Lost in Translation

Nuclear energy.

Politics, in a nutshell:

No. You are wrong. You are not reading what I am saying, so I'll repeat it: I would much rather spend effort building tools to enable humanity to survive despite changes in the climate than bankrupt civilization in an attempt to change the climate. For example: cheaper power driving ubiquitous cooling systems to combat rising temperatures and cheap desalination to combat reduced rain fall. An advanced civilization can live anywhere, under any conditions, but a bankrupt society will find it difficult to live under the best circumstances, and I do not want to bankrupt our civilization.

Leftists are like vampires. They live off the blood of the living, cling to the shadows, and fear above all the light of truth.

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Virtue Signalling https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtue_signalling https://www.dictionary.com/browse/virtue-signaling

We already have many answers to this question. Israel has robust measures to reclaim rain water, purify and repurpose sewage water for agriculture, desalination plants to turn salt water into fresh water, and an amazing drip-irrigation watering system for crops. They have offered to share the technology with the world, free of change, but no one seems to notice...

It's not about logic. If Leftists valued logic then they would not be on the left. Instead, it is all about emotion, virtue signaling, and stage one thinking.

If only it were that simple. I don't like paying my bills, but that does not make my bills evil. I like sleeping late on the weekend, but that does make sleeping late good. Good and evil have intrinsically moral qualities. Like and don't like are amoral.

And what? Climate change in an of itself is a non-issue. The real issue is what do we do? All I hear in this regard is something along the lines of "we should bankrupt the civilized world on the hope that we can reduce temperatures by 1-2 degrees centigrade in 50 years." That's not a compelling argument. Why create a financial crisis to maybe avoid a climate crisis? So what do we do?

Here's an interview with Fred Singer from PBS. I don't see a date on it. I was only able read about half of it before my mind went numb. It's pretty boring stuff, but the man does seem sound of mind. Personally, I wish people would spend their time and energy learning how to adapt to changing climate rather than trying to prevent it from changing. That seems like a much better proposition to me. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/warming/debate/singer.html

I see. But is he wrong?

And now for something completely different... https://www.heartland.org/news-opinion/news/gores-global-warming-mentor-in-his-own-words Granted, this article is old, but it is still incredibly important. Revelle, credited by Al Gore as his mentor and inspiration to become a climate change activist, has himself stated that the issue is too complex to know for certain how, and to what extent, human actions are contributing to global warming, but he cautions that unilateral actions taken by wealthy countries would not only do nothing to ease climate change globally, they would only succeed in bankrupting the western world. And to implement policies globally would be catastrophic to developing countries that depend upon cheap and proven sources of energy to build their economies. It seems to me we are far better served by using our minds and economies learning how to adapt to climate change than in trying to control it.

Is it accurate to define Good and Evil in relative terms? I.E. Good equals whatever I prefer and Evil equals whatever I don't. That seems a cheapening of both concepts... Of course I can see when that is entirely appropriate. Take, for example, the idea of the sacrifice. A people hold that great evil is approaching and consequently a very bad thing will happen. To forestall this, a single, innocent (e.g "good") person is selected for public murder and sacrifice. This has happened before among the Aztecs, and elsewhere. One can call the murder of an innocent what it is, namely evil. There is no denying that. On the other hand, such a "small" evil is often necessary to prevent an even greater evil, and thus is good. From this perspective, both evil and good are relative. I admit that I don't see a way to resolve this, except to acknowledge that evil is necessary.

The President surprises a group of civilians on a White House tour, shaking hands, taking photos, and yes, kissing babies - all the while the Secret Service are having a conniption fit.

Good point! I don't think this was mentioned before.

I don't think it's that simple. For example, it may be good for me to have a million dollars, but that does not mean I can murder someone and take a million dollars from them. Killing in such a manner is evil, regardless of whether I personally will benefit.

Indeed. Let's clarify the original meaning of "meek." https://www.biblestudytools.com/dictionary/meekness/

Bump! Evil is a thing. It exists, and not every conscious being who acts in an evil fashion does so out of ignorance or necessity. Some actually choose evil. It's a conversation still worth having. What is evil? Why does evil frighten you? Is it the part within you that resonates with evil? Are you afraid that if you accept your own capacity for evil that you will lose yourself and be unable to recover? Or are you afraid that if you allow yourself to embrace evil that you will really, really like it, and what does that say about your precious image of self?

Good review. I'll add this to my reading list.

I went to a restaurant and asked for food. The server brought it to me. I ate it and it was good. Then the server gave me a bill. I asked, "How can you charge me for food, when food is essential to my life?" The server responded, "food is also essential to my life. How do you expect me to live if I give you all I have for free?"

If I were a landlord and suddenly everyone, including my tenants, suddenly had $1000 more dollars every month, I would raise all my rents by $1000. It's a no brainer. Same thing happened, BTW, with college tuition as a result of guaranteed student loans.

Is this really produced by North Korea? If so, why isn't this headline news across the country? The NK propaganda machine is saying things like "The respected Comrade Supreme Leader was grateful that they had come together and actively engage in the outcome of this meeting" and "Today's historical meeting proved once again that it is possible to pioneer a better future." Now, it's possible this is propaganda setting up high expectations with the intention of cutting them down with righteous indignation when the US inevitable betrays NK. One could spin it that way. But it's also possible this is a genuine admission of the desire for peace. I hope that is what it is, and will take it on face-value for he moment.

https://thefederalist.com/2019/07/02/antifa-assault-andy-ngo-inevitable-will-repeated/ Once more, I refer you back to Robespierre.

I think the words we use are insufficient. "Bliss" is wrong for this context. Anyone who "remain(s) blissful" while the world "come(s) crashing down around them" is insane. Bliss is the wrong response for such an event. That said, I think there is a place for holding an unmoving center, as it were. An enlightened person absolutely could remain unmoved at that place in their being even as the world burns, but that is not the same as bliss. EDIT: Another reason why words matter: many people cultivate to a medium or high level, in the process making great progress. Then something catastrophic happens - the death of a spouse, a failed career, loss of health, etc. - and they feel horrible pain. It's very difficult to endure such suffering, and if you have trained yourself to expect "bliss" at all times then you will feel as if you have failed in your cultivation, thus adding further pain. But, if you realize that bliss is not the goal, but rather an unmoving center, then you can fall back upon your training, not despite the pain but because of it. And in this manner you can persevere where previously you would have faltered.

Sen. Ted Cruz Full video, below.