Its quite obvious that you don't know the relation between Zeitgeist the Movie and The Zeitgeist Movement. Even clearer, is that you dont not watch those two videos because if you had, you would know that they are irrelevant to this discussion.
You dont think abolishing the monetary system is a good idea, then very well, continue being the slave of bankers who create money out of nothing and use it to control your life and take away your time.
continue being the slave of bankers who create money out of nothing
What's wrong with creating money out of nothing?
you don't know the relation between Zeitgeist the Movie
I saw Zeitgeist the Movie and the last part about NWO federal reserve system and distortion of Carroll Quigley's work really disgusted me.
How to follow movement based on falsehoods you tell me?
Well, think...for once. Say a banker creates $1 million out of nothing, in today's fractional reserve system and loans it to you. And almost all money in circulation is created that way. Only the principle amount exists and the interest charged doesnt exist. That way, there is constant competition for money (to pay off the interest) that doesnt exist and its a way to keep poverty and bankruptcy a constant in society.
Zeitgeist The Movie and The Zeitgeist Movement are totally different things (though they share the same name). Do your homework before posting.
Zeitgeist The Movie and The Zeitgeist Movement are totally different things
Then why there is link to each other on their sites?
http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/activism.htm
So? If you say Zeitgeist The Movie = The Zeitgeist Movement. Clearly, there is a logical fallacy. Let me put it across simply so I can save the trouble of posting on the "rich and poor gap" thread (and since you're too lazy to go find out). There is an association since they are by the same person.
But the Youtube videos you posted refutes Zeitgeist because Zeitgeist attacked Christianity in the first part (nothing said about what Zeitgeist said about the NWO and the Fed). Whether it was right or wrong is irrelevant, the point is that you didnt even watch it to ensure that it was relevant to the discussion. We're discussing the merits of the monetary system and why it should be abolished, and that is what The Zeitgeist Movement aims to achieve. At the same time, Zeitgeist Addendum, the sequal, is another documentary that puts forward what I've been saying. Pointing out the flaws of the present monetary system and the corporate-dominated world today and in history and offering a better alternative. Therefore, there is a difference and your links are totally irrelevant.
I didn't know there were two movies.
That was my error.
The first one had so many flaws and distortions that I was quite turned off by it.
Here is another discussion on that:
Zeitgeist: Addendum
Do you have an opinion of your own? I think so. Demonstrate that you have it.
Use your own knowledge to disprove, ridicule... everything connected to The Zeitgeist Movement.
As I said, not doing your homework for you.
At the very least, it is very idealistic to set forward a humane-oriented society. But then, why are we have something called "humanity" and "humane behaviour", stemming from the word "human"?
Fellow crackpots also criticises Zeitgeist: Addendum.
Not doing your homework for you.
The least you could do is to make an assertion and back it up with one of those links. At least, that'll make it a substantiated claim. (Of course, first you got to read/watch those- I got my whole stuff to read.)
For less wacky ideas on how to reform capitalist society, see:
http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/3637
http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/1834
http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/1266
But it is good that you are interested in these things, because as you know PAP regime doesn't want us to be politicised.
There are no critical discussion of state policies or political shows on state media, just state propaganda.
But get caught up in zany internet stuff is also not right.
Funny how a thread on global warming can end up like that.
So what are you currently reading up on or interested in?
Originally posted by Stevenson101:Sorry for the late response, had to do a little research.
Well, the African nations are still selling their oil and gas reserves currently, but their country as a whole is still riddled with poverty and violence isn't it? Like the Saudis, the oil and gas reserves are what is helping their government from not listening to their people.
....The problem with this is that you're neglecting EROEI ( Energy returned upon Energy Invested) and how is that power going to distributed.
Iceland has geothermal energy production, but how are you going to transfer excess energy to the rest of Europe? Considering the geological distance? And considering the fact that it has to be next to active volcanic activity how do you ensure your facilities are going to stay intact during an earth quake?
Felt I should address this. And who do you think is responsible for the poverty and violence wrecking African nations so that they can continue exporting to developed countries and prevent their people from enjoying their national resources? I don't know whether its the case for all African countries, but I bet western corporate exploitation is behind it. The chaos in the Congo for instance. Think who benefits?
As for the practicality of geothermal plants, I don't know. That should be the problem for the engineers but one thing I do know is that EROEI can be resolved with EGS (Enhanced, engineered Geothermal System- the fanciful term used in that MIT report) because geothermal energy is potentially unlimited as the earth's core is constantly generating heat. What if we use too much? We haven't even consider solar, wind, tidal and wave energy yet. Energy sources that corporations may not be able to control and hence, bill and therefore they don't want to publicise it.
I agree with you that it is the western corporations that is exploiting the African nations. But if we follow your reasoning, increase our consumption rate and ignore our greenhouse gases production how does that help the African nations?
Wouldn't it be in the western corporations' interests to furthur destablize the region in order to exploit more of the natural resources?
At least by reducing consumption rates and introducing renewable energy the corporations would lose the incentives to throw in the money to furthur destablize Africa. Your suggestion would worsen the stituation the way i see it.
I've did a quick glimpse through the pdf you sent me. To be honest i could only understand around 20% of it because most of it is made in technical terms that i'm not schooled in to understand.
How can you don't know the practicality of the geothermal plants and yet be so sure that EROEI can be resolved with the EGS? That is already a contradiction. You are basing on pure faith to support your views.
The report only states the potential benefits of implementing the EGS, the theoratical methods that can be used to tap the energy reserves. I won't say it won't work, but i'm very skeptical that this supposedly 4,000 years of reserves can be tapped into and distributed through the world in our life time.
Even if by some miraculous discovery, we got all the technology to exploit and implement it would still take decades to rework our infrastructure to support it(Gathering the engineers/materials/workers/machines), and that is for the countries that can actually afford it in the first place.
And still it only deals with America, it doesn't deal with how the rest of the world can tap into it and the potential cost required.
We have already made this world dependant on the workings of capitalism. If the potential benefits from solar, wind, tidal and wave energy is so significant, the corporations would have raced to exploit it.
Do not forget that any new startups would still need fundings from these corporations, these "corporations" do not need to try to control it, people would beg them to come.
Originally posted by Stevenson101:I agree with you that it is the western corporations that is exploiting the African nations. But if we follow your reasoning, increase our consumption rate and ignore our greenhouse gases production how does that help the African nations?
Wouldn't it be in the western corporations' interests to furthur destablize the region in order to exploit more of the natural resources?
At least by reducing consumption rates and introducing renewable energy the corporations would lose the incentives to throw in the money to furthur destablize Africa. Your suggestion would worsen the stituation the way i see it.
I've did a quick glimpse through the pdf you sent me. To be honest i could only understand around 20% of it because most of it is made in technical terms that i'm not schooled in to understand.
How can you don't know the practicality of the geothermal plants and yet be so sure that EROEI can be resolved with the EGS? That is already a contradiction. You are basing on pure faith to support your views.
The report only states the potential benefits of implementing the EGS, the theoratical methods that can be used to tap the energy reserves. I won't say it won't work, but i'm very skeptical that this supposedly 4,000 years of reserves can be tapped into and distributed through the world in our life time.
Even if by some miraculous discovery, we got all the technology to exploit and implement it would still take decades to rework our infrastructure to support it(Gathering the engineers/materials/workers/machines), and that is for the countries that can actually afford it in the first place.
And still it only deals with America, it doesn't deal with how the rest of the world can tap into it and the potential cost required.
We have already made this world dependant on the workings of capitalism. If the potential benefits from solar, wind, tidal and wave energy is so significant, the corporations would have raced to exploit it.
Do not forget that any new startups would still need fundings from these corporations, these "corporations" do not need to try to control it, people would beg them to come.
I agree with you on the fact that society has to reduce their consumption levels, consumerism and materialism are sick ideologies. But the reasons which we do it are flawed. And besides why do you think corporations spend billions every year advertising. In addition anthropogenic CO2 (around 0.0068%) gases do not affect climate, 98% of GHG is water vapour.
In Al Gore's so-called Inconvenient Truth, he states that there is a complex relationship between CO2 and temperature. But he doesnt go on to state it. The complex relationship is that CO2 levels lag temperatures, according to ice core records, by about 800 years. Immediately, that makes him a corporate shrill who is pushing a carbon tax to fill corporate coffers.
The way I see it, stabilising Africa is a danger to be prevented. The exploitation of the natives and natural resources can only continue if African countries, for instance the Congo, are divided and in turmoil. That why the people or any nationalistic leaders cannot use the country's natural resources for national development. Divide and Rule, a classic tactic from the age of colonialism. In fact, from 2001-2003, the UN put together 3 reports that blame the chaos in Congo on about 100 corporations, if anyone still doubts that fact.
Well, I am also unable to completely interpret that report, but one thing I can derive is that EGS offers huge potential. I'm no engineer, I cannot argue about the technical details that EGS involves. But I do know that sofar, discussion about renewable energy sources like geothermal, wind, solar, wave and tidal are very scarce in the MSM. If there is one incentive for corporations to suppress such information, its because of control. Fossil fuels/biofuels/hydrogen/nuclear are technologies that make people and countries dependent on energy companies. Imagine if every house in the world was energy self-sufficient, these corporations wouldnt make any money at all.
More than 100 years ago, Nikola Tesla offered humanity unlimited energy by tapping the EM energy in the atmosphere. Upon his death, his work was hushed up and he fell into obscurity. Given how much is being covered up by the MSM and public awareness, it is likely that energy independence is a danger to be averted when we can achieve it.
consumerism and materialism are sick ideologies.
If too extreme, then it is bad.
Apparantly, when consumerism and materialism dictate the self-worth of people and social status- people judging others not as human beings, but what they own- you know society is sick.
Originally posted by freedomclub:I agree with you on the fact that society has to reduce their consumption levels, consumerism and materialism are sick ideologies. But the reasons which we do it are flawed. And besides why do you think corporations spend billions every year advertising. In addition anthropogenic CO2 (around 0.0068%) gases do not affect climate, 98% of GHG is water vapour.
In Al Gore's so-called Inconvenient Truth, he states that there is a complex relationship between CO2 and temperature. But he doesnt go on to state it. The complex relationship is that CO2 levels lag temperatures, according to ice core records, by about 800 years. Immediately, that makes him a corporate shrill who is pushing a carbon tax to fill corporate coffers.
The way I see it, stabilising Africa is a danger to be prevented. The exploitation of the natives and natural resources can only continue if African countries, for instance the Congo, are divided and in turmoil. That why the people or any nationalistic leaders cannot use the country's natural resources for national development. Divide and Rule, a classic tactic from the age of colonialism. In fact, from 2001-2003, the UN put together 3 reports that blame the chaos in Congo on about 100 corporations, if anyone still doubts that fact.
Well, I am also unable to completely interpret that report, but one thing I can derive is that EGS offers huge potential. I'm no engineer, I cannot argue about the technical details that EGS involves. But I do know that sofar, discussion about renewable energy sources like geothermal, wind, solar, wave and tidal are very scarce in the MSM. If there is one incentive for corporations to suppress such information, its because of control. Fossil fuels/biofuels/hydrogen/nuclear are technologies that make people and countries dependent on energy companies. Imagine if every house in the world was energy self-sufficient, these corporations wouldnt make any money at all.
More than 100 years ago, Nikola Tesla offered humanity unlimited energy by tapping the EM energy in the atmosphere. Upon his death, his work was hushed up and he fell into obscurity. Given how much is being covered up by the MSM and public awareness, it is likely that energy independence is a danger to be averted when we can achieve it.
I spend everyday reading the articles on http://www.theoildrum.com/
Coincidentally there is an article today on geothermal plants.I find it excellent reading because there are quite a few professors who post on it and can explain quite well in technical details on what will work and why.
The main disagreement i have in your logic is that you treat the corporations like some monolithic group mind bent on world domination while i believe they are the ugly manifestation of our primitive instincts - the inability to identify needs and wants. They are not united as you believe, but it is also their united stubborn need to keep what they have that's causing the troubles in the world.
While i agree in America there is this trend, because the corporate lobbies do not want to lose profits from the move from fossil fuels. I do not share your belief that current alternate fuel technologies can even come close to matching the output from fossil fuels. Nikola Tesla merely claimed that the theory was workable, he could not give the evidence to support, the same with the claim of cold fusion.
And even if we had the technology, our lifestyle will have to make massive changes to accommodate the transition. And this is impossible in a democracy, especially a mature one. Because in a democracy, the fools will always outnumber the intelligent.
I stand by my stand that corporations are fucking up the planet in their lust for power and wealth. World domination, you're probably not too off.
Look up the Bilderberg Group (please not Wikipedia). 125 of the world's most powerful corporate and political elites who meet in secret every year since 1954 under armed guard. Why doesnt the MSM cover it? Why arent their discussions made public? When the G8 meet, the press goes crazy. But when 125 powerful people from business, government, industry and academia meet in secret, its a taboo to speak about them? Is this conspiracy? Yes, it is.
BBC investigated their 1954 meeting and concluded that they were behind the EU. Corporate interest dictating political developments. Leaked minutes from the 1973 meeting revealed that they wanted to engineer the 400% hike in oil prices after the Yom Kippur War (engineered too?) to recoup corporate costs of North Sea oil exploration. Need I say more? This hatred of corporations, hijacking governments is justified.
And I agree, in a monopolised society, where the masses are kept to a suitable level of intelligence to be obedient workers, its hard to envision change that is democratic, in the common good. But then, all that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.
Seems quite mundane:
Bilderberg is more of a discussion and policy coordinating group in my opinion.
"discussion and policy coordinating group" So they plan world events that seem to happen months later by accident?
Translating out of your whitewashed term, one could say its corporate-political collusion.
One step further, its a conspiracy.
This is from that site you quoted:
"Wouldn't it be satisfying if the energy being put in to help sort out our misdirected world could turn things around? It would be comforting to think so but realistically the banks, corporate media and other transnational corporations, the merger maniacal 'dark side', are extending their monopolistic control.
The modern transnational corporation is an immortal, soulless collusion of greed that reduces everything it touches to a dollar value. In law a corporation is a person, able to own property and resources just as a person can only, it seems, not responsible for the deaths it causes. The present 'War on Terror' is a fraudulent attempt to create a new Moslem enemy, much like the attack on the Jew's in the 1930's. Nato and many Western Military masters are following the same tactics as Hitler's Nazis."
So financial crisis also created by bilderberg group?
Of course you would think that liberating Man from the monetary system is fantasy. That is a form of conditioning that society perpetrates. All of us have known money our whole lives. Therefore, its only natural that we would seek to defend the status quo that we know. I'm just asking you to look at this concept with an open mind and think whether it'll be a better system than corporate-political domination through the monetary system.
Originally posted by Poh Ah Pak:So financial crisis also created by bilderberg group?
Perhaps. I don't have any evidence to back that up, but its likely there was foreknowledge of it. It wouldnt be the first time the corporate-political elites engineer financial crisis to facilitate the transfer of wealth to themselves. Like how Rothschild engineered a stock market panic, taking advantage of his knowledge of Napoleon's defeat in 1815 and how the Fed engineered the Great Depression. Like I posted in a new post.