What is "civilization?" The 0-level civ.

Started by fauxlaw

Replies
38
Posts
39
Page
1 / 2

Conversation

#1 •••

I have seen a variety of definitions. Nat Geo once published - sometime in the 80s, I think, a list of six or5 seven defining principles, the whole of which would demonstrate the best of our civilization that disks not5 yet entertain nuclear power, or nuclear anything, meaning a level of technology free-dsating nuke tech. Technology, itself, in the broad stroke, was near the last of the list, if not the last, others included oral, then written language, to achieve complex, and even legitimate theoretical science over and above "earth sciences" of thousand of years in development. Another feature was elevation above an agrarian, hunter/gatherer status to full agriculture [plant and animal husbandry] Another was the wheel, and then other mechanically driven devices to assist and simplify work. Establishment of politics/government. Development of formal education from childhood into adulthood, and freeing up children from necessary farmers/huntrers to be so educated. Ther3e are others, but these formed Nat Geo's suggest3ed meaning of civilization.


Russian astrophysicist, Nikolai Kardashev, proposed the Kardashev Scale of Civilization in 8 steps in 1964. This scale was developed on the basis of energy use, and began at Level 0 as a civilization depending on petroleum as the primary energy source, meaning that in 1964, earthlings were a level 0 civilization.


Today, 6 decades later, our energy dependence on petroleum to the tune of 60%-plus, keeps us at level 0. But, Kardechev believed global warming [now called climate change, but Kardashev used the earlier term] was indeed an existential threat, as some. like AlGore, still believe it, believing that man is too stupid to figure out what isn't there case anyway; that petroleum is not a renewable engergy source.


Our familiar Nat Geo still believes that, and yet, petroleum continues to be a readily available energy source, and does not seem to be exhausting itself as was predicted in the 1950s, to be exhausted within 20-30 years]. We'rter still pumping th4e stuff out of the ground at increasing rates, worldwide, with no end in sight, given just proven reserves, let alone what is unknown.


Meanwhile, wind power, claimed to be "renewable," is not producing 24-7, is it? And solar fails every single night of the world. These may be "renewable," but they cannot be said to be perpetually sustainable with so many interruptions.


That petroleum ceased to be produced with the death of the dinosaurs is just a convenient myth. So, Kardashev's scale is, at best, just another biased climate change theory that is failing to inundate us by invading oceans onto our landmasses, as predicted by AlGore. It was his "inconvenient truth," and that it has not come to pass in his lifetime,


AlGore is a woke relic who, though he invented the internet [?}, it seems he's never been able to invent AlGoreGooeyJuice to replace petroleum, which is supposed to be completely eliminated and replaced in four years, by the originally established green schedule, and as guarantee by An Occasional Cortex [AOC] back in the Oba'a administration. So, we're a 0-level civilization, no more civilized than Ug and Gut.


We'll cover the more advanced Kardashev civilizations in other topics by the numbers.

Edit comment

We tell God what to do and then blame Him for our errors.

- Dr. Pet Dragon of Sorbonne University

#2 •••
@fauxlaw

Hmmmm.


Six sentences of error rife rambling just to have a dig at Al Gore.

Edit post

#3 •••
@SergeantLynch
Six sentences of error rife rambling just to have a dig at Al Gore.


Show me which sentence re: ALGore is not true. Is Manhattan inundated as he predicted? Do we not have adequate technology to compensate for environments that exceed a temperature variation of >1.5º C? Do we have any climate on Earth that remains within ±1.5ºC?Have we ever had such a climate, even before the advent of man?


If AlGore is going to make such inconvenient claims, he. better be able to back them up. To date, he has failed to do so. And where is AlGoreGooeyJuice to replace oil?

Edit post

We tell God what to do and then blame Him for our errors.

- Dr. Pet Dragon of Sorbonne University

#4 •••
@fauxlaw

Sorry Faux, but I failed to see any pertinent connection between the philosophies of Nikolai Kardashev and Al Gore.

Edit post

#5 •••
@SergeantLynch


pertinent connection between the philosophies of Nikolai Kardashev and Al Gore.


The connection is that both believed global warming/climate change as fundamentally [existentially] threatening to life on Earth when the fact is, we've had much more violent, changeable climate as late as 140M years ago when mammals with identical physiological systems to modern man, and which could not be said to have been responsible for causing those climates, survived them to give rise to man, who have been claimed responsib00le for our milder, but allegedly more harmful climates. Oxymoronic, if you ask me.


Edit post

We tell God what to do and then blame Him for our errors.

- Dr. Pet Dragon of Sorbonne University

#6 •••
@fauxlaw

So you don't think for one minute that the insatiable human greed for fossil fuels and the atmospheric pollutants derived thereof can have any effect whatsoever on climatic function. Thereby affecting the wider biosphere...Not just your snug mountain retreat.

Edit post

#7 •••
@SergeantLynch

Trump’s war on Iran will highlight our dependence on fossil fuel.

Edit post

#8 •••
@Debby

For sure, the US is always chasing resources, as are all the big players...What some might regard as counter-intuitive progress.

Edit post

#9 •••
@SergeantLynch

But the U.S. is also depleting its resources by waging wars.Its a zero sum game.

Edit post

#10 •••
@Debby

Yes, clever stupid.


Seemingly more stupid than clever.


Which might suggest that a real AI is essential to progress.

Edit post

#11 •••
@SergeantLynch

AI is the future for everything.

Edit post

#12 •••
@Debby

I'm guessing so.

Edit post

#13 •••
@SergeantLynch

AI is keeping the stock market up.

Edit post

#14 •••
@Debby

Yes, what future for stockmarkets?


What use will real AI have for stockmarkets?

Edit post

#15 •••
@SergeantLynch

Better predictions and more investments in AI.

Edit post

#16 •••
@Debby

I did say real AI.


Will real AI see the need for monetarism?


Wouldn't intellectual investment be all that is required.

Edit post

#17 •••
@SergeantLynch

But to sustain AI it has to be monetarised.

Edit post

#18 •••
@Debby

Nope, your confusing real self sustaining AI with human controlled AI...I'm talking in the future somewhat, perhaps not so far though when compared with the previous rate of material evolution...Hundreds of years rather than billions of years...So why would a techno-AI see the need to exchange some sort of token payment for it's maintenance and development?

Edit post

#19 •••
@SergeantLynch

It will take a heavy investment in AI to bring it to fruition maybe in the trillions.

Edit post

#20 •••
@Debby

That's a human problem...Maybe a human failing...Though I guess that the system relative to the fallible organism was probably inevitable.

Edit post

#21 •••
@SergeantLynch

AI is designed to overcome human limitations and avoid human failures.

Edit post

#22 •••
@Debby

Well, I would say that techno-AI has inevitably evolved and will overcome organic/human limitations.

Edit post

#23 •••
@SergeantLynch

The stock market is betting on it too.

Edit post

#24 •••
@Debby

Yes, fat cats getting fatter before AI wipes them out.


And for sure, currently dependant AI is dependant on human input.


And clever human's don't input without financial stimulation.


I expect you find that big ego's need stimulation before input.

Edit post

#25 •••
@SergeantLynch


SergeantLynch wrote:
Hmmmm.

Six sentences of error rife rambling just to have a dig at Al Gore.


Can you imagine still being bunged up about Al Gore? Most people on this board don't even know who Al Gore is, and for the rest of us, he's barely a dim memory.


Foe Faux, festering is a lifestyle choice.

Edit post

#26 •••
@Sidewalker

Al Gore did not set the path to AI. But he was a strong advocate of global warming.

Edit post

#27 •••
@Debby

Well, I'm not sure that he was an advocate of global warming.

Edit post

#28 •••
@Sidewalker

True, but Faux also thinks that major deposits of crude oil are being laid down as we speak.


But to be fair, Faux is of the oil dependant generation and is comfortably set in his ways...So why should he worry about global warming...Yep, why does he worry about AL gore.


He needs to concentrate on Peggy Flannigan...Who for sure is a crazy mixed up female democrat with big glasses. described by wikipedia as a woman of colour...Sort of a whitish colour.


Americas Great

Edit post

#29 •••
@SergeantLynch

Why do you follow American politics. Wasn’t BREXIT final?

Edit post

#30 •••
@Debby

No...Brexit was a phase.


And British politics is not a hot topic.


Have you ever heard of Anne Widdecombe...She was bludgeoned to death by a woke madman with a hammer....Didn't make the Forum.

Edit post