X-Message-Number: 19266
References: <>
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2002 14:35:07 +0200
From: David Stodolsky <>
Subject: Re: CryoNet #19254 - #19262

At 9:00 AM +0000 2002-06-12, CryoNet wrote:
>>Can I retain my sanity when I agree with the unelected Texas
>>simpleton that the Kyoto Treaty is a bunch of crap foisted on unsuspecting
>>political leaders by an army of ideologically tainted environment
>>'scientists?' How do we fight back against this most destructive form of
>>political correctness? Any ideas?
>
>I'm not sure you can (retain your sanity)....  I share your irritation with
>the lack of positivity and optimism that is being perpetuated through the
>doomsday thinking that you scorn, however certain realities cannot be
>denied. The reason for criticising the Kyoto Protocol it is that is way too
>weak. Not demanding enough. Of course refusing to sign the Kyoto Protocol

Benford suggests a one percent increase in airline tickets would be
adequate to solve the "global warming" problem.
http://dss.secureid.org/

Cryonics supporters will have a hard time fighting back while many of them
subscribe to world views which, in fact, support the opposition.

The terms "survival" and "meeting needs" set a certain agenda. The work
ethic and capitalism are subtexts in which "organizational survival" is a
guiding concept. Masschelein suggests that this discourse, in reality,
hides a soft totalitarianism.


<http://www.blackwellpublishers.co.uk/images/Journal_Samples/JOPE0309-8249~35~1~206%5C206.pdf>

His argument suggests a congruence of Environmentalism and Protestantism.

Here is the link to my evidence that Environmentalism functions
as a religion in Denmark, the "Myth of Environmental Fragility":
http://dss.secureid.org/stories/storyReader$6

Given developments in genetic engineering, a single individual will be able
to launch a biological attack killing millions of persons within the next
ten years. These developments and the expressed interest of individuals
with appropriate training to carry out such an attack, suggest that claims
about overpopulation and inadequacy of the Earth to sustain our current
life style could have disastrous consequences (and most likely will).
(Franz, D. & Lucey, C. (2001, January). Biological Emerging Threats
Assessment: Response Recommendations. In J. Rosen & C. Lucey (Eds.).
Emerging Technologies: Recommendations for Counter-Terrorism. Hanover, NH:
Institute for Security Technology Studies, Dartmouth College. URL
<http://www.dartmouth.edu/~engs05/readings/md/Emerging_Tech/ETech.pdf>)


If we accept Masschelein's argument, then neo-liberal ideologies like
Libertarianism, which enshrine the "free market" are also anti-life
extensionist, in their philosophical underpinnings, and thus an inadequate
and ultimately self-defeating foundation for action.

What this boils down to is that recognition of the realities of our
existence are essential for effective action. And the dominant ideologies
of today don't make the grade. My draft "Essential realities and their
meanings" is available by email.


dss

-- 
David S. Stodolsky, PhD    PGP: 0x35490763    

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=19266