Global Futurism. A discussion of impending issues

regardless of your possition in theology or relegion, scientific data and evidence in archeology prove that the earth corrects imblance of its struture.usually a devestation precludes the correction.there are tons of different ways the earth could be destroyed or man at least returned to the stone age. some of these more easy to see would be :global warming: carbon is mined from below the surface of the earth, and released into the atmospher at an alarming rate, the excess greenhouse gas causes an imbalance in the recycling of carbon in the natural order.as ice melts faster from the caps the sea is being thinned of its salt content. the north atlantic drift which brings warmer water to the north also stabalizes the temperature of the region, so if the flow was to stop (balance of salt and freshwater compromised) the temperature change would be drastic.if this was to happen, the ensueing chaos could possibly be similiar to what happened after the hurricane in new orleans. instead of people banding together, they took an "eveyrone for themself" approach and rapes, murders and looting was broad.another approach to a possible world disaster would be the release of atomic bombs or a nuclear war.perhapts an undocumented mass slamming into the earth. something say, half the size of our moon.should we all give up on life then?no.if you see that something is umbalanceing the earth, should you ignore it?no.we must be responsable patrons of the planet that we live if we wish to have half the success of the dinosaurs before us.the (majority of) the world basis value in terms of money. and until man realizes that money does not make the world go round, there is no hope for our future anyways.to stop living, stop science, stop hope, stop religions, stop anything, due to the fact tommorrow all could be gone is foolish.
if you can help change something for the better of mankind, do it....at least, thats my opinion.Edited by tesla, : typoes (some anyways lol)

we have the information and the ability to avoid some natural disasters.the problem is : money vs life.until the problem is "proven" to exist in the lifetime of those in the position to make the necessary changes through politics, special interest groups like big oil are keeping the problems from being solved.(at least in the case of global warming, this is pretty much a quote from Senator McCain when asked about the issue)i think that the government can make pushes towards green energies, but that the pushes there idealizing are too expensive for the consumer.for example, putting even stricter emission requirements on vehicles. now..this drives the cost of production up, and green emission vehicles are still too expensive to make available to the greater public.bio-diesel/electric engine in California, rated at 100 miles to the gallon on bio-diesel fuel, in an older heavy vehicle. engine cost: $30,000making this engine available in new market vehicles with a price range of 5-7 thousand dollars WOULD slow down global warming and solve a lot of the energy problems in this country.but..HOW does a government endorse the production of such an engine at low enough prices that it could be afforded?there are many other potential "end of the world" scenarios, and all of the ones that we the people of this planet are aware of, need to start seriously thinking of how they can be avoided, and once a solution is found, bring awareness via the media, and pressure the government into implementing whatever is necessary.ie: if the government introduced a new tax (i know, we're taxed to death as it is, but it IS for the future of the planet) the tax was a weekly deduction of one dollar from each paycheck, and all the money was sent to a car factory, for the specific use to produce bio-diesel electric engined cars and sell them at 3-7k dollars.say the car costs the factory 17,000, for a suggested 7k model, the government pays the $10,000 with the tax money.now i'm not a politician, but i am trying to find a solution.anyone think this could work? or have any other ideas?Edited by AdminPhat, : spellcheck

i type to slow..the convo turned fast, i dont beleive that end time believers do any more damge now than they did 2000 years ago and started burning rome.i do beleive that extremists gruops being tought that the more they kill, the better off they will be in heaven..THAT could wipe out the planet..but the topic is the "real" threat to humanity. it isnt end time beleivers..its EVERYone. man itself.its the ones who turn a blind eye.its the ones who can help,but who wont help because it doesnt add to their pockets.its the ones who are always looking at a person by their skin color, or region, or different religion, or different political standing.its people thinking about number one, self gratification, and so big in their own minds the world is stupid, so they dont even try to make it better.the real threat to humanity, is humanity.but we can also save it.

russia is the current weakest link in nuclear grade plutonium. because corruption is high. dick cheny has made it his number one priority to research the worlds plutonium levels and possible losses.the US built enough nuclear bombs to destroy the world times over in a three year arms race with russia.but both countries have a very strict eye on those caches. the leak is only potentialy through corruption.other countries arnt so suavy, and dictators are unpredictable enough that they will use them. where as our dimplomatic process prevents that kind of descision by one individual.to prevent nuclear mayhem: the leage of nations, or other world ewide endorsed watchdog gruop needs to monitor al sales buying of rodes and b able to inspect all facilities of nuclear fission to ensure none is weapons grade material. nations not in compliance need worldwide consequence of invasion and dismantaling. only then could we be remotly safe, and its what the world has tried to do.

Myth, they do not have the capability to do much, except for those who are in positions of power like the President of the US and the US Christians that believe in their own End Time myths.
(quote from jar)they did 9/11. to assume they have no power is naive.pakistan if it was to get its hands on nuclear weapins im pretty sure they allow an extremist to play with it.and as far as us christians, they do not preach that people should prepare for armegadon by acting on warfare. they preach goodwill towards men in preperation of their souls.Edited by tesla, : No reason given.

lol now whos being funny?the US does not have half the power the world thinks it does.if china wanted the united states to fall, it would fall.

9/11 proved intent. all they need is a bigger weapon and they will use it.think logicaly.

thats not true.even if the us was to dismantle every single nuclear weapoin, and convert all moterized transport to biodeisel (grown carbons, not mined)china would still be produceing emmisions. just like all the other countries.jar, the united states is a part of the equation, but with its goverment being limited to several gruops like congress and the house of represenatives to restrict the actions of any president (and do) and especially since americans essentially cannot agree in unity on almost any topic, shows only this rule:that the greatest threat that the united states poses to world annihlation , is inaction.(however not the only threat, but definatly the greatest.)

im inclined to agree with you, obvios, in that statement.

yes, even when the commander in cheif is one.beleiveing that the world will come to an end or thayt we are in the end times, does not mean that the beleivers are going to commit suicide.most end time beleivers beleive that preperation for the end time means prayer and self improvment.i think there are issues that the planet is faceing that are easy to see without looking to divine assistance. and that they can be avoided, or at least prolonged, so that time would be allowed for preperation to lessen the impact.

as long as you focus on their insistance and ignore the storm about to smack humanity, we as a human race will only prove them right.global warming is the greatest proven threat that is going to hurt the planet and the human race.just because the chicken keeps saying the sky is falling dont mean we stare at the chiken at point fingers at it when something does go wrong.i beleive we need to seriosly think about what is an actual threat and leave the chicken alone.i dont beleive the religeos should abandon their religeons in order to be helpful in the correction of mankinds mistakes. as long as the religeon does not condone attempting to destroy the planet in response to its inevitable demise.

i dont follow;humanity is the storm:rather, the actions of humanity is the storm.religeous or not, when an army is standing at a countries border, the country reacts. even as we now foresee the impending global climate changes that are affecting the planet , we must act.a man who prays and teaches others to pray and self improve, is not as dangerous as teaching humanity to give up on their God or Gods. the hope and inspirations in religeon have added to, not taken away from mankind.a man without hope is dangerous. a people without hope is catestrophic.

yes but the storm is relative to the return of christ, or God.if the sun has not blackend over, the coming danger is not yet here. since it seems to be a recuring theme.years ago, as wars broke out and many claimed "the end was near" did not prevent the people from reacting to nutural dangers that threaten humanity.the belief that the world would end in 1999 did not cause the world to end in 1999.but if masses beleive that belief alone will result in the end of life, then by their inaction to present dangers will claim humanity.recognizing the danger of inaction, the cost of inaction needs to be relayed, and the world being aware, begin to take action to prevent the disaster. and if history repeats itself, action will be taken.when the flood came, boats were built. when the cold comes, fires need to be stoked.so what threats are real, because an imagined danger is not going to rally but a small portion of mankind. remember, mankind has shown that they agree on very little, and this lack of unity is what prevents with ease that the "beleif" of the end will cause it, since most people will begin arguments with no winner in such a debate.Edited by tesla, : No reason given.

the industery and economy:essentially the issue with global warming is carbons being burned from mined carbons.but feul can be produced from "grown" carbonsthe fuel would work in the same form as the mined (biodeisel) but stem from agriculter not from mining industeries. the change can be made, and if well planned the only economic devastation would be to the mining and oil industeries.prayer has no effect:this is not true. in perhapts your lifestyle you have found aspects in life that instill "purpose"however, the lack of purpose in the life of many finds its filling in prayer. although, if all religeon dissapeard tommorrow, not eveyrone would find it a problem, the majority would. since the majority, is religeos based. this purpose inspires hope.hope: human phsychology has found hopeless individuals counter productive in life. im not suggesting that all people find their hope in God. but i do suggest that a very large majority do.

biodeisel carbons would be recycled carbons. not carbons mined.what we mine and add to our atmosphere is added carbons outside of the geological cycle, where biodeisel comeing from plants would only be a recycling of current carbons.i cant say that all oil products can be manufactured from plants, but it could be possible since carbon is carbon after all.by swapping the transportation to biodeiesel from oil would greatly reduce greenhouse gas emmisions and if nothing else, buy more time.