To further emphasize Dr. Garrett's point, it seems that, as per the laws of thermodynamics, the perfectly "circular economy" is akin to the myth of the perpetual motion machine, since resources degrade with each recycling of the system unless more inputs are put into the system (i.e. growth in energy consumption).
resources degrade with each recycling - yes yet mushrooms and trees communicate via biophotons as coherent laser information. Read the article, "Light is Heavy" by Nobel Physicist Gerard 't Hooft for the secret power of light. New matter can be created from virtual photons - all matter is essentially light.
Tim is absolutely my favourite big picture speaker. His perspective cuts through so much BS and denial. Acceptance is the healthiest approach in the end. This was a fabulous interview.
In 1611 Kepler published a paper on Snowflakes that reads like it might have been written yesterday. The thermodynamics issue was not yet framed, but the clear-eyed hunt for scientific truth that Prof Garrett hunts for was there at the birth of Western Science. Thanks Prof Garrett for your work on dissipative systems!! Thanks, Rachel for this and for the like-minded Carey King, platformed back in Oct.
yes I wrote a paper called "The Incorrect Supply and Demand Model" for my environmental economics class at University of Wisconsin-Madison in the early 90s. My instructors freaked out and first told me to change my topic. haha. Then they circled the paper in red for stylistic grammar "errors" - as if I didn't use enough commas or something. Hilarious. Finally I got the only comment on the paper, "I still think economists are smarter than you think they are."
"Sustainability is a thermodynamic impossibility" "there is nothing we can control here"."we are not special".Brings to mind what he said at beginning "acceptance" being the key.. however, I have to swallow the pill first..Gulp.😱 Thanks Rachel keep up good work I am a great fan of Tim to put thing's in perspective..new subscriber.
new matter is created from virtual photons - you can access this through meditation. It's called the "golden key" as "superluminal yin matter." Only this golden immortal "yang shen" body requires hiding out in the mountains or caves - meditating nonstop. hahaha.
@@voidisyinyangvoidisyinyang885 Hi Void 😄 good to hear from you, trust you are well,and your shrooms are healthy.Closest I get to meditation is the music, which I immerse myself in daily.(long tones are surely meditation).and better still I have my wife who sings like a ray of sunshine to share it with.💟🙏💥. Best to you, my long time virtual friend.
@@henryholt1359 I just added two new music playlists - Frank "sugar chile" Robinson - child prodigy of boogie woogie. And 23 different versions of "Beggin'" - yes I hear you! thanks
Just rewatched this one. Really blew my mind. I want more Tim Garrett in my RUclips life but there's only a few videos with him on here. You should have him on again Rachel to discuss how basically everything he said has even more evidence now that we're buried even deeper.
@@PlanetCritical Nice. At this point, I'm pretty much a doomer. The more I learn, the more of a doomer I become. Scientists like Tim, who tell the truth, without sentiment, give me my doom fix for the day.
It is too early to say that peak oilers were wrong about the implications of peak oil. We have been on the plateau of conventional oil production since 2005, and peak oil theory is very explicit that the really bad stuff only happens after production falls OFF the plateau. It also says that the longer the plateau lasts, the more severe the decline when it finally falls off the plateau. Petroleum geologist Colin Campbell explained this 20 years ago. He also explained that by this point it would be too late for new oil discoveries to make a significant difference.
It's all about net energy return on investment - and so the "dirty" oil from Tar Sands has all sorts of environmental costs that are NOT included in GDP - economics is just a plunger and pillage scam for immediate gain. So yeah Peak Oil is of course real since the net energy return does not even include those environmental externalities.
To me there's a contradiction here in the idea that Peak Oil was wrong. Since the Peak of Covententional Oil there has been no real growth in GDP, what there has been is Quantative Easing, deindustrialisation of the West and rise of Industrialisation in China where entropy costs are lower. (less energy flow required for a given industrial product). This is not in contradiction to the premise, just recognising where we are on the S curve.
Instead of an S-curve Dr. Louis Arnoux talked about an energy cliff! My guess is that our civilization will overcome it, but there is a scary situation now where our economy requires around a 10:1 return of energy in order to function. And even renewable energies are dependent on oil, Arnoux said and in the past 1 barrel could produce 100 barrels, while today the ratio is far less than 10:1!
@@PlanetCritical SRSrocco Report has a video called "Thermodynamic Oil Collapse & Future" and there is for example also a GoldCore TV video "Energy Crisis Great Reset- Steve St. Angelo".
@@PlanetCritical There is a book called Energy and Society by Fred Cottrell that was first published in 1955 and has since been revised. It is an excellent starting point for ideas on energy returned on energy investment and cultural evolution. I'm not sure what a good source is on those ratios. Always heard 100-120 barrels for every one put in about a hundred years ago in the US. Saudi oil still at 30-50 maybe? Fracking 3-10 or something. Hopefully there is some good data on this out there.
The last I weaned of Markist phenomenon suggested that the capitalist were a cusion in times of need. Marks and Lenin were different in enabling the labor capital and the capitalist were a cusion in the summary.
This is terrific. Only on the question of sustainability I feel that Tim is defining sustainability through a dangerous scientific lens that describes relatively slow changes over time (and spontaneous changes, if you wish, as opposed to crushing authoritarian technics/systems). It would render carrying capacity meaningless, and that doesn't seem correct. Could you perhaps invite Vandana Shiva and Derrick Jensen (or Lierre Keith), about this question? Vandana is a physicist too, I believe she said that only in nature we can find negative entropy systems. Derrick Jensen studied mineral engineering physics and he also speaks of the Jevons Paradox (and has also interviewed Tim Garrett). I'd be very interested in a thorough discussion of a physics vs socio-ecological/eco-philosophical lens of sustainability. Thank you.
Wonderfully insightful interview! Could the fall in the rate of energy consumption be the result of the fall in energy return on investment (EROI) of our energy source? After conventional oil (EROI ~50:1) peaked in 2005 resulting in the Great Recession, we resorted to extract uneconomic tight oil (EROI ~5:1) financed by over a decade of zero % Fed interest rates. Oil that was not newly discovered but just unprofitable at historic oil prices. If so, what could this imply for plans for "green growth" with solar and wind (EROI ~5:1)? Would the rate of growth be inevitably suppressed with such falling EROI?
11:16 "a company has to grow. it doesn't have a choice." The problem is that companies which should have come to their natural end by now were able to extend their life by using the massive leverage their wealth provided over the system. Thus we are currently burdened with not just companies but entire industries which began their lives in World war II -- fossil fuel industry the chemical industry the pharmaceutical industry the plastics industry... The expanded military industrial complex -- and which we should have found alternatives to their exploitative practices and alternatives to their products in many cases -- but we were prevented by their outsized leverage over our world government systems.
I recently got an input that a quantum computer has a statement were the point is made how a number of certain chemical reactions might be reduced to a billionth the speed so much needs to elaborated.
I don't know about pulsing universe That is one model suggests that its an equilibrium of expanding and contracting modes overlap? It's quite crazy then in the workshop.
He mentions in the interview the irony, to him, of using snowflake terminology to refer to this "victim complex" given how resilient snowflakes are. Fascinating stuff.
When Tim says our brain consumes 20 watts - about 2/3rds of that energy is used for vision. So if we close our eyes and then visualize light internally - we create a 13 watt laser that is holographic energy inside of us. That light then accesses the supermomentum virtual photon energy that can be stored up as increases biophoton energy.
@@PlanetCritical the double irony is snowflake originally meant people who wanted to maintain slavery in the U.S. "In the 1860s, Merriam-Webster says "snowflake" was used by abolitionists in Missouri to refer to those who opposed the abolition of slavery."
Machines wear out. The Laws of Physics cannot tell a Capital Good from a Consumer Good. Where is the data on the annual depreciation of automobiles purchased by consumers? When do Economists talk about Net Domestic Product?
Ordinary glass shards or pumice could be seeded in higher levels in high humidity windy zones trapped in mountain traps could be useful in cloud burst in import
I'm watching ice melt and sea level rise. All global ports are at sea level. A rapid rise in sea level will effect all countries imports and exports into those countries. Those dependancies will shape the regional and local collapses.
Ultimately energy is used up, sure, but I think the questions should have been more grounded. Like for example I'm not expecting civilization to last till the Sun explodes and engulfs the Earth. Obviously that's the end but I don't really care about that. That's something that ultimately should be accepted (assuming we never get off the Earth) and even complex life long before that might be gone . I'm thinking more of can a civilization , a steady state one, not of constant growth, be sustained at least as much as life on Earth has been able to exist as a system, for hundreds of millions of years? But I'm not even expecting that much. Can we do it for a few million at least, and how it would look like if we can do it at least that long? If we assume that we have to have the most fundamental benefits of civilization persist that long. Which is avoiding being predated (mostly), avoid parasites and infectious diseases (mostly) , and having secure access to healthiest food and clean water consistently, for long healthy lives, without war and crime. Screw all the fancy toys that come out of the interaction between technology and capitalism. Just if those core benefits can be sustained, and be able to still do science to learn more and more, as the ultimate source for occupying people's time , since learning about the world and the universe seems like a limitless task for now . Does that seem doable?
Mevhisms are to be examined by the question of sustainable issues in micro and Macro assembly We could revise or replace only bits by bits by mutual consent so what we do is a convincing argument and it's enabled by mamy.
so homeostatis is impossible - but what about a social project that puts more energy back into the biosphere than it takes out? a terraforming project. with the right energy sources, would this be possible?
if you check out Peter Wadhams he thinks carbon can be stored by making limestone and water vapor can cool the arctic - it's called "marine cloud brightening"
We collaborate as a species but still compete with other individuals. It's the source of conflict when energy goes down. The interviewer is having a hard time to cope. Life grows by investing energy to get an energy profit, just like capitalism. In fact, every system works like that. The difference with modern capitalism is the amount of energy available.
looking more and more like solid state as social media relentlessly programs people to their echo chambers let's get back to tube watts! Rock on nevertheless
He doesn't really say anything profound but seems to hold a confused position more than anything else. Unless I have totally misread him, he seems to be saying that we require energy to do what we do. True. But you don't need an advanced physics degree to work that out. However, his position seems also to be that this entire system is deterministic. Well, this is where I think he becomes tangled. E.g is it determined that the Milky Way Galaxy or our Universe will be gone sometime in the future? Yes, and that is determined from a physics standpoint - does it mean we ought to do nothing because everything will end anyway. He then wants to start speaking about all the problems we're facing. Well, then we can come up with solutions to try remedy the profound injustices that come with these determined processes. We have agency. All this stuff is great for a conversation but doesn't solve anything, it's just intellectual masturbation.
I think you'd be better served by listening to alan watts take on the collapse of civilizations and what we should do about it in his "veil of thoughts" lecture available on RUclips. eastern philosophy is full of paradoxes but so is thermodynamics. to arrive at Tim's position is to say that the thermodynamic throughput of this fossil fuel civilization will follow a general pattern, much like when you throw something up it falls back down. Absent an energy source more concentrated than fossil fuels, this civilization absolutely will collapse. Playing politics and pretending it won't is a foolish endeavor. Do you yell at gravity for bringing things back to ground and accuse it of being deterministic? Sure maybe an airplane will come along and pick your object up, but eventually the airplane has to come back down too.
There are two types. Traditionally men could kill their subjects - wives and slaves. For instance at the beginning of Rome, then end of Rome was family law benefiting women. It switches. At beginning of democracy only men could vote, now most voters are women and the mantra of human rights which is no such thing. It is womens rights denying men of their rights. This has led to 7.5billion people. If men don't have their rights back, gaia will reduce the population for us. His wrath will be worse.
Study our original human culture, the San Bushmen - human nature is better than this! tim Garrett is discussing the invention of agriculture. He talks about the invention of writing in another talk - but also the invention of fire. I don't think the invention of fire is on the same level as the invention of writing. Writing is left-brain dominant - he means the Alphabet as a phonetic system technology. He says it only got invented twice on Earth.
To further emphasize Dr. Garrett's point, it seems that, as per the laws of thermodynamics, the perfectly "circular economy" is akin to the myth of the perpetual motion machine, since resources degrade with each recycling of the system unless more inputs are put into the system (i.e. growth in energy consumption).
Absolutely! Simon Michaux goes into detail about this during our interview.
the discussion inevitably leads to that basic question "how do we fix this?" collaberation on de-growth, also know as the collapse.
resources degrade with each recycling - yes yet mushrooms and trees communicate via biophotons as coherent laser information. Read the article, "Light is Heavy" by Nobel Physicist Gerard 't Hooft for the secret power of light. New matter can be created from virtual photons - all matter is essentially light.
That has been known since the 18th century. See Carnot. This is so basic. Where is even first order cybernetics? Nope. Too complex for this chatter.
Tim is absolutely my favourite big picture speaker. His perspective cuts through so much BS and denial. Acceptance is the healthiest approach in the end. This was a fabulous interview.
In 1611 Kepler published a paper on Snowflakes that reads like it might have been written yesterday. The thermodynamics issue was not yet framed, but the clear-eyed hunt for scientific truth that Prof Garrett hunts for was there at the birth of Western Science. Thanks Prof Garrett for your work on dissipative systems!! Thanks, Rachel for this and for the like-minded Carey King, platformed back in Oct.
My sincere pleasure-thank you for listening!
Unique presentation of this economics system. Thanks. Start a garden and avoid the worst of collapse!
Great dialogue. Thermodynamics is the tool for understanding the biophysical limitations of the ecosphere and all of the organisms within it.
yes I wrote a paper called "The Incorrect Supply and Demand Model" for my environmental economics class at University of Wisconsin-Madison in the early 90s. My instructors freaked out and first told me to change my topic. haha. Then they circled the paper in red for stylistic grammar "errors" - as if I didn't use enough commas or something. Hilarious. Finally I got the only comment on the paper, "I still think economists are smarter than you think they are."
"Sustainability is a thermodynamic impossibility" "there is nothing we can control here"."we are not special".Brings to mind what he said at beginning "acceptance" being the key.. however, I have to swallow the pill first..Gulp.😱 Thanks Rachel keep up good work I am a great fan of Tim to put thing's in perspective..new subscriber.
Thanks for tuning in, Henry!
new matter is created from virtual photons - you can access this through meditation. It's called the "golden key" as "superluminal yin matter." Only this golden immortal "yang shen" body requires hiding out in the mountains or caves - meditating nonstop. hahaha.
@@voidisyinyangvoidisyinyang885 Hi Void 😄 good to hear from you, trust you are well,and your shrooms are healthy.Closest I get to meditation is the music, which I immerse myself in daily.(long tones are surely meditation).and better still I have my wife who sings like a ray of sunshine to share it with.💟🙏💥. Best to you, my long time virtual friend.
@@henryholt1359 I just added two new music playlists - Frank "sugar chile" Robinson - child prodigy of boogie woogie. And 23 different versions of "Beggin'" - yes I hear you! thanks
@@voidisyinyangvoidisyinyang885 A statement like that, especially when made in the comments of a science channel, demands proof.
Just rewatched this one. Really blew my mind. I want more Tim Garrett in my RUclips life but there's only a few videos with him on here. You should have him on again Rachel to discuss how basically everything he said has even more evidence now that we're buried even deeper.
I've got another episode out with him next week!
@@PlanetCritical Nice. At this point, I'm pretty much a doomer. The more I learn, the more of a doomer I become. Scientists like Tim, who tell the truth, without sentiment, give me my doom fix for the day.
You can't win, break even or quit.
It is too early to say that peak oilers were wrong about the implications of peak oil. We have been on the plateau of conventional oil production since 2005, and peak oil theory is very explicit that the really bad stuff only happens after production falls OFF the plateau. It also says that the longer the plateau lasts, the more severe the decline when it finally falls off the plateau. Petroleum geologist Colin Campbell explained this 20 years ago. He also explained that by this point it would be too late for new oil discoveries to make a significant difference.
How interesting, thanks for flagging.
It's all about net energy return on investment - and so the "dirty" oil from Tar Sands has all sorts of environmental costs that are NOT included in GDP - economics is just a plunger and pillage scam for immediate gain. So yeah Peak Oil is of course real since the net energy return does not even include those environmental externalities.
To me there's a contradiction here in the idea that Peak Oil was wrong. Since the Peak of Covententional Oil there has been no real growth in GDP, what there has been is Quantative Easing, deindustrialisation of the West and rise of Industrialisation in China where entropy costs are lower. (less energy flow required for a given industrial product).
This is not in contradiction to the premise, just recognising where we are on the S curve.
Ridiculous. Show me a paper about "de-industrialisation of the west".
Instead of an S-curve Dr. Louis Arnoux talked about an energy cliff! My guess is that our civilization will overcome it, but there is a scary situation now where our economy requires around a 10:1 return of energy in order to function. And even renewable energies are dependent on oil, Arnoux said and in the past 1 barrel could produce 100 barrels, while today the ratio is far less than 10:1!
That's really interesting-could you point out where I could read more about that ratio?
@@PlanetCritical SRSrocco Report has a video called "Thermodynamic Oil Collapse & Future" and there is for example also a GoldCore TV video "Energy Crisis Great Reset- Steve St. Angelo".
@@PlanetCritical There is a book called Energy and Society by Fred Cottrell that was first published in 1955 and has since been revised. It is an excellent starting point for ideas on energy returned on energy investment and cultural evolution.
I'm not sure what a good source is on those ratios. Always heard 100-120 barrels for every one put in about a hundred years ago in the US. Saudi oil still at 30-50 maybe? Fracking 3-10 or something. Hopefully there is some good data on this out there.
Clouds need forests to form. Mature forests need to be fostered, worldwide. Reclaiming deserts are also quite necessary.
The last I weaned of Markist phenomenon suggested that the capitalist were a cusion in times of need. Marks and Lenin were different in enabling the labor capital and the capitalist were a cusion in the summary.
This is terrific. Only on the question of sustainability I feel that Tim is defining sustainability through a dangerous scientific lens that describes relatively slow changes over time (and spontaneous changes, if you wish, as opposed to crushing authoritarian technics/systems). It would render carrying capacity meaningless, and that doesn't seem correct. Could you perhaps invite Vandana Shiva and Derrick Jensen (or Lierre Keith), about this question? Vandana is a physicist too, I believe she said that only in nature we can find negative entropy systems. Derrick Jensen studied mineral engineering physics and he also speaks of the Jevons Paradox (and has also interviewed Tim Garrett). I'd be very interested in a thorough discussion of a physics vs socio-ecological/eco-philosophical lens of sustainability. Thank you.
We're done for.
My favourite kind of Professor.
Prof: I have been studying snowflakes.
Me: Ridiculous, yawn
Me 2min later: Wait, what! Mind blown
Wonderfully insightful interview! Could the fall in the rate of energy consumption be the result of the fall in energy return on investment (EROI) of our energy source? After conventional oil (EROI ~50:1) peaked in 2005 resulting in the Great Recession, we resorted to extract uneconomic tight oil (EROI ~5:1) financed by over a decade of zero % Fed interest rates. Oil that was not newly discovered but just unprofitable at historic oil prices. If so, what could this imply for plans for "green growth" with solar and wind (EROI ~5:1)? Would the rate of growth be inevitably suppressed with such falling EROI?
Thanks so much for tuning in! I'll let someone with more expertise tackle your question, though.
Peak oil in 2005? You mean in the US or in the entire world? any source on this?
11:16 "a company has to grow. it doesn't have a choice." The problem is that companies which should have come to their natural end by now were able to extend their life by using the massive leverage their wealth provided over the system. Thus we are currently burdened with not just companies but entire industries which began their lives in World war II -- fossil fuel industry the chemical industry the pharmaceutical industry the plastics industry... The expanded military industrial complex -- and which we should have found alternatives to their exploitative practices and alternatives to their products in many cases -- but we were prevented by their outsized leverage over our world government systems.
Flip side is that reserves for fundamental help and aid would be slow to inspire.
whenever Tim disagrees he talks about snowflakes - it's hilarious as a displaced anger psychological strategy.
Exactly. This guy is a poser.
I recently got an input that a quantum computer has a statement were the point is made how a number of certain chemical reactions might be reduced to a billionth the speed so much needs to elaborated.
system dynamics and the natural fit. Learning where to lead, when to follow.
I don't know about pulsing universe
That is one model suggests that its an equilibrium of expanding and contracting modes overlap? It's quite crazy then in the workshop.
When I heard Tim referred to "snowflakes" I first though of the sociological/political phenomenon of professional victims.
He mentions in the interview the irony, to him, of using snowflake terminology to refer to this "victim complex" given how resilient snowflakes are. Fascinating stuff.
When Tim says our brain consumes 20 watts - about 2/3rds of that energy is used for vision. So if we close our eyes and then visualize light internally - we create a 13 watt laser that is holographic energy inside of us. That light then accesses the supermomentum virtual photon energy that can be stored up as increases biophoton energy.
@@PlanetCritical the double irony is snowflake originally meant people who wanted to maintain slavery in the U.S. "In the 1860s, Merriam-Webster says "snowflake" was used by abolitionists in Missouri to refer to those who opposed the abolition of slavery."
Machines wear out. The Laws of Physics cannot tell a Capital Good from a Consumer Good. Where is the data on the annual depreciation of automobiles purchased by consumers? When do Economists talk about Net Domestic Product?
Ordinary glass shards or pumice could be seeded in higher levels in high humidity windy zones trapped in mountain traps could be useful in cloud burst in import
mapped region's.
How do you think?
I'm watching ice melt and sea level rise. All global ports are at sea level. A rapid rise in sea level will effect all countries imports and exports into those countries. Those dependancies will shape the regional and local collapses.
It's about disaster prevention or damage control.
Ultimately energy is used up, sure, but I think the questions should have been more grounded. Like for example I'm not expecting civilization to last till the Sun explodes and engulfs the Earth. Obviously that's the end but I don't really care about that. That's something that ultimately should be accepted (assuming we never get off the Earth) and even complex life long before that might be gone .
I'm thinking more of can a civilization , a steady state one, not of constant growth, be sustained at least as much as life on Earth has been able to exist as a system, for hundreds of millions of years?
But I'm not even expecting that much. Can we do it for a few million at least, and how it would look like if we can do it at least that long? If we assume that we have to have the most fundamental benefits of civilization persist that long. Which is avoiding being predated (mostly), avoid parasites and infectious diseases (mostly) , and having secure access to healthiest food and clean water consistently, for long healthy lives, without war and crime. Screw all the fancy toys that come out of the interaction between technology and capitalism. Just if those core benefits can be sustained, and be able to still do science to learn more and more, as the ultimate source for occupying people's time , since learning about the world and the universe seems like a limitless task for now . Does that seem doable?
Do the freeze zones travel in direct predicted weather.
Did he did an interview yet with Nate Hagens?
Mevhisms are to be examined by the question of sustainable issues in micro and Macro assembly
We could revise or replace only bits by bits by mutual consent so what we do is a convincing argument and it's enabled by mamy.
Many I mean
Wait isn't this what the Club of Rome basically did with their World3 model?
Now'we might think of a hybrid models in more areas.
Brilliant
Meaning value based model?
European neanderthal managed about 300k years in equilibrium until homo loco turned up...
Is there life without GDP?
Just a couple minutes in and she's flirting with this guy. 🙄
Fun? Really? Collapse will probably not be fun... for most of us.
I thought funding is sourced by publications like Nature etc.
Some records are available in tapestry of some sorts.
so homeostatis is impossible - but what about a social project that puts more energy back into the biosphere than it takes out? a terraforming project. with the right energy sources, would this be possible?
if you check out Peter Wadhams he thinks carbon can be stored by making limestone and water vapor can cool the arctic - it's called "marine cloud brightening"
Save Our Planet
Check out Howard t odum general systems theory from the 1970's. Same idea.
We collaborate as a species but still compete with other individuals. It's the source of conflict when energy goes down. The interviewer is having a hard time to cope.
Life grows by investing energy to get an energy profit, just like capitalism. In fact, every system works like that. The difference with modern capitalism is the amount of energy available.
Water took Time and came out of radiance waste matters as end of half lifes.
25:00
32:00
Too many logical leaps in favor of his cultural biases. It's giving "Great chain of being"...
You need to give specific evidence or else it's just a "false accusation" on your part. Nice try though.
Totally. But don’t question because “snowflakes” and “thermodynamics “. See collapse?
Sudden sublimated on the window sill.and sketched.
You know I'm sticking my neck out and I might be only a cuckoo clock and a wake up 💗
Are the watts our brains put out tube or solid state watts? 🧐😙🙃
looking more and more like solid state as social media relentlessly programs people to their echo chambers
let's get back to tube watts! Rock on nevertheless
They originate from biophoton laser spirit energy.
Interesting
Swirls is the key word.
He doesn't really say anything profound but seems to hold a confused position more than anything else. Unless I have totally misread him, he seems to be saying that we require energy to do what we do. True. But you don't need an advanced physics degree to work that out. However, his position seems also to be that this entire system is deterministic. Well, this is where I think he becomes tangled. E.g is it determined that the Milky Way Galaxy or our Universe will be gone sometime in the future? Yes, and that is determined from a physics standpoint - does it mean we ought to do nothing because everything will end anyway. He then wants to start speaking about all the problems we're facing. Well, then we can come up with solutions to try remedy the profound injustices that come with these determined processes. We have agency. All this stuff is great for a conversation but doesn't solve anything, it's just intellectual masturbation.
So what are you doing other then pounding on a keyboard?
I think you'd be better served by listening to alan watts take on the collapse of civilizations and what we should do about it in his "veil of thoughts" lecture available on RUclips. eastern philosophy is full of paradoxes but so is thermodynamics.
to arrive at Tim's position is to say that the thermodynamic throughput of this fossil fuel civilization will follow a general pattern, much like when you throw something up it falls back down. Absent an energy source more concentrated than fossil fuels, this civilization absolutely will collapse. Playing politics and pretending it won't is a foolish endeavor. Do you yell at gravity for bringing things back to ground and accuse it of being deterministic? Sure maybe an airplane will come along and pick your object up, but eventually the airplane has to come back down too.
snowflake snowflake snowflake. hahaha
Agreed. Simplistic and not thought out. Just alarmism.
Yep, you have totally misread him.
the stars is a ponzisceeme!!
human nature.
There are two types. Traditionally men could kill their subjects - wives and slaves. For instance at the beginning of Rome, then end of Rome was family law benefiting women. It switches.
At beginning of democracy only men could vote, now most voters are women and the mantra of human rights which is no such thing. It is womens rights denying men of their rights. This has led to 7.5billion people. If men don't have their rights back, gaia will reduce the population for us. His wrath will be worse.
Study our original human culture, the San Bushmen - human nature is better than this! tim Garrett is discussing the invention of agriculture. He talks about the invention of writing in another talk - but also the invention of fire. I don't think the invention of fire is on the same level as the invention of writing. Writing is left-brain dominant - he means the Alphabet as a phonetic system technology. He says it only got invented twice on Earth.
Let's hope Musk will find many better planets out there.
Why him? He's delusional
Send him to Mars now, its already collapsed for him.
Him and all the other billionaires who think they can tell us what the future is🥱
This Individual on the picture is not Tim Garrett 🤣
@@elekkr Yes, it is!
human choice decentralization; God's kingdom central authority