings, Kermit the Frog here
And today I'd like to tell you a little bit
About the color green
Do you know what's green?
Well I am for one thing
You see frogs are green, and I'm a frog
And that means I'm green, you see"

CoolieFroggie is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 02-02-2005, 01:08 PM   #4 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Crazymanw00t's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: San Mateo, CA
Posts: 818
Quote:
Originally Posted by CoolieFroggie
I don't think so.. Techinques will be more improving to make all of planet stay strong..
Not really. Technologies really can't make up for all damaged Mother Natures.
Crazymanw00t is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 02-02-2005, 01:16 PM   #5 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: High desert in Calif
Posts: 4,208
Ants, cockroaches and sharks will live on.
jazzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 02-02-2005, 02:06 PM   #6 (permalink)
Expelled
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 11,649
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crazymanw00t
Not really. Technologies really can't make up for all damaged Mother Natures.
That's what you think.
Banjo is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 02-02-2005, 02:18 PM   #7 (permalink)
Banned
 
ravensteve1961's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Here
Posts: 3,940
Naw Wont happen. If youre talking about that giant metor strikes the earth by then we should have a defense system in place.
ravensteve1961 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 02-02-2005, 03:13 PM   #8 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Nusentinsaino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 462
Send a message via AIM to Nusentinsaino Send a message via MSN to Nusentinsaino Send a message via Yahoo to Nusentinsaino
Quote:
Originally Posted by ravensteve1961
Naw Wont happen. If youre talking about that giant metor strikes the earth by then we should have a defense system in place.
Lol use common sense. If we shoot a missle at an metor, It will still destroy the world. Think about it, Shooting a missle blows up the metor right? Then that means there will be thousands of little pieces of metors hitting earth.
Nusentinsaino is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 02-02-2005, 03:18 PM   #9 (permalink)
Expelled
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 11,649
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nusentinsaino
Lol use common sense. If we shoot a missle at an metor, It will still destroy the world. Think about it, Shooting a missle blows up the metor right? Then that means there will be thousands of little pieces of metors hitting earth.
Better to have it split into many pieces rather than having one HUGE meteor hitting the Earth. The bigger the meteor, the bigger the impact will be.
Banjo is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 02-02-2005, 04:01 PM   #10 (permalink)
Banned
 
ravensteve1961's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Here
Posts: 3,940
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banjo
Better to have it split into many pieces rather than having one HUGE meteor hitting the Earth. The bigger the meteor, the bigger the impact will be.
I rather have it in pieces then in one huge chunk.
ravensteve1961 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 02-02-2005, 04:36 PM   #11 (permalink)
Banned
 
The*Empress's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: on Plantation.
Posts: 6,932
what if Muslims or Russians get access to America's Social Security and computer system... and shut down everything... and they entered
our country and WAR!!!!
The*Empress is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 02-02-2005, 05:18 PM   #12 (permalink)
Expelled
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 11,649
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miss*Pinocchio
what if Muslims or Russians get access to America's Social Security and computer system... and shut down everything... and they entered
our country and WAR!!!!
There are probably some Muslims working in the government, and for decades that I'll say.
Banjo is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 02-02-2005, 07:48 PM   #13 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Crazymanw00t's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: San Mateo, CA
Posts: 818
Simple for you all.

You can talk but you can't make it happen because we don't have $ for researchs. We spent on Wars, Powers, Prides, and Greeds. By time and our all resources will ran out then we will finally realized that we should spent on research for new technologies. It's sad.

Mentors into pieces will kill entry of Earth same as one mentors. It depends on the sizes. For example if the mentors were about 25 miles wide. It brokes into few less than 1 miles wide piece of mentors. It will lands on the ground, it cause earthquake and maybe more than 8.0. It will cause massive fire and massive CO2. It will prevent us breathing the air. Also if a small mentor crashed on the water and it will cause worse than Tusamui Asia's crisis. Any more than 5 miles of mentors are deadly checkmate for us on Earth.
Crazymanw00t is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 02-03-2005, 07:02 AM   #14 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Nusentinsaino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 462
Send a message via AIM to Nusentinsaino Send a message via MSN to Nusentinsaino Send a message via Yahoo to Nusentinsaino
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crazymanw00t
Simple for you all.

You can talk but you can't make it happen because we don't have $ for researchs. We spent on Wars, Powers, Prides, and Greeds. By time and our all resources will ran out then we will finally realized that we should spent on research for new technologies. It's sad.

Mentors into pieces will kill entry of Earth same as one mentors. It depends on the sizes. For example if the mentors were about 25 miles wide. It brokes into few less than 1 miles wide piece of mentors. It will lands on the ground, it cause earthquake and maybe more than 8.0. It will cause massive fire and massive CO2. It will prevent us breathing the air. Also if a small mentor crashed on the water and it will cause worse than Tusamui Asia's crisis. Any more than 5 miles of mentors are deadly checkmate for us on Earth.
^^What he said
Nusentinsaino is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 02-03-2005, 07:53 AM   #15 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Dennis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Death Star HQ
Posts: 1,858
Send a message via ICQ to Dennis
To be fair, the world may end at any time, but it would take a LOT to kill us all off and for he world as we know it to end.

Hollywood is obsessed with those dramatic "end of the world" flicks. They make us all want to believe that the ecosystem or Mother Nature or the solar system or the Reds or the Muslims are so set against us Americans or lovers of freedom that it's all going to come crashing down if someone sneezes the wrong way.

We get this feeling from THE MEDIA -- scientists who tell us that the world will end tomorrow get better media coverage than those who tell us that the earth will continue to act as it always has acted. Those who believe every word the media feeds them are really gullible and go around spreading panic and distrust because it makes them feel smart and important.

Therefore, DOOOOOOOOMSDAY stuff isn't what's going to kill us -- it's those people who spread the "fact" that "doomsday" is happening is what's going to kill us.
Dennis is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 02-03-2005, 08:36 AM   #16 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Codger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 817
Talking Exponential technology

O.K. folks, hold onto your seats and put on your thinking caps. Those of you who are subject to brain overload trying to read the menue at Sonic may want to skip this read. I am going to attempt to explain to you why the world is not going to end, at least by our hand, in the next fifty years. Ready?

the future: it's widely misunderstood. Our forebears expected the future to be pretty much like their present, which had been pretty much like their past. Although exponential trends did exist a thousand years ago, they were at that very early stage where an exponential trend is so flat that it looks like no trend at all. So their lack of expectations was largely fulfilled. Today, in accordance with the common wisdom, everyone expects continuous technological progress and the social repercussions that follow. But the future will be far more surprising than most observers realize: few have truly internalized the implications of the fact that the rate of change itself is accelerating.

The Intuitive Linear View versus the Historical Exponential View
Most long range forecasts of technical feasibility in future time periods dramatically underestimate the power of future technology because they are based on what I call the "intuitive linear" view of technological progress rather than the "historical exponential view." To express this another way, it is not the case that we will experience a hundred years of progress in the twenty-first century; rather we will witness on the order of twenty thousand years of progress (at today's rate of progress, that is).

When people think of a future period, they intuitively assume that the current rate of progress will continue for future periods. However, careful consideration of the pace of technology shows that the rate of progress is not constant, but it is human nature to adapt to the changing pace, so the intuitive view is that the pace will continue at the current rate. Even for those of us who have been around long enough to experience how the pace increases over time, our unexamined intuition nonetheless provides the impression that progress changes at the rate that we have experienced recently. From the mathematician's perspective, a primary reason for this is that an exponential curve approximates a straight line when viewed for a brief duration. So even though the rate of progress in the very recent past (e.g., this past year) is far greater than it was ten years ago (let alone a hundred or a thousand years ago), our memories are nonetheless dominated by our very recent experience. It is typical, therefore, that even sophisticated commentators, when considering the future, extrapolate the current pace of change over the next 10 years or 100 years to determine their expectations. This is why I call this way of looking at the future the "intuitive linear" view.

But a serious assessment of the history of technology shows that technological change is exponential. In exponential growth, we find that a key measurement such as computational power is multiplied by a constant factor for each unit of time (e.g., doubling every year) rather than just being added to incrementally. Exponential growth is a feature of any evolutionary process, of which technology is a primary example. One can examine the data

in different ways, on different time scales, and for a wide variety of technologies ranging from electronic to biological, and the acceleration of progress and growth applies. Indeed, we find not just simple exponential growth, but "double" exponential growth, meaning that the rate of exponential growth is itself growing exponentially. These observations do not rely merely on an assumption of the continuation of Moore's law (i.e., the exponential shrinking of transistor sizes on an integrated circuit), but is based on a rich model of diverse technological processes. What it clearly shows is that technology, particularly the pace of technological change, advances (at least) exponentially, not linearly, and has been doing so since the advent of technology, indeed since the advent of evolution on Earth.

I emphasize this point because it is the most important failure that would-be prognosticators make in considering future trends. Most technology forecasts ignore altogether this "historical exponential view" of technological progress. That is why people tend to overestimate what can be achieved in the short term (because we tend to leave out necessary details), but underestimate what can be achieved in the long term (because the exponential growth is ignored).

The first technological steps-sharp edges, fire, the wheel--took tens of thousands of years. For people living in this era, there was little noticeable technological change in even a thousand years. By 1000 A.D., progress was much faster and a paradigm shift required only a century or two. In the nineteenth century, we saw more technological change than in the nine centuries preceding it. Then in the first twenty years of the twentieth century, we saw more advancement than in all of the nineteenth century. Now, paradigm shifts occur in only a few years time. The World Wide Web did not exist in anything like its present form just a few years ago; it didn't exist at all a decade ago.





The paradigm shift rate (i.e., the overall rate of technical progress) is currently doubling (approximately) every decade; that is, paradigm shift times are halving every decade (and the rate of acceleration is itself growing exponentially). So, the technological progress in the twenty-first century will be equivalent to what would require (in the linear view) on the order of 200 centuries. In contrast, the twentieth century saw only about 25 years of progress (again at today's rate of progress) since we have been speeding up to current rates. So the twenty-first century will see almost a thousand times greater technological change than its predecessor.




The Singularity Is Near
To appreciate the nature and significance of the coming "singularity," it is important to ponder the nature of exponential growth. Toward this end, I am fond of telling the tale of the inventor of chess and his patron, the emperor of China. In response to the emperor's offer of a reward for his new beloved game, the inventor asked for a single grain of rice on the first square, two on the second square, four on the third, and so on. The Emperor quickly granted this seemingly benign and humble request. One version of the story has the emperor going bankrupt as the 63 doublings ultimately totaled 18 million trillion grains of rice. At ten grains of rice per square inch, this requires rice fields covering twice the surface area of the Earth, oceans included. Another version of the story has the inventor losing his head.

It should be pointed out that as the emperor and the inventor went through the first half of the chess board, things were fairly uneventful. The inventor was given spoonfuls of rice, then bowls of rice, then barrels. By the end of the first half of the chess board, the inventor had accumulated one large field's worth (4 billion grains), and the emperor did start to take notice. It was as they progressed through the second half of the chessboard that the situation quickly deteriorated. Incidentally, with regard to the doublings of computation, that's about where we stand now--there have been slightly more than 32 doublings of performance since the first programmable computers were invented during World War II.

This is the nature of exponential growth. Although technology grows in the exponential domain, we humans live in a linear world. So technological trends are not noticed as small levels of technological power are doubled. Then seemingly out of nowhere, a technology explodes into view. For example, when the Internet went from 20,000 to 80,000 nodes over a two year period during the 1980s, this progress remained hidden from the general public. A decade later, when it went from 20 million to 80 million nodes in the same amount of time, the impact was rather conspicuous.

As exponential growth continues to accelerate into the first half of the twenty-first century, it will appear to explode into infinity, at least from the limited and linear perspective of contemporary humans. The progress will ultimately become so fast that it will rupture our ability to follow it. It will literally get out of our control. The illusion that we have our hand "on the plug," will be dispelled.


Anyone want a second helping?
Codger is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 02-03-2005, 08:41 AM   #17 (permalink)
Prayers for my dad.
 
Cheri's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Ohio
Posts: 22,818
In 2050 if the world ends that would be like global nuclear war If that happens then We doomed for life, Remember when 65 million years ago when the dinosaurs disappeared, the atmosphere becomes so filled with dust that sunlight is blocked out for days or weeks? I am wondering if that is going to be the same in 2050? Where all the trees, grass everything is gone? I am freggin out now. LOL!
__________________
Avoid being a victim of a stroke, a stroke can happen to anyone at anytime. You will never know how devastating this could be until you had live through it. It affects everybody. So Support Stroke Awareness to find a cure and hope.
Cheri is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 02-03-2005, 08:49 AM   #18 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Crazymanw00t's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: San Mateo, CA
Posts: 818
Quote:
Originally Posted by Codger
O.K. folks, hold onto your seats and put on your thinking caps. Those of you who are subject to brain overload trying to read the menue at Sonic may want to skip this read. I am going to attempt to explain to you why the world is not going to end, at least by our hand, in the next fifty years. Ready?

the future: it's widely misunderstood. Our forebears expected the future to be pretty much like their present, which had been pretty much like their past. Although exponential trends did exist a thousand years ago, they were at that very early stage where an exponential trend is so flat that it looks like no trend at all. So their lack of expectations was largely fulfilled. Today, in accordance with the common wisdom, everyone expects continuous technological progress and the social repercussions that follow. But the future will be far more surprising than most observers realize: few have truly internalized the implications of the fact that the rate of change itself is accelerating.

The Intuitive Linear View versus the Historical Exponential View
Most long range forecasts of technical feasibility in future time periods dramatically underestimate the power of future technology because they are based on what I call the "intuitive linear" view of technological progress rather than the "historical exponential view." To express this another way, it is not the case that we will experience a hundred years of progress in the twenty-first century; rather we will witness on the order of twenty thousand years of progress (at today's rate of progress, that is).

When people think of a future period, they intuitively assume that the current rate of progress will continue for future periods. However, careful consideration of the pace of technology shows that the rate of progress is not constant, but it is human nature to adapt to the changing pace, so the intuitive view is that the pace will continue at the current rate. Even for those of us who have been around long enough to experience how the pace increases over time, our unexamined intuition nonetheless provides the impression that progress changes at the rate that we have experienced recently. From the mathematician's perspective, a primary reason for this is that an exponential curve approximates a straight line when viewed for a brief duration. So even though the rate of progress in the very recent past (e.g., this past year) is far greater than it was ten years ago (let alone a hundred or a thousand years ago), our memories are nonetheless dominated by our very recent experience. It is typical, therefore, that even sophisticated commentators, when considering the future, extrapolate the current pace of change over the next 10 years or 100 years to determine their expectations. This is why I call this way of looking at the future the "intuitive linear" view.

But a serious assessment of the history of technology shows that technological change is exponential. In exponential growth, we find that a key measurement such as computational power is multiplied by a constant factor for each unit of time (e.g., doubling every year) rather than just being added to incrementally. Exponential growth is a feature of any evolutionary process, of which technology is a primary example. One can examine the data

in different ways, on different time scales, and for a wide variety of technologies ranging from electronic to biological, and the acceleration of progress and growth applies. Indeed, we find not just simple exponential growth, but "double" exponential growth, meaning that the rate of exponential growth is itself growing exponentially. These observations do not rely merely on an assumption of the continuation of Moore's law (i.e., the exponential shrinking of transistor sizes on an integrated circuit), but is based on a rich model of diverse technological processes. What it clearly shows is that technology, particularly the pace of technological change, advances (at least) exponentially, not linearly, and has been doing so since the advent of technology, indeed since the advent of evolution on Earth.

I emphasize this point because it is the most important failure that would-be prognosticators make in considering future trends. Most technology forecasts ignore altogether this "historical exponential view" of technological progress. That is why people tend to overestimate what can be achieved in the short term (because we tend to leave out necessary details), but underestimate what can be achieved in the long term (because the exponential growth is ignored).

The first technological steps-sharp edges, fire, the wheel--took tens of thousands of years. For people living in this era, there was little noticeable technological change in even a thousand years. By 1000 A.D., progress was much faster and a paradigm shift required only a century or two. In the nineteenth century, we saw more technological change than in the nine centuries preceding it. Then in the first twenty years of the twentieth century, we saw more advancement than in all of the nineteenth century. Now, paradigm shifts occur in only a few years time. The World Wide Web did not exist in anything like its present form just a few years ago; it didn't exist at all a decade ago.





The paradigm shift rate (i.e., the overall rate of technical progress) is currently doubling (approximately) every decade; that is, paradigm shift times are halving every decade (and the rate of acceleration is itself growing exponentially). So, the technological progress in the twenty-first century will be equivalent to what would require (in the linear view) on the order of 200 centuries. In contrast, the twentieth century saw only about 25 years of progress (again at today's rate of progress) since we have been speeding up to current rates. So the twenty-first century will see almost a thousand times greater technological change than its predecessor.




The Singularity Is Near
To appreciate the nature and significance of the coming "singularity," it is important to ponder the nature of exponential growth. Toward this end, I am fond of telling the tale of the inventor of chess and his patron, the emperor of China. In response to the emperor's offer of a reward for his new beloved game, the inventor asked for a single grain of rice on the first square, two on the second square, four on the third, and so on. The Emperor quickly granted this seemingly benign and humble request. One version of the story has the emperor going bankrupt as the 63 doublings ultimately totaled 18 million trillion grains of rice. At ten grains of rice per square inch, this requires rice fields covering twice the surface area of the Earth, oceans included. Another version of the story has the inventor losing his head.

It should be pointed out that as the emperor and the inventor went through the first half of the chess board, things were fairly uneventful. The inventor was given spoonfuls of rice, then bowls of rice, then barrels. By the end of the first half of the chess board, the inventor had accumulated one large field's worth (4 billion grains), and the emperor did start to take notice. It was as they progressed through the second half of the chessboard that the situation quickly deteriorated. Incidentally, with regard to the doublings of computation, that's about where we stand now--there have been slightly more than 32 doublings of performance since the first programmable computers were invented during World War II.

This is the nature of exponential growth. Although technology grows in the exponential domain, we humans live in a linear world. So technological trends are not noticed as small levels of technological power are doubled. Then seemingly out of nowhere, a technology explodes into view. For example, when the Internet went from 20,000 to 80,000 nodes over a two year period during the 1980s, this progress remained hidden from the general public. A decade later, when it went from 20 million to 80 million nodes in the same amount of time, the impact was rather conspicuous.

As exponential growth continues to accelerate into the first half of the twenty-first century, it will appear to explode into infinity, at least from the limited and linear perspective of contemporary humans. The progress will ultimately become so fast that it will rupture our ability to follow it. It will literally get out of our control. The illusion that we have our hand "on the plug," will be dispelled.


Anyone want a second helping?

Summary it, please.
Crazymanw00t is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 02-03-2005, 08:55 AM   #19 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Nusentinsaino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 462
Send a message via AIM to Nusentinsaino Send a message via MSN to Nusentinsaino Send a message via Yahoo to Nusentinsaino
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheri
In 2050 if the world ends that would be like global nuclear war If that happens then We doomed for life, Remember when 65 million years ago when the dinosaurs disappeared, the atmosphere becomes so filled with dust that sunlight is blocked out for days or weeks? I am wondering if that is going to be the same in 2050? Where all the trees, grass everything is gone? I am freggin out now. LOL!
Yes i have been in deep thought about that subject: Nuclear Wars. In the future, We do not know whats going to happen. However i do have a strong feeling that we will indeed have an nuclear war because time goes on, and there will be wars of course and have you noticed how America and the surrounding nations are suddenly increasing their weaponary. It makes ms depressed to know that America has the most nuclear weapons in the world (Over 500 - 1000 Hydrogen Bombs, Capbable to destroy the world if denoted all at once) Dontfreak out Cheri, It will probably happen when we are already dead hehe... But still, we will be still alive in the 2050's and i have a bad feeling about my lifetime with the nations


Quote:
Originally Posted by Crazymanw00t
Summary it, please.

Lol yes please... Too lazy to read long paragraphs here.
Nusentinsaino is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 02-03-2005, 09:29 AM   #20 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Codger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 817
Summary?

Hydrogen fuel cell technology will be widespread in the next 20 years. Bye bye gas engines. Water vapor exhaust fumes. Dinosaurs had zero technology. Bye bye dinosaurs. Solar technology will be very feasable in 10 years. Bye bye coal fired and hot nuke power plants. Computers will be so powerful that environmental monotoring and modeling will enable us to prepare for environmental disaster ahead of time. Bye bye tsunami disaster, no more Pompei's either. Weather control through programs like HAARP are already a reality. Laser technology will advance so far that the stuff you see on Star Trek will be old hat. Medical advances will astound you. You remember Gordy's visor? Lets the blind guy "see"? Nearly done now. There will be so many changes in YOUR lifetime that the human brain will be hard pressed to keep up. Born with a short leg? We can lengthen it now. Get your arm or wanker cut off? We can reattach it now, nerves included. Humans have always had the drive to survive in whatever environment they find themselves.

Simple enough?
Codger is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 02-03-2005, 09:57 AM   #21 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Nusentinsaino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 462
Send a message via AIM to Nusentinsaino Send a message via MSN to Nusentinsaino Send a message via Yahoo to Nusentinsaino
^well its a good point...
Nusentinsaino is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 02-03-2005, 11:52 AM   #22 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Crazymanw00t's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: San Mateo, CA
Posts: 818
Quote:
Originally Posted by Codger
Hydrogen fuel cell technology will be widespread in the next 20 years. Bye bye gas engines. Water vapor exhaust fumes. Dinosaurs had zero technology. Bye bye dinosaurs. Solar technology will be very feasable in 10 years. Bye bye coal fired and hot nuke power plants. Computers will be so powerful that environmental monotoring and modeling will enable us to prepare for environmental disaster ahead of time. Bye bye tsunami disaster, no more Pompei's either. Weather control through programs like HAARP are already a reality. Laser technology will advance so far that the stuff you see on Star Trek will be old hat. Medical advances will astound you. You remember Gordy's visor? Lets the blind guy "see"? Nearly done now. There will be so many changes in YOUR lifetime that the human brain will be hard pressed to keep up. Born with a short leg? We can lengthen it now. Get your arm or wanker cut off? We can reattach it now, nerves included. Humans have always had the drive to survive in whatever environment they find themselves.

Simple enough?
Yeah. We still don't have enough $ to spent on those research.
Crazymanw00t is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 02-03-2005, 11:58 AM   #23 (permalink)
Prayers for my dad.
 
Cheri's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Ohio
Posts: 22,818
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crazymanw00t
Yeah. We still don't have enough $ to spent on those research.

That is funny how you say " we don't have enough $ to spend on those research" when we spend millions to billions of dollars on a war.
__________________
Avoid being a victim of a stroke, a stroke can happen to anyone at anytime. You will never know how devastating this could be until you had live through it. It affects everybody. So Support Stroke Awareness to find a cure and hope.
Cheri is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 02-03-2005, 12:04 PM   #24 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Codger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 817
No Money For Research

Wrong. Private companies see a huge profit to be made in emerging technology. That research has been going on for years. Some of the major developments have come from the space and military research programs. It is called transferable technology.
Codger is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 02-03-2005, 12:14 PM   #25 (permalink)
bloody phreak from hell
 
VamPyroX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: 40.18, 58.41
Posts: 34,318
Send a message via ICQ to VamPyroX Send a message via AIM to VamPyroX Send a message via Yahoo to VamPyroX
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheri
That is funny how you say " we don't have enough $ to spend on those research" when we spend millions to billions of dollars on a war.
We will probably never advance much in technology and never find the cure to AIDS, cancer, and other diseases... if Bush keeps spending our money on things we can avoid.
__________________
Check out my city... CLICK HERE!
(If you've already visited yesterday, visit again today!)
VamPyroX is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 02-03-2005, 12:33 PM   #26 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Codger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 817
Bush does not spend money. Clinton did not spend money. Congress spends money. The majority of health research comes from the private sector. Yes, sometimes government grants are handed out to fund research. I do not agree with our foriegn policy. Never have. But that don't change the facts.
Codger is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 02-03-2005, 01:10 PM   #27 (permalink)
Prayers for my dad.
 
Cheri's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Ohio
Posts: 22,818
Quote:
Originally Posted by Codger
Bush does not spend money. Clinton did not spend money. Congress spends money. The majority of health research comes from the private sector. Yes, sometimes government grants are handed out to fund research. I do not agree with our foriegn policy. Never have. But that don't change the facts.

But, Who wanted the war to begin with the first place? Bush. Thank you.
__________________
Avoid being a victim of a stroke, a stroke can happen to anyone at anytime. You will never know how devastating this could be until you had live through it. It affects everybody. So Support Stroke Awareness to find a cure and hope.
Cheri is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 02-03-2005, 01:27 PM   #28 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Codger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 817
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheri
But, Who wanted the war to begin with the first place? Bush. Thank you.
Presidents do not declare a war. Congress does. The preparations for the war predated Dubya's first term. Clinton made significant contributions. As did Bush Sr. And his predecessor, and his. Coke or pepsi, it is still soda pop. Democrat or Republican, they are still politicians.
Codger is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 02-03-2005, 01:44 PM   #29 (permalink)
Expelled
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 11,649
Well, President Bush did push for the Iraq war. We all know that. But like Codger said, a president cannot declare a war without the congress' power.

Now, we all know that the CIA/FBI reports weren't what they claimed to in the first place. Heck, I don't think most people even read the reports to begin with. After all, most didn't read the Patriot Act.

A few months ago, they voted to reform the CIA from what I know. Hopefully, it'll be for the better.

(shrugs)
Banjo is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 02-03-2005, 03:35 PM   #30 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Crazymanw00t's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: San Mateo, CA
Posts: 818
Yeah I know with the private company's $. They aren't stable investing $ on the research. We would like to have our government spent their $ on military so it will be very stable investing. It involved with many politc forgien policy with researchs, raw resources, and services to make it happen. Private Company can't really afford for all those thing to make it happen. It will take decades to make it happen if we use private CO.'s $. If we use our government's $ and it would make it less than 10 years to invent new technologies or ways.

Our thinking in this society will NOT make this Earth beautiful. Why? We are looking for "PROFITS with MONEY" than saving our Earth. We need to change that to save Earth and maybe profit some $. I hate to depend money for our life and on Earth.

We can't just point out to our president, congress, and FBI/CIA for war. We decided the war. Congress, and President had to depend on our feelings. Today's war was 50/50 so President and Congress went ahead with war. If everyone in USA disagree to go war with Iraqi then President and Congress will not declare war aganist Iraqi.
Crazymanw00t is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:01 AM.


Join AllDeaf on Facebook!    Follow us on Twitter!

AllDeaf proudly supports St. Jude Children's Research Hospital

Copyright © 2002-2014, AllDeaf.com. All Rights Reserved.