Industrial Society Destroys Mind and Environment

[sushil yadav]

TechnoWorshipper,

I find it ironic that you have no concern/ compassion for Environment despite the fact that you owe your very existence to nature/ environment.

Why do you breathe the Air?

Why do you drink the Water?

Why do you eat the Food that comes from Soil? - Why don't you have Computers for breakfast, lunch and dinner.

Take all your technology to the Moon - and try producing a single grain of Food without using any natural ingredient from Earth.


In the absence of Nature your grandfather would'nt have lived.
In the absence of Nature your father would'nt have lived.
In the absence of Nature you would'nt have lived.

Show some respect to Nature.


sushil_yadav
PowerSwitch
StrategyTalk
Industrial Society Destroys Mind and Environment

[sushil yadav]

For several decades environmentalists have been warning modern society that ecosystems are getting destroyed - that consumerist life is not sustainable.

But modern society which was busy chasing progress, growth and development did not listen. It refused to believe there was any environmental crisis or problem. It said science and technology will always find a solution - if earth gets destroyed we will move on to another planet.

Impossible dreams were sold to people in the name of science and technology.

Moving to another planet would probably rank as the most impossible of all impossible things.

One space shuttle exploded during take off - another exploded on the return journey.

So far man has not been able to go beyond the moon. There is no other life sustaining ecosystem/ planet within our solar system. Outside the solar system planets and galaxies are millions of light years away - billions of light years away.

So when are we moving to a new home ?

Next year - or 5 years later ?


sushil_yadav
PowerSwitch
StrategyTalk
Industrial Society Destroys Mind and Environment

[milifestyle]

Quite honestly folks - this proposed experiment/article/adventure into outer space is 90% nonsense.

Please do not be fooled by the presentation. There are no results as suggested, merely an unsupported string of hypotheses and opinions that cannot be substantiated by science. To be considered academically, this post is never going to make it.

Is Science 100% correct, 100% of the time ?

The word "Science" is from the Latin scientia, meaning "knowledge".

Knowledge and truth do not have the same meaning. I KNOW for a fact Jack climbed the Beanstalk. But the TRUTH is... he didn't.

Anything that needs to be researched can be called a "science" if we acquire knowledge in the process. Thomas Edison acquired knowledge more than 1000 times on how NOT to make a light bulb before he got it right.

Philosophy, on the other hand looks at logic before science.

If 90% of the article in question is nonesence, 10% isn't...

[christopher]

Rainbow Farmer walked off a few years ago in a chemical/organic debate, which was too bad. She had a lot of knowledge about pond based aquaculture and goats, I had a lot of respect for her, but she became offended when round-up was demonized. She deleted most of her posts on the way out, too, sort of petty vandalism.

This thread has been around for years, and is thought provoking, and perhaps a bit esoteric, appraently some people find it threatening.

The most noble life a human can lead is as a fair free trade capitalist owning or working for a company, especially a publically owned corporation which provides large amounts of wealth for its share holders and society. The highest level of society is those refered to as conservatives or neo-conservatives, in many ways modeled after Plato's Republic where the smartest and most educated run society for the benefit of all.

I thought a pretty noble way to live is to grow food for yourself and your neighbors, so the hardest working can provide for the infirm, employed, or indolent.

[Dalzieldrin]

Quite honestly folks - this proposed experiment/article/adventure into outer space is 90% nonsense.

Please do not be fooled by the presentation. There are no results as suggested, merely an unsupported string of hypotheses and opinions that cannot be substantiated by science. To be considered academically, this post is never going to make it.

*snip*

Thomas Edison acquired knowledge more than 1000 times on how NOT to make a light bulb before he got it right.

to continue your allusion he discarded the ones that were >90% nonsense until he got to the 1000th that was 90% good and only 10% nonsense

surely RainbowFarmer is suggesting that we discard what was presented, because as an Edisonian reject its removal brings us closer to the useful information

[sushil yadav]

Industrial Society has been spreading blatant lies over the years.

"Green Industry", "Green Technology", "Ethical Consumerism", "Sustainable Development".

These are contradictory terms – these are oxymorons.
Industrialization can never be green – it is impossible.

You cannot save a person after you have killed him.
You cannot save ecosystems after you have killed them for making consumer goods.


When we make consumer goods we kill Animals, Trees, Air, Water and Land - directly or indirectly.

Industrial Society destroys ecosystems - all Industrial Societies destroy ecosystems.

It hardly matters whether it is "Capitalist Industrial Society" - "Communist Industrial Society" - or "Socialist Industrial Society".

Industrial Society destroys ecosystems at every stage of its functioning - when consumer goods are produced - when consumer goods are used - when consumer goods are discarded/ recycled.

Raw material for industry is obtained by cutting up Forests. It is extracted by mining/ digging up the earth. It comes by destroying/ killing Trees, Animals and Land.

Industries/ Factories use Water. The water that comes out of Factories is contaminated with hundreds of toxic chemicals. What to speak of Rivers - entire Oceans have been polluted. Industry kills Water.

Industries/ Factories burn millions of tonnes of fuel - and when raw material is melted/ heated up, hundreds of toxic chemicals are released into the atmosphere. Industry kills Air.

Industrial Society has covered millions of square miles of land with cement and concrete. Industry kills Land.

When consumer goods are discarded/ thrown away in landfills it again leads to destruction of ecosystems.

When consumer goods are recycled, hundreds of toxic chemicals are released into air, water and land.

Consumer goods are sold/ marketed through a network of millions of kilometers of rail / road network and shipping routes which causes destruction of all ecosystems that come in the way.


We have limited resources/ ecosystems on earth which is just 40,000 km in circumference.

If we destroy ecosystems for fewer things [food, clothing, shelter] the ecosystems will last longer.

If we destroy ecosystems for more things [consumer goods] the ecosystems will finish much sooner.

The fewer things we make the more sustainable we are.

This is common sense - plain common sense - which the so called smart, intelligent, advanced, civilized and developed Industrial Society does not possess.


We are alive because of ecosystems - we owe our very existence to ecosystems.

Industrial Society has destroyed most ecosystems within a span of 250 years after Industrial Revolution.

Ecosystems are not consumer goods that can be manufactured, repaired or restored by MultiNational Companies in industries and factories.

The collapse has already happened for millions of other species. Most of them have been decimated.

Very soon it will be the turn of man to go.


sushil_yadav
PowerSwitch
EnviroLink
Industrial Society Destroys Mind and Environment

[kimbo.parker]

i like it

i 'm not fussed about the quality of the science. Some truths I deem to be self evident.
the posts were fully read by me, and it was a nod along. Reading, nodding, reading, nodding.

i stopped nodding when some discussion was entered into of the suitability of the post/thread.

i would like the perma nazis to leave censorship out of the dialogue...the chap wants to air his thoughts...and I warm to this 'your all screwed' tune.

i agree with the post that remarks that some things are just better sung.....very funny.....and true in this case.
regards, Kimbo

[Noz]

I didn't read everything you wrote, but I found some of the ideas interesting.
I reject the concept that high density living cannot be done well. To suggest this is to support expansion into wilderness and higher carbon footprints (or some sort of eugenics).

I put it to you that some of the symptoms you observe relate to chronic nutritional deficiencies (B vitamins and magnesium) and are perhaps unrelated to the density or perceived pace of life in cities. In essence, correlation does not imply causation.

[sushil yadav]

This crazy society did not anticipate "Financial Collapse" until it actually happened.

This crazy society is not going to anticipate "Ecosystem Collapse" until it actually happens.


The way this insane, abnormal and criminal society is running is like :

A car running in a closed garage.

Adding extra floors to a building by removing bricks from the lower floors.


The crash - the collapse - the end is coming.

It is a matter of one or two decades at the most.


sushil_yadav
PowerSwitch
EnviroLink
Industrial Society Destroys Mind and Environment

[Gen-X]

I do question whether "intelligence" is really the root of the problem. Take the way you define our society for example; insane, abnormal and criminal. These definitions would appear to describe a society lacking intelligence - rather than possessing it.

Even so, insanity, abnormality and criminal tendencies are all definitions created by mankind. They all centre around the construct of "normal" within our own majority. But what is normal, in a natural world constantly evolving?

What I find difficult to accept in many of the moral debates about life (no matter which side you sit on) is that mankind is somehow askewed/irrational/faulty, in a world filled with perfection without us. A world where (if we believe the science) animals and the natural world ruled previously, and still got struck down to extinction.

We would have to accept that no-matter who sits at the top of the food chain, there is a "position" to get knocked down from. We also have to accept that the natural world will always go through a cleansing process, regardless of who's at the top of the food chain.

I put it to you that "normal" is nature in control - not the other way around. Mankind does not control nature, any more than the animals do. We are part of it, we all effect each other by what we do - but nature will always evolve, create, destroy, create, destroy, evolve again. This process will effect mankind no matter what we do.

This doesn't change the fact our actions are damaging eco systems. But I think that has more to do with our responsibility, rather than our intelligence. We cannot think our way into responsibility, we have to be taught by our actions. This is where industrialisation has probably removed people from understanding responsibility. Being segmentalised, we all have a "portion" of it, but no understanding of the entirity.

This is where encouraging people to grow their own food, begins the learning process again.