One year later ..

Not good to get people reading this I guess, waiting 1 year between blog entries.
Did anything new jump out to support the green deception theory? Not really, things keep going leisurely at their previous pace, although, new IPCC reports have been thrust upon us and Al Gore won the nobel prize, all because we are producing to much CO2. So, what do we need to do? We all need to start reducing how much energy we use??? That is the surest way to go into stagnation. Nothing against more efficient use of energy, but reducing energy consumption by not travelling abroad, by putting on extra clothes to heat your house less??? Not exactly what I would call progress.
A positive point is that the economics we have built around the CO2 story are producing some perverse effects. The main one being that land previously used to grow food is now being converted to grow sugar cane to make alcohol as energy souurce or oil producing plants to produce bio diesel. We haven't degenerated completely, most people know this is not the way to go.

Whether it is the greenhouse effect or the fact that oil reserves are limited, let's get some research going to develop a real alternative energy. Assuming we can find enough resources on earth or in the neighbourhood, fusion seems like a viable option. We are working on it, but shouldn't we invest more and get this working faster?
The other source is of course solar energy, but just a few solar panels on your roof may not be enough. Let's make some reasonable calculations on the energy needed per person and to be on the safe side, assume we'll all be consuming twice as much energy as the most most energy consuming nation today. Also allow for a doubling of the world population. Where does that get us in terms of required energy production? Can it be extracted from solar energy without covering half of the earth with solar panels? If not, let's put those things in orbit or beyond and research not only how to do that, but also how to transport the energy back to earth. As efficiently as possible, but keep in mind feasbility.
Hopefully I don't go dormant for another year now ...

How it started?

For a couple of years I have started wondering why it was that we were seeing less technological solutions to problems and more restrictions being imposed on all sorts of things. Two examples struck me recently. The first one is related to safety on our roads. Rightfully we are more and more concerned about the safety on our roads, however, the solutions we seem to be capable to come up with are usually limited to imposing speed limits, installing humps in certain areas to force you to go slower and similar things. One wonders if it is really impossible to use technology to increase the safety on our roads? Often the argument is that it is a matter of money. Installing an overpass or an underpass is much more expensive than a roundabout for example. A second example is around energy and global warming. We have come to the point where companies that sell electricity are forced to make commercials that tell you how to consume less electricity. Does this feel right to you?

So why are these kind of things happening? I have started developing a theory that may seem a bit far fetched, but it is a starting point for a discussion on the main issue: why is technology failing to address some of our daily problems.

In short, someone is deliberately fostering this way of tackling problems to drive the development of human society in a certain direction. The onset of this way to deal with daily problems coincides with the rise of the environmentalist parties. I do not think the environmentalist parties have a global plan to drive human society in a certain direction, they are just people that have fallen into the trap. Who may possibly have an interest to direct human development besides mankind itself? Are there entities out there in the galaxy that see a fast development of the human race as a possible threat? A threat doesn't mean they feel we are real soon going to start a military campaign to conquer the galaxy, this is long term and it is about resources on a galactic scale. Once a civilisation goes beyond its own star system, where do things stop? And if you as a civilisation have managed to go beyond your own system, how do you deal with competition? Peaceful coexistence is a nice idea, but we just have to look at how we are failing to achieve this on earth to see how difficult it is. So, we might look at it from a positive side and assume that another civilisation would rather have us stay in our own star system until we have managed to coexist peacefully amongst ourselves before letting us loose on the galaxy. If you can prevent any other civilisation to reach a technology level that will let them go beyond their own star system, that is undoubtedly a preferable option to any type of military intervention.
So, the environmentalist parties are really just a front for an outside civilisation to keep the human civilisation inside their own star system until they deem it safe to let us loose.
More to come.