Summations Only

Perhaps the best solution is group size somewhere between tribalism and all of humanity erring on the smaller size.Tribalism, or in modern society, gangs, are groups between perhaps 200 and 1000 individuals. That's too small for any practical large-scale solutions.Ca. 7 billion people encompassing many different philosophies and regions is far too large for any practical solutions.

Democracy is based on the assumption that a million men are wiser than one man. How's that again? I missed something.

​

Autocracy is based on the assumption that one man is wiser than a million men. Let's play that over again, too. Who decides?

​

Robert A. Heinlein, Time Enough for Love

In other words, what does someone in India or China have to say about the way we do things in my county? Or state?Nothing.Let's keep our mistakes as local as possible, so there is some hope of correcting them.

I cannot google any good definition for "magestic laws," or "majestic laws" either.Could you please explain what you mean by that.My initial google searching suggests that it is a very non-standard term.

Good questions. Here is a non-math response.Exponential growth would have us filling the universe in just a few thousand years. But the same growth rate would have bacteria taking over the entire earth in weeks or months and the universe not long after. Neither is going to happen because you just can't sustain that growth rate. Also, getting to the rest of the universe is somewhat of a problem at the moment. I don't see us colonizing adjacent stars any time soon.The greatest threat I see at the moment is fundamentalism. We need to get off this rock and any resources spent fighting amongst ourselves are just wasted. All fundamentalism, but particularly Muslim fundamentalism, is diametrically opposed to scientific advance and the development of cultures that can expand into space.Rationality is the best solution for humanity, but too often folks who are entirely rational in all other aspects of their lives fall prey to the most irrational forms of woo and defend that woo at all costs. I suggest that we need to get over that, and as soon as possible.

Well, there is this little hurdle there--getting to the next star system is a bit beyond our capabilities at the moment. And busting that silly light-speed barrier may take a while as well. It would be handy to have solutions to those problems.I don't doubt that we'll figure a way if given half a chance, but don't wait up. I agree. But it doesn't have to wipe us off the map. All it has to do is sap much-needed resources and we're stuck on this rock. Surely you've heard something like "Why are we launching money into space when we have such poverty here. Let's fix that first." This is wrong in so many ways that I won't bother to deal with them at all. You either see it or you don'tThere was a time not that long ago when we could go to the moon. Before that, just about 50 years ago, we could put astronauts into orbit. At the moment we can't do either!Color me pessimistic.

If I remember correctly, acceleration at 1 g will near light speed in about a year.The actual doing of this is left as an exercise for the student.

We do not currently have the ability to go to the moon, nor even to put astronauts into orbit.

$100 placed at 7 percent interest compounded quarterly for 200 years will increase to more than $100,000,000 by which time it will be worth nothing.

​

Robert A. Heinlein, Time Enough for Love, 1974

Because of two recent crashes the Russians have discontinued manned launches. Just temporary, most likely, but there you have it.

Genesis is an ancient tribal myth, with no necessary application to modern problems.But belief is better than artificial respiration at keeping ancient myths alive. You seem to exemplify this.Genesis has been disproved in so many ways, but facts don't affect belief, do they? Facts can just be ignored or misrepresented--anything to keep belief alive, eh?You can believe what you want. You can rub blue mud in your naval on alternate Thursdays.But unless you have some real evidence, don't expect others to fall for that stuff.

Please do so, in a new thread.But don't forget to lead with talking snakes, young earth, global flood ca. 4,350 years ago, and that silly tower.And don't worry about any other writings. Your claim is about Genesis so that's what you have to defend.See you on your new thread, eh?

Homo habilis dates to between 2.4 and 1.5 million years ago and the brain shape shows evidence that some speech had developed.Homo erectus lived between 1.8 million and 300,000 years ago and definitely had speech.As for all languages beginning simultaneously, the linguists would dispute that. Could this be a matter of no written records prior to 6,000 years ago rather than the lack of speech?You might consider this possibility, as the evidence of brain development and skeletal anatomy definitely places speech prior to 6,000 years ago.Perhaps your beliefs are wrong, and could be helped by looking at facts?

The traditional religious view on the origin of the Torah is that it was written by Moses between 1446 BC and 1406 BC. While this view is still held by conservative Christians and Jews, modern scholars argue that the whole of the Torah was composed in the mid-1st millennium BC as a "prequel" to the prophetic books (books of Joshua, Judges, Samuel and Kings).

Dating the Bible - Wikipedia

The first known examples of writing may have been unearthed at an archaeological dig in Pakistan.

​

So-called 'plant-like' and 'trident-shaped' markings have been found on fragments of pottery dating back 5500 years.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/334517.stmSo, you're 2,000 or more years off.Care to try again, sticking to facts this time?

Epic of Gilgamesh

​

The earliest Sumerian poems are now considered to be distinct stories rather than constituting a single epic.[2]:45 They date from as early as the Third Dynasty of Ur (2150-2000 BC).[2]:41-42 The earliest Akkadian versions are dated to the early second millennium [2]:45, most likely in the eighteenth or seventeenth century BC, when one or more authors used existing literary material to form the epic of Gilgamesh.[3] The "standard" Akkadian version, consisting of 12 tablets, was edited by Sin-liqe-unninni sometime between 1300 and 1000 BC and was found in the library of Ashurbanipal in Nineveh.

Epic of Gilgamesh - WikipediaDon't you ever tire of being proven wrong?

"Alphabeticals" is a poor standard. "Phonetic alphabet" is far more accurate.I suspect you are only using alphabeticals because that's what your favorite writings are in.There are a lot of writings far earlier. What you are doing is akin to studying the history of cars and declaring that the V-8 was the most important event, and that nothing before that counted for squat.Nice work if you can get it.

Scholars propose that the flood story was written around 550—450 BC as a reworking of the ancient Mesopotamian myth of the flood-hero Utnapishtim. For the ancient author or authors, the purpose of the story was theological, elevating Hebrew monotheism over Babylonian polytheism.

Flood geology - WikipediaPlease don't try to make a living as a scientist. There you have to be right, all the time, or nearly so. There is no credit for being wrong.I suppose you can get away with being wrong when you're a religious apologist, but that doesn't cut it in the real world where you need evidence to back up your claims

Your insistence on an alphabetical book does you no credit.As per my analogy above, that is like writing the history of automobiles as starting with the V-8 and ignoring all that went before.But I guess when you're doing apologetics you don't need to rely on evidence, just rhetoric, eh?Your posts are certainly showing that to be the case.