The End Of Science

[Gawdzilla Sama]

They already exist. Here on the periphery is Rationalia and they even 'chucked' in a Mule. Nearer the centre is RatSkep and beyond the dying embers of empire itself with RDF and the elusive Emporer himself, The Dawk.

Now it all makes sense! The archived ratz threads are the Encyclopedia Galactica...

This is Terminus, there are no train stops beyond here.

You forget about the "train station" in HP7.

[Atheist-Lite]

They already exist. Here on the periphery is Rationalia and they even 'chucked' in a Mule. Nearer the centre is RatSkep and beyond the dying embers of empire itself with RDF and the elusive Emporer himself, The Dawk.

Now it all makes sense! The archived ratz threads are the Encyclopedia Galactica...

This is Terminus, there are no train stops beyond here.

You forget about the "train station" in HP7.

Wrong book, wrong genre and most importantly wrong author.

[Geoff]

Daneel?

[Atheist-Lite]

Let's avoid getting too L. Ron Hubbard here and just stick with Asimovs good idea?

[Gawdzilla Sama]

They already exist. Here on the periphery is Rationalia and they even 'chucked' in a Mule. Nearer the centre is RatSkep and beyond the dying embers of empire itself with RDF and the elusive Emporer himself, The Dawk.

Now it all makes sense! The archived ratz threads are the Encyclopedia Galactica...

This is Terminus, there are no train stops beyond here.

You forget about the "train station" in HP7.

Wrong book, wrong genre and most importantly wrong author.

That's three different books as far as I can tell.

[Atheist-Lite]

I thought it was six although only the first three were popular.

[Geoff]

I thought it was six although only the first three were popular.

Depends whether you allow the amalgamation with the "robots" books...and the "Bear, Brin & Benford" later additions...

[hiyymer]

I'm thinking about this in light of a collapse of food resources following climatic changes & the loss of cheap eaily accessible oil and things. Consider science as a cultural limb like sport, music or warfare. Whilst the human population is expanding there is always a surplus of food & resources (must be to maintain the societal stability of the forward expansion in numbers.) This allows the blue skies thinking, room to tinker and experiment without a discrenible return that is the hallmark of free enquiry, the basis of science. When a population goes into decline then the there is no surplus allocated for 'free enquiry' and science becomes much more a economic concern? before disappearing completely in a set of basic traditional techniques such as have been prevalent in older cultures throughout historic time. As science and advanced knowledge is unnecessary with regards maintaining a smaller population a transferal of social power away from secular bodies and back towards theocratic forms should occur in the currently advanced industrial world? Whilst science will continue to exist it may more and more take a backward form with a return to alchemic practices and astrology. One with only occasional flourishes, perhaps lasting a couple of generations, when small food surpluses allow a brief return to semi-scientific awreness - and promptly crushed by whatever theocratic powers should exist.

I think it's more geographic/country specific. Whatever the overall circumstance things change and specific areas will produce the opportunity for ascendancy and the characteristics that you identify as coming with ascendancy. If not now later. One could say that the plague in Europe created an opportunity for the survivors and led to a whole shift in mindset.

[Atheist-Lite]

I've no doubt that new ascendencies will arrise only that they'll hit a brick wall in attempting to recreate the modern world or anything remotely like it. Climate change is central to my thinking here in that unpredictable chaotic weather shifts stemming from the carbon and methane entering the atmosphere will have a massive global impact on a reliable food supply anywhere. Then the easily accessible oil and certain metals are gone....requiring a advanced level of technology to exploit.

[hiyymer]

I've no doubt that new ascendencies will arrise only that they'll hit a brick wall in attempting to recreate the modern world or anything remotely like it. Climate change is central to my thinking here in that unpredictable chaotic weather shifts stemming from the carbon and methane entering the atmosphere will have a massive global impact on a reliable food supply anywhere. Then the easily accessible oil and certain metals are gone....requiring a advanced level of technology to exploit.

Climate instability is a fact of life. The last several thousands of years have been remarkably stable, not the norm. We seemed to have been in a cycle of ice ages in the recent past, so carbon induced warming may be preferable to the natural alternative. The cycle seems to be related to the ocean convection current and the impact of freshwater melting on those currents. The global warming hysterics tend to dismiss those effects or not factor them into the model, but carbon warming may still turn out to be a relatively good thing relative to the alternatives and my gut tells me less catastrophic than the hysteria is demanding. One thing is certain. The current status quo isn't going to last forever, and we will be affected. The planet is not the static enthralling pristine natural wonder that the greens want to believe it is, and trying to freeze it in time is a dubious enterprise. Without a few good extinction events we wouldn't even be here.

[Atheist-Lite]

I recognise the climate as been uncanny & stable since the beginning of the agricultural revolution. Could be a reflection of the highly sensitive nature of the feedback loops between the climate and mans 'unique' impact on it over several thousand years? Would you like to change this to something more technical and say mans activity is a historic forcing stressor on climate variabllity sufficent to push towards a sub-phase shift area of stability. That recent 'industrial agricultural' devolpments have pushed through the envelope of calm air and we're now on the other side with no way to return, and a chaotic weaving maelstrom ahead?

[hiyymer]

I recognise the climate as been uncanny & stable since the beginning of the agricultural revolution. Could be a reflection of the highly sensitive nature of the feedback loops between the climate and mans 'unique' impact on it over several thousand years? Would you like to change this to something more technical and say mans activity is a historic forcing stressor on climate variabllity sufficent to push towards a sub-phase shift area of stability. That recent 'industrial agricultural' devolpments have pushed through the envelope of calm air and we're now on the other side with no way to return, and a chaotic weaving maelstrom ahead?

The last ice age ended about 10,000 years ago, well before the agricultural revolution. One theory is that the little ice age in the north atlantic from around 1300 to 1850 was caused by a partial shut down of the ocean convection current. It resulted sporadic wide spread famine in Europe. The global warming effect from increased greenhouse gases is believed to have started in the mid 20th century.

[Daan]

Science is domed indead. But, what is wrong with fantisizing? Science is so dry. No wonder people prefer fantasy!!!

[Seth]

I've no doubt that new ascendencies will arrise only that they'll hit a brick wall in attempting to recreate the modern world or anything remotely like it. Climate change is central to my thinking here in that unpredictable chaotic weather shifts stemming from the carbon and methane entering the atmosphere will have a massive global impact on a reliable food supply anywhere. Then the easily accessible oil and certain metals are gone....requiring a advanced level of technology to exploit.

Climate instability is a fact of life. The last several thousands of years have been remarkably stable, not the norm. We seemed to have been in a cycle of ice ages in the recent past, so carbon induced warming may be preferable to the natural alternative. The cycle seems to be related to the ocean convection current and the impact of freshwater melting on those currents. The global warming hysterics tend to dismiss those effects or not factor them into the model, but carbon warming may still turn out to be a relatively good thing relative to the alternatives and my gut tells me less catastrophic than the hysteria is demanding. One thing is certain. The current status quo isn't going to last forever, and we will be affected. The planet is not the static enthralling pristine natural wonder that the greens want to believe it is, and trying to freeze it in time is a dubious enterprise. Without a few good extinction events we wouldn't even be here.

Yup. And it may be AGW (if such a thing exists) that saves us from an extinction event. Most species can tolerate higher temperatures, but few can tolerate another ice age, with sheets of ice a mile or more thick covering everything north of 30 degrees north.

Of course, that doesn't mean that every individual human will survive, but then we all go under eventually.

Climate alarmists fail to understand that the only thing stable about the environment is change, and that the earth will abide, whether we're here to enjoy it or not.

Adapt or die.

[Daan]

Yup. And it may be AGW (if such a thing exists) that saves us from an extinction event. Most species can tolerate higher temperatures, but few can tolerate another ice age, with sheets of ice a mile or more thick covering everything north of 30 degrees north.

Of course, that doesn't mean that every individual human will survive, but then we all go under eventually.

Climate alarmists fail to understand that the only thing stable about the environment is change, and that the earth will abide, whether we're here to enjoy it or not.

Adapt or die.

Humans have survived the ice ages so far. We probably won't survive the Anthropocene. We humans have destroyed our own habitat. And now it is too late.