On 1/17/2025 3:57 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 1/17/2025 1:57 PM, AMuzi wrote:
" The Earth can only support a finite number of humans...."
Logically, yes.
That limit is a much larger number than pessimists have predicted.
Imminent doom has been wrong repeatedly. Everything was supposed to
collapse at 4 billion, at 5 billion, at 6 billion, etc. Still waiting.
The Malthusians ignore human innovation.
I suppose we could read the specific scientific articles of the day to
see exactly what they said, as opposed to something like the blaring
headlines on the front pages of popular magazines. And I'm aware that
some ingenious breakthroughs (e.g. in food production) have acted as
Deus Ex Machina to at least temporarily save the day.
But I suspect those who feel "Everything Will Always Be Fine" were
interpreting warnings about (say) 6 billion as "... and then the world
will suddenly end!" More realistic people would be expecting a
prolonged and very messy gradual failure, probably with a slow initial
buildup. Which seems to be what we're seeing today.
We've recently set yet another record for "hottest year since record
keeping began." Those seem to keep coming. "Everything is fine!"
skeptics say, "Because I can still make a snowball!!"
But climate problems are certainly increasing. California wildfires,
Appalachian hurricanes, African droughts etc. are driven at least in
part by novel climate changes. That's evidence of a slow initial buildup.
I expect we'll gradually see more people demanding immigration
permission, or sneaking in without permission, as conditions worsen in
certain countries. We may see migration out of certain areas of the
U.S. as water becomes more and more scarce and expensive, except in
certain coastal areas, where it will become inconveniently abundant
due to rising sea levels. Like other changes, that won't be a sudden
wall of water inundating a city. Instead, it will be "Damn! The
business district is flooded _again_???" I suspect there will be
economic consequences, but they will be gradual enough to give
"plausible deniability" to the skeptics.
The bigger factors that _may_ give "I told you so" proof are, in my
mind, the Atlantic Ocean thermal circulation and the unlocking of
long-trapped arctic methane. Those seem likely to be "tipping point"
scenarios that will be relatively sudden, self enhancing and
impossible to reverse.
But I guess we'll see, if we live long enough.
Climate change and California wildfires? Pfffft.
The first Spanish captain who sailed past and didn't anchor there called
it 'valley of smoke'. In the 1570s, not last week.
On 18 Jan 2025 14:15:44 GMT, Roger Merriman <[email protected]> wrote:
Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> wrote:
On 18 Jan 2025 08:02:18 GMT, Roger Merriman <[email protected]> wrote:
AMuzi <[email protected]> wrote:
On 1/17/2025 9:02 PM, John B. wrote:
On Fri, 17 Jan 2025 22:01:41 -0300, Shadow <[email protected]> wrote:
On Sat, 18 Jan 2025 07:47:48 +0700, John B. <[email protected]> >>>>>>> wrote:
On Fri, 17 Jan 2025 13:18:48 -0300, Shadow <[email protected]> wrote:
On Fri, 17 Jan 2025 08:25:45 -0600, AMuzi <[email protected]> wrote:
On 1/17/2025 5:21 AM, Shadow wrote:
On Fri, 17 Jan 2025 11:30:14 +0700, John B. <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On Thu, 16 Jan 2025 14:07:10 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 1/16/2025 12:28 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 1/16/2025 10:30 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:I suggest a test. Put Mr. Tricycle out in the wilderness all alone. I
On 1/16/2025 10:00 AM, Catrike Ryder wrote:Interpretation varies.
In my opinion, the reason that humans rose to our place on the food
chain is because of our individualistic need to better ourselves and
our situation.
Your rabid individualism has obviously stunted your education. Don't
expect that many will value your totally uneducated opinions. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mr Tricycle has a point, and a very good one at that. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
predict he won't better himself or his situation. In fact, I predict he
won't survive long.
OTOH, human beings working cooperatively have built entire civilizations.
Your argument sounds so logical... until one actually work with >>>>>>>>>>>> primitive people, the ones the trike man is talking about. And yes I
have worked with this sort of people. In one case we had to call in
the Indonesian military to stop a "war" between two villagers over who
would keep a worn out plastic tarpaulin. Hardly an example of >>>>>>>>>>>> "cooperatively".
By the way, the military solution was to simplify get out of the >>>>>>>>>>>> helicopter and immediately shoot one of the two fighters. Fight over.
What faction were the "military" ? Nazis?
They murdered a citizen in cold blood and didn't solve the >>>>>>>>>>> problem.
And unless that "primitive person" was a baboon, his IQ was >>>>>>>>>>> probably equal to, or even superior to the "military's"***. Not having
access to a decent education doesn't make you stupid, it makes you >>>>>>>>>>> ignorant.
[]'s
*** The military are notoriously stupid. Far more stupid than >>>>>>>>>>> the general population.
Well, their mission was to prevent a war and further
slaughter.
Sounded more like a scuffle between two men.
Best solution? Maybe not, but we were not the
officer in the field that day.
I would have given each one half of the tarpaulin. One cuts. >>>>>>>>> the other chooses. And whoever does not agree gets shot in the knee. >>>>>>>>>
Military === Stuuuupid.
[]'s
But of course, if you are correct no one in S.America world be >>>>>>>> speaking Spanish or Portuguese, Adolf Hitler's party would rule >>>>>>>> Europe, the U.S. would still be a colony of G.B. and even more >>>>>>>> examples throughout the history of mankind.
LOL.
I don't think our "military" had anything to do with our
independence. Our very gay prince had a hysterical fit and hollered he >>>>>>> didn't want to go home, and that was that.
As to Hitler, he was not a party type. He was more of a
military man. AKA Stuuuupid. Invading Russia in winter is not a good >>>>>>> idea....
Operation Barbarossa, the invasion of the Soviet Union by Nazi Germany >>>>>> starting on Sunday, 22 June 1941, during World War II.
Is June winter?
Napoleon crossed into Russia in mid September. Same result
as Stalingrad.
Winter comes, whether you like it or not.
Indeed I the assumption that Russia would fold and the war would be over by
time winter came around, was foolish.
It did have some help in terms of materials with the convoys but Russia >>>> took on and won the majority of the German army without them the war
outcome probably wouldn?t change but the how and the why and the length >>>> certainly would.
Roger Merriman
My old college history professor called it the iffy game. What would
have happened if the US hadn't known about the Japanese Naval force
heading to Midway? What would have happened if McClellan had chased
down Lee when he was retreating from the Battle of Antietam? What
would have happened at the Battle of the Bulge had the weather not
cleared and allowed supplies to be dropped in.
Wars seem to be won or lost as much on chance occurrences as on
strategic decisions and the strengths of opposing forces.
Battles maybe but not the outcome of the war, hence the sane Japanese and
indeed German military trying persuade their political masters to either
delay or not start the war, Pearl harbour and its plan was because Japan
couldn’t win the war, conventionally as American industrial capacity and >> oil reserves so Yamamoto hope was this would bring America to the
negotiations table.
Midway absolutely shortened the war but not the result.
Iffy....
Where some strategies/training that differences where in American’s favour
such damage control being crew wide basic training, so that US ships
surviving damage that would of sunk the equivalent Japanese ships due to
much better and damage control, though as cheeky note, the British carriers >> tended to shrug off due to having armoured deck and belt, though this makes >> other compromises.
The other being actively conserving skilled and experienced flight crew,
hence the “The Great Marianas Turkey Shoot” as by then japan had lost its
experienced pilots, and a technical edge ie the US planes improved quite
significantly, in contrast to the Japanese aircraft.
The Zero was a very good fighter airplane, but the US fighters were
better able to deal with damage.
Japan would have always reached that point but by not actively working to
keep skilled pilots and that knowledge alive it came sooner, than later.
You're suggesting that neither Germany and Japan never had a chance.
I'm not so sure that's true, but we'll never know for sure.
In any major war, WW 2 in this case, "career personnel" make up a very
small percentage of military officers.. Simply because there is no
need for great numbers in piece time so, prior to war few are trained.
As for, "Mean while in the actual world, a Brazilian division
acquitted themselves very well", from what I read the Brazilian
contingents "went to war" with the understand that the U.S.was to
supply all arms and supplies, right down to their uniforms and that
they would act under the control of U.S. forces commanders.
On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 09:01:25 +0700, John B. <[email protected]>
wrote:
In any major war, WW 2 in this case, "career personnel" make up a very
small percentage of military officers.. Simply because there is no
need for great numbers in piece time so, prior to war few are trained.
Brazil has far more senior officers than the US. Example: The
US has 43 4-star generals. Bolsonaro used them as office boys.
None of them ever fought an external enemy.
They retire when they're 50 with full pensions (their salary+a promotion).
Also any wife or daughter of an officer is entitled to his
pension if he dies. They only lose it if they re-marry (in case of
daughters, marry).
I have some colleagues that never married because they make
over US $ 25.000 a month from their military pensions. Working as
doctors they make around US$ 5.000 tops.
As for, "Mean while in the actual world, a Brazilian division
acquitted themselves very well", from what I read the Brazilian
contingents "went to war" with the understand that the U.S.was to
supply all arms and supplies, right down to their uniforms and that
they would act under the control of U.S. forces commanders.
Yes, the commanders were American. But clothing and food was
supposed to be supplied by the Brazilian military....
They got the color of the uniforms wrong because the Brazilian
Military were fascists (still are) and thought they would be fighting
for Hitler. Hence Brazilian uniforms = German uniforms.
[]'s
On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 14:23:06 -0300, Shadow <[email protected]> wrote:
On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 09:01:25 +0700, John B. <[email protected]>Not to comment on numbers of Brazilian Officers but the idea that
wrote:
In any major war, WW 2 in this case, "career personnel" make up a very >>>small percentage of military officers.. Simply because there is no
need for great numbers in piece time so, prior to war few are trained.
Brazil has far more senior officers than the US. Example: The
US has 43 4-star generals. Bolsonaro used them as office boys.
None of them ever fought an external enemy.
They retire when they're 50 with full pensions (their salary+a >>promotion).
Also any wife or daughter of an officer is entitled to his
pension if he dies. They only lose it if they re-marry (in case of >>daughters, marry).
I have some colleagues that never married because they make
over US $ 25.000 a month from their military pensions. Working as
doctors they make around US$ 5.000 tops.
As for, "Mean while in the actual world, a Brazilian division
acquitted themselves very well", from what I read the Brazilian >>>contingents "went to war" with the understand that the U.S.was to
supply all arms and supplies, right down to their uniforms and that
they would act under the control of U.S. forces commanders.
Yes, the commanders were American. But clothing and food was
supposed to be supplied by the Brazilian military....
They got the color of the uniforms wrong because the Brazilian >>Military were fascists (still are) and thought they would be fighting
for Hitler. Hence Brazilian uniforms = German uniforms.
[]'s
Brazil was planning on supplying a military unit half the world away
when the U.S. was already supplying a much larger group in the same
location is just plain silly. Here the U.S. is with a much larger and
fully operational supply system and Brazil isn't going to utilize it?
In fact, the largest problem in any military operation isn't
solders... it is supply. It's easy to move the troops, just chuck them
out of an airplane, but what do you do at supper time?
On Tue, 21 Jan 2025 09:40:09 +0700, John B. <[email protected]>
wrote:
On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 14:23:06 -0300, Shadow <[email protected]> wrote:
On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 09:01:25 +0700, John B. <[email protected]>Not to comment on numbers of Brazilian Officers but the idea that
wrote:
In any major war, WW 2 in this case, "career personnel" make up a very >>>> small percentage of military officers.. Simply because there is no
need for great numbers in piece time so, prior to war few are trained.
Brazil has far more senior officers than the US. Example: The
US has 43 4-star generals. Bolsonaro used them as office boys.
None of them ever fought an external enemy.
They retire when they're 50 with full pensions (their salary+a
promotion).
Also any wife or daughter of an officer is entitled to his
pension if he dies. They only lose it if they re-marry (in case of
daughters, marry).
I have some colleagues that never married because they make
over US $ 25.000 a month from their military pensions. Working as
doctors they make around US$ 5.000 tops.
As for, "Mean while in the actual world, a Brazilian division
acquitted themselves very well", from what I read the Brazilian
contingents "went to war" with the understand that the U.S.was to
supply all arms and supplies, right down to their uniforms and that
they would act under the control of U.S. forces commanders.
Yes, the commanders were American. But clothing and food was
supposed to be supplied by the Brazilian military....
They got the color of the uniforms wrong because the Brazilian
Military were fascists (still are) and thought they would be fighting
for Hitler. Hence Brazilian uniforms = German uniforms.
[]'s
Brazil was planning on supplying a military unit half the world away
when the U.S. was already supplying a much larger group in the same
location is just plain silly. Here the U.S. is with a much larger and
fully operational supply system and Brazil isn't going to utilize it?
In fact, the largest problem in any military operation isn't
solders... it is supply. It's easy to move the troops, just chuck them
out of an airplane, but what do you do at supper time?
Brazil agreed to allow the US to build a Naval Base in Natal,
in exchange for the US financing the "Companhia Siderurgica
Nacional".
//Because of its strategic position (Natal is one of the cities in
Brazil nearest to Western Europe and Africa, especially Dakar,
Senegal), an American air base was built in a suburb of Natal named Parnamirim during World War II, as part of the so-called Operation
Rainbow. This base provided support for allied troops fighting in
north Africa. Thousands of American soldiers were sent to Natal. Their presence left traces in the culture of the city. The city also held
the Potenji Conference, which took place right after the Casablanca Conference and defined the active participation of Brazil in the war,
being the only Latin American country to send troops overseas to fight
in Europe. //
It was about supply. The Americans used a base in Brazil to
supply Brazilian soldiers in Southern Europe .... because our military wouldn't.
PS The base was returned to Brazil in 1946. There are no
American bases in Brazil.
[]'s
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 716 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 50:27:23 |
| Calls: | 12,115 |
| Calls today: | 6 |
| Files: | 15,010 |
| Messages: | 6,518,550 |
| Posted today: | 1 |