RE: Natural gas: The fracking fallacy

['Chris de Morsella' via Everything List]

 

 

From: everything-list@googlegroups.com 
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of John Clark
Sent: Tuesday, December 23, 2014 8:18 PM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: Natural gas: The fracking fallacy

 

On Tue, Dec 23, 2014 at 7:08 PM, 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List 
 wrote:

 

>> I was under the mistaken impression that you understood that historically 
>> the proven oil reserves of a country have remained about as constant as the 
>> New York Stock Exchange, it changes every time a new oil discovery is made, 
>> and even more important, it changes  every time a new technology is 
>> developed that allows for the economic extraction of oil in places where it 
>> had previously been uneconomic.

 

> If that is the case can you kindly point these new super giant fields that 
> must have been discovered

 

I'll do better than that, I'll give you a chart of all the oil and gas reserves 
of all the super giant fields combined in all of the USA as they have changed 
from 1073 to 2013.

 

Yes, the very same EIA that got it so wrong with the Monterey shale deposit 
reserve projections it made in 2011 – that were projected to be far larger than 
the Bakken or Marcelus (have you noticed I actually site the important geologic 
formations by name) All you gave is the one bucket global reserve projections 
made by an agency that has a track record of producing reserve projections that 
it is forced to later revise downwards by 94%.

Am I supposed to be impressed?



 
http://www.usnews.com/cmsmedia/69/cb/488ad887410c904878caf6f3a11d/141204-eiareserves-graphic.png

 

> the bubble mania that was being frothed up in the media

 

There you go again, oil and gas prices are dropping like a rock and you're 
still babbling about a bubble. 

 

I am describing a huge financial bubble, tied to tight oil sector energy 
derivatives that is bursting as we speak, yes. I am describing this investment 
and perception mania that was manufactured on promises of endless supplies of 
new shale deposits. The EIA, IMO, is complicit in this fraud. And as evidence I 
produced the grossly overstated reserve numbers it produced for the Monterey 
shale deposits in 2011, as well as reserve numbers that are proving highly 
optimistic for other formations (the Bakken, Marcelus). Six months ago – with 
hardly anyone noticing the EIA, revised those rosy projections down by 94%.

What are you babbling about, John?

 

 

>> So your theory is that the price of oil collapsed from $130 to $60 because 
>> of some sort of byzantine conspiracy of the Saudi's, but your theory just 
>> does not fit the facts.

 

> You have not been following the news coming from recent OPEC meetings have 
> you. 

 

Saudis block OPEC output cut, sending oil price plunging 

 

For god's sake, don't you at least read the title of articles before you 
recommend one to the list?! The title of the article is "Saudis block OPEC 
output cut" ; the key words are BLOCK and CUT! The Saudis decided NOT to 
decrease production but to keep it CONSTANT. Meanwhile the USA INCREASED oil 
production from 5.0 million barrels per day in 2008 to 7.4 million in 2013 and 
8.5 million this year and it is expected to be 9.3 million in 2015. Knowing 
that do we really need conspiracy theories to explain the huge drop in oil 
prices since 2008? 

You continue to believe in whatever numbers the EIA is putting out – even after 
such embarrassing lack of accuracy of their previous and very loudly and widely 
quoted reserve projections for what was to be an even much larger formation 
than the Bakken. Once the bankruptcies start happening in the oil patch US 
production numbers will begin to slide. Your rosy – EIA produced projections 
will (as is their habit) have to be revised (quietly with little media 
attention) downwards.

You don’t seem to understand the implications of a global spot price of under 
$60 for oil for the drillers in the Bakken, Marcelus and Eagle Ford shale 
deposits. These are debt financed operations that have a voracious need for 
huge amounts of new capital just in order to sustain current levels of 
production. Production that does not make economic sense at anything less than 
$100 per barrel. New financing, is not going to be available with oil at under 
$60 and the drillers will get no loans till it again climbs to well over $100. 
The financing bottleneck is going to really hurt this sector and constrict the 
rate at which upstream projects make it to market.

>> And the free market ensures that the sort of silly conspiracy you're so 
>> concerned about could never work. I manufacture 99% of the worlds widgets, 
>> you make 1%. I want to drive you out of business, so I figure I'll lower my 
>> price until you go broke and then I can jack them up to anything I want. So 
>> now you lose money on each widget you sell, the trouble is I do too.

Re: Natural gas: The fracking fallacy

[John Clark]

On Tue, Dec 23, 2014 at 7:08 PM, 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List <
everything-list@googlegroups.com> wrote:

>
> >> I was under the mistaken impression that you understood that
>> historically the proven oil reserves of a country have remained about as
>> constant as the New York Stock Exchange, it changes every time a new oil
>> discovery is made, and even more important, it changes  every time a new
>> technology is developed that allows for the economic extraction of oil in
>> places where it had previously been uneconomic.
>>
>> > If that is the case can you kindly point these new super giant fields
> that must have been discovered
>

I'll do better than that, I'll give you a chart of all the oil and gas
reserves of all the super giant fields combined in all of the USA *as they
have changed* from 1073 to 2013.

[image:
http://www.usnews.com/cmsmedia/69/cb/488ad887410c904878caf6f3a11d/141204-eiareserves-graphic.png]


> > the bubble mania that was being frothed up in the media
>

There you go again, oil and gas prices are dropping like a rock and you're
still babbling about a bubble.

>> So your theory is that the price of oil collapsed from $130 to $60
>> because of some sort of byzantine conspiracy of the Saudi's, but your
>> theory just does not fit the facts.
>>
>
> > You have not been following the news coming from recent OPEC meetings
> have you.
>
> Saudis block OPEC output cut, sending oil price plunging


For god's sake, don't you at least read the title of articles before you
recommend one to the list?! The title of the article is "Saudis block OPEC
output cut" ; the key words are BLOCK and CUT! The Saudis decided NOT to
decrease production but to keep it CONSTANT. Meanwhile the USA INCREASED
oil production from 5.0 million barrels per day in 2008 to 7.4 million in
2013 and 8.5 million this year and it is expected to be 9.3 million in
2015. Knowing that do we really need conspiracy theories to explain the
huge drop in oil prices since 2008?

>> And the free market ensures that the sort of silly conspiracy you're so
>> concerned about could never work. I manufacture 99% of the worlds widgets,
>> you make 1%. I want to drive you out of business, so I figure I'll lower my
>> price until you go broke and then I can jack them up to anything I want. So
>> now you lose money on each widget you sell, the trouble is I do too. I have
>> 99 times as much money as you do, but I'm losing it 99 times faster. Even
>> worse, because the price is very low the demand for widgets is huge, and if
>> prices are to remain low I must build more factories (or oil wells) and
>> increase production. I'm losing money faster and faster, meanwhile you just
>> temporally halt production in your small factory and wait for me to go
>> broke. It won't be a long wait.
>>
>
> > How can I possibly benefit from an economics 101 lesson from a man who
> swallows cornucopean reserve statements hook line and sinker.
>

>From that non-response would I be correct in assuming that you have no
logical counter argument?

  John K Clark

==







>







[image: image]







VIENNA (Reuters) - Saudi Arabia blocked calls on Thursday from poorer
members of the OPEC oil exporter group for production cuts to arrest a
slide in global prices,...

View on www.reuters.com

Preview by Yahoo










>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen

[Bruce Kellett]

John Clark wrote:
On Tue, Dec 23, 2014 at 4:43 PM, Bruce Kellett 
mailto:bhkell...@optusnet.com.au>> wrote:



>>> I wouldn't fear death even then.

> > Then you're either the bravest man who ever lived or you're
full of bullshit. I think it's far more likely that you're full
of bullshit.


 > A lot of people have faced firing squads with calm dignity.

Some may have been dignified but I am quite certain in every single case 
their heart rate was elevated over what it would have been had they not 
been facing a firing squad. And no doubt you have played the scene over 
in your mind but do you really think your musings about what it would be 
like to face a firing squad have the slightest relation to the reality 
of actually facing a  firing squad? You may be certain how you'd react 
in a life or death situation, but as I've said being certain and being 
correct are not the same thing; I don't think we have good simulation 
software in our brain for that sort of thing and thus nobody can know 
how they'd behave in such a extreme situation until that it actually 
happened.


 > I don't think I am particularly brave,

You know something, I don't either. 


 > but the thought of death itself -- being dead, that is -- does
not frighten me in the least.

Bullshit.


On what basis do you call what I have said, Bullshit? It is the sober 
truth. If you don't believe me then the problem is yours, not mine.




As I said, if you have dependants you would worry about the effect
on them. But that does not mean that you would fear for yourself.


Well I guess you're just a selfless hero then.


Maybe that makes you the craven coward.

Bruce



  John K Clark


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen

[John Clark]

On Tue, Dec 23, 2014 at 4:43 PM, Bruce Kellett 
wrote:

>
>> >>> I wouldn't fear death even then.
>>
>> >> Then you're either the bravest man who ever lived or you're full of
>> bullshit. I think it's far more likely that you're full of bullshit.
>>
>
> > A lot of people have faced firing squads with calm dignity.


Some may have been dignified but I am quite certain in every single case
their heart rate was elevated over what it would have been had they not
been facing a firing squad. And no doubt you have played the scene over in
your mind but do you really think your musings about what it would be like
to face a firing squad have the slightest relation to the reality of
actually facing a  firing squad? You may be certain how you'd react in a
life or death situation, but as I've said being certain and being correct
are not the same thing; I don't think we have good simulation software in
our brain for that sort of thing and thus nobody can know how they'd behave
in such a extreme situation until that it actually happened.

> I don't think I am particularly brave,


You know something, I don't either.

> but the thought of death itself -- being dead, that is -- does not
> frighten me in the least.


Bullshit.

As I said, if you have dependants you would worry about the effect on them.
> But that does not mean that you would fear for yourself.
>

Well I guess you're just a selfless hero then.

  John K Clark

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Natural gas: The fracking fallacy

['Chris de Morsella' via Everything List]

  From: John Clark 
   
On Mon, Dec 22, 2014 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List 
 wrote:



>> In the USA oil production rose by more than half a million barrels per day 
>> between 2007 and 2011 to the highest level in 15 years, and in that same 
>> year the USA exported more gasoline and diesel than it imported for the 
>> first time since 1949. And in 2012 USA oil production increased by another 
>> 760,000 barrels a day, the largest yearly increase since records about oil 
>> production started in 1859. But incredibly 2013 beat even that record, oil 
>> production in the United States rose by another 992,000 barrels a day! And 
>> in 2014 the USA overtook Saudi Arabia to become the largest producer of oil 
>> on planet Earth, it was already the largest natural gas producer in the 
>> world and has been since 2010.


> Yes, so what?


>>So the "false projections" about the USA becoming the next Saudi Arabia 
>>turned out to be true.
That is misleading and is myopically focused in on the incomplete picture given 
by just looking at current production numbers. The meme of "The USA becoming 
the Saudi Arabia of shale" is that this resource base was as large in scale as 
the Saudi mega fields and that the USA would achieve long term fossil oil & gas 
independence based on these -- massively overstated reserves being produced.It 
does not matter much ion the long run if for a few years and at the cost of 
trillions of dollars of sunk capital that could have been better allocated in 
other sectors, the US has managed to -- very temporarily -- increase it's 
current production. The fact is we cannot sustain the level of drilling that 
would be required just to hold production levels current levels; fracked wells 
deplete a lot more rapidly than traditional oil & gas wells do. This assertion 
is borne out by the actual (public domain) data that exists for the older more 
mature tight oil play of the Eagle Ford formations (which ere developed before 
the Marcellus and the Bakken)If you want to grab on to that much repeated sound 
bite -- go ahead run with it, but it is little more than a fig leaf and does 
not give an accurate picture of the energy production capacity of the US tight 
oil sector over the next decades.


 > I was under the mistaken impression that you understood what reserves mean,


>>And I was under the mistaken impression that you understood that historically 
>>the proven oil reserves of a country have remained about as constant as the 
>>New York Stock Exchange, it changes every time a new oil discovery is made, 
>>and even more important, it changes  every time a new technology is developed 
>>that allows for the economic extraction of oil in places where it had 
>>previously been uneconomic.

If that is the case can you kindly point these new super giant fields that must 
have been discovered and are in the ever growing reserve numbers you seem to 
believe in. Where are the new Ghawar super giants? They are not being 
discovered John. Traditional oil has already peaked some years ago and the 
tight oil sector will not be able to sustain the current production rates, 
especially now that the global capital market for this sector is in full blown 
retreat. The EIA has had to very significantly downgrade a lot of its reserve 
projections in the US -- so I really don't have a clue what numbers you are 
referring to and who is producing the numbers you seem to believe in.

 
> Reserves measure what is in the ground that can be recovered.

Reserves measure what is known to be in the ground that can be recovered 
economically with existing technology. 
Yes. That is what reserves are supposed to be measuring, but as the recent 
fiasco with the EIA reserve projections for the California Monterey shale 
formation (from May of last year) the stated reserve numbers of even the 
official agency of the US government responsible for producing these numbers 
needs to be taken with a lot of skepticism.  Three years ago -- at the 
beginning of this boom -- and also very much by the way adding a a lot of fuel 
to the shale play bubble  -- the EIA estimated that California's Monterey 
formation contained some 15.4 billion barrels of technically recoverable oil - 
about 64 percent of total U.S. shale oil reserves. Last May the EIA announced 
it had reduced the Monterey's reserve potential to just 600 million barrels - a 
measly 4% of its 2011 estimate. 
Thus the largest -- and largest by far -- alleged shale oil reserve in the USA 
e.g. the Monterey shale deposit -- has had its reserve potential reduced down 
to just 600 million barrels - about four percent of its 2011 estimate. In other 
words a full 96% of the 2011 reserve numbers have just vanished into thin air 
-- e.g. they never existed! What is left unreported is how the original totally 
overblown EIA figures were very much used by the shale boosters to build the 
bubble mania that was being frothed up in the media and amongst investors 
duri

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen

[meekerdb]

On 12/23/2014 9:12 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
A future tip: encrypt your Gödel number, if possible quantum mechanically, as soon as 
possible. Protect yourself.


Doesn't a Godel number depend on the Godelization scheme - which I think would be enough 
encryption.


Brent

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen

[Bruce Kellett]

John Clark wrote:


With several bullets inserted into your brain with high power rifles 
you're head will explode within a fraction of a second and you're not 
going to feel any pain, but you're sure as hell going feel some fear the 
night before thinking about it.


I am reminded of Edward Woodward playing Breaker Morant in the 
Australian film of the same name about the Boer war. He was sentenced to 
death by firing squad for executing prisoners of war. As he was tied to 
the post waiting for the officer to lower his sword for the order to 
fire he shouted "Shoot straight, you bastards".


Although this is a scene from a movie (based on a real story), I think 
the image conveyed is not unrealistic for people who believe that their 
execution is unjust.


Bruce

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Democracy

[Alberto G. Corona]

Democracy is an false envelope, a fetish  name for a what is the best of
the western world. The freedom and innovation is not nor event would be
based of democracy. If the idea of democracy  - that is the idea that the
truth comes from consensus, were the thing that gives freedom and
innovation, then herds of sheeps would have been exploring the galaxy
millions of years ago. It should not be necessary forme to explain this to
you.

What gives freedom is the respect for the individual. That does not come
from democracy. democracy may be a  (maybe wrong) consecuence of the
respect for the individual. This respect comes from outside of the
political system. It comes from Christianity. it will last for as much as
Christianity will endure. And will end in the very moment that Christianity
is repressed. I invite you to look at the (frequent) moments of  supression
of freedom in Europe.

2014-12-22 18:42 GMT+01:00 Bruno Marchal :

>
> On 22 Dec 2014, at 15:42, Alberto G. Corona wrote:
>
> >Democracy makes it possible to live differently from the mainstream. It
> is >not easy, and democracy is not enough, but it can help better than a
> tyrant >or community enforcing arbitrary rules without means of contesting
> them.
>
> And what differences "Democracy"  from a tirant or community enforcing
> arbitrary rules without means of contesting them?.
>
> Democracy is a ritualized form of brute force. The root of the democratic
> idea is the sacralization of numeric force.  And the legitimation is,
> consciously or unconsciously, the realization for everyone, that the
> majority would win a bloody confrontation.
>
> That IS the TRUE legitimization of democracy. In the same way that two
> deers will not fight if one show bigger horns, since the result of the
> combat is already know. Each side of a democratic contest does not fight
> for the same reason.
>
>  The difference is that in democracy the force comes from the highest
> pitch for the best short term offer in exchange for the longer term
> disaster. The coalition that accept that mix of offer and lies is the
> Tyrant.
>
>
>
> Well, you will not succeed in breaking my pleasure to see democracy making
> progress in East-europa and in the middle-east, where it means to just been
> able to discuss and gossip behind a beer or a coffee without fearing
> delation from some spy hostage of the power. And today my pleasure is made
> great with the election of a laic muslim in Tunisia.
>
> I even consider that Egypt's democracy has win when people elected the
> Muslim Brotherhood, and has still win when the same people re-install
> courageously the military dictatorship once they saw the persecution of
> jews and christian coming back, and when they understood that a military
> dictatorship was the only way to save the possibility of a democracy in
> some middle run, a possibility that the fanatic islamists were threatening.
>
> It is easy to criticize democracy in a democacry (even old and sick), but
> most people living in non democratic regime suffer a lot, and have no
> hope---except for the ruling minority which can stand for many generations.
>
> Would you prefer to live in North Korea or in South Korea? Honestly. Come
> on.
>
> Democracy is not perfect. A bit like computationalism, it is not the
> solution of the problems, but an efficacious frame making it possible to
> formulate the problems, and listen to different solutions, and keep the
> extremists at bay.
>
> Yes, a democracy can be tyrannic, or lead to a tyranny, but with a
> tyranny, well you are already in the tyranny, and you can fear even your
> friends and brothers and sisters.
>
> Bruno
>
>
>
>
> 2014-12-22 13:24 GMT+01:00 Bruno Marchal :
>
>>
>> On 22 Dec 2014, at 00:36, Telmo Menezes wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 1:41 PM, Bruno Marchal  wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 18 Dec 2014, at 10:58, Telmo Menezes wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 5:11 PM, Bruno Marchal 
>>> wrote:


 On 17 Dec 2014, at 13:03, Alberto G. Corona wrote:

 Starting from the fact that The NHS was introduced by Bismark in the
 German Empire. for the same reasons that it is sustained today by
 "democracies": populism.

 Since the introduction of NHS in England no new hospital was
 constructed until recently.

 Democracy, an element of the liberal state, lives on premises that it
 can not itself guarantee. (Bockenforde). It is based on the idea that
 people will not act or vote for their inmediate interests  but will vote
 for anything that maintain the common good forever.  That is absolutely
 false. The only thing that maintain democracy is not democracy, but the
 morality of the people. That morality is contunuously underminded by
 democracy itself by means of the logic of populism and the formation of
 majorities that produce false and impossible and incompatible political
 promises for different groups of people. That divides and confront ones

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen

[meekerdb]

On 12/23/2014 8:59 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:

If no, the Mark Twain argument is less convincing.

Note that Mark twain provides here an argument for after-life. If I could come from 
nowhere, why would that not be possible again? is it not the case all the time? Who 
are we, really?


Indeed.  As far as I know Twain may have thought another life was possible.  He only 
satirized the Abrahamic idea of an after-life in heaven or hell.  But why would it be 
HIS after-life if he didn't remember his prior life?


It is HIS after-life because he makes the SAME errors.


How do you know.  Did he make the same mistake every day of his life?  Every week? Every 
month?  Did he never learn anything?  Is it fate, so that he makes the eternal return?


Brent

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen

[Bruce Kellett]

zibblequib...@gmail.com wrote:

On Monday, December 22, 2014 10:18:55 PM UTC, Bruce wrote:

Have you never heard of, or seen, courage in the face of death? Often
taken as the true test of manhood!

Bruce


 Bruce, Courage is acting in the face of fear, where the action speaks 
to virtue. Having no fear is something entirely different. People are 
born that way sometimes. And sometimes people are temporarily 
desensitized by events in a theatre or war or a sub-culture gone awry. 
The dy secret of PTSD is that it is almost always not about what is done 
to us, but something that we did, or allowed to be done.


Answer to your question..I've seen enough. Your characterizations of 
fear exhibited a disjoint. Al the stuff about oblivion and that fear of 
death was culturalthis wasn't thought through. That's the best that 
can be said. But then you gave a very descriptive depiction of fear in a 
runaway paragraph, that rang very true.


One has to be logical and marry up the incongruity best as can. I think 
it says you've had experiences of fear that you still struggle with. You 
described your own fear.


I don't know what you are talking about. You must be confusing me with 
something someone else wrote.


Bruce

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen

[Bruce Kellett]

Bruno Marchal wrote:


On 22 Dec 2014, at 21:14, meekerdb wrote:


On 12/22/2014 4:43 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:


On 21 Dec 2014, at 20:06, meekerdb wrote:


On 12/20/2014 11:05 PM, Bruce Kellett wrote:
Most legal systems punish murder more than any other crime, and 
those that have the death penalty reserve it for the worst 
offenders. Most criminals know that if they threaten a person with 
death they are more likely to comply than with other threats. Most 
religions, in the absence of any evidence, promise an afterlife. I 
think this all supports the fact that it is a common human trait 
to fear oblivion, even if as John says it's just a matter of taste.


Stathis Papaioannou


It might be a common human trait to fear oblivion, but it is even 
more irrational than belief in an afterlife.


Bruce 



"I do not fear death, in view of the fact that I had been dead for 
billions and billions of years before I was born, and had not 
suffered the slightest inconvenience from it."'(Mark Twain)


Would do accept to be tortured, here and now, with the promise of 1) 
1000,000 $, 2) total amnesia of the torture?


But then I would have forgotten you owed me a $1,000,000.


"total amnesia" on the torture. Of course not of event preceding the 
torture. I pay you in advance if you insist.


I guess you are joking. 


But still, you forget to answer.

A quasi (comp) equivalent question is the following one. I pay you 
1000,000 $ if you accept to be duplicated, and the copy will be tortured 
to death. I let you introduce delays if it give you the feeling it is 
less risky, but oif course if you said yes to step 4 you know this is an 
illusion. 


Should we made such transaction illegal?


It would seem to be a problem that if one entered into such an 
arrangement one would, in effect, be complicit in, or at least 
condoning, torture. And that is immoral, illegal even.


Bruce

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen

[Bruce Kellett]

John Clark wrote:
On Mon, Dec 22, 2014 at 5:06 PM, Bruce Kellett 
mailto:bhkell...@optusnet.com.au>> wrote:


>  And as for the fear of death stuff, are we asked to believe
that if you learned right now that tomorrow morning at 9am a
firing squad was going to put several bullets into your brain
you wouldn't be the slightest bit apprehensive and would go to
bed tonight just as you always do and sleep like a baby without
a care in the world?

No, I wouldn't fear death even then.

Then you're either the bravest man who ever lived or you're full of 
bullshit. I think it's far more likely that you're full of bullshit.


A lot of people have faced firing squads with calm dignity. I don't 
think I am particularly brave, but the thought of death itself -- being 
dead, that is -- does not frighten me in the least. As I said, if you 
have dependants you would worry about the effect on them. But that does 
not mean that you would fear for yourself.


Bruce





 > I might worry about the possibility of pain. 



With several bullets inserted into your brain with high power rifles 
you're head will explode within a fraction of a second and you're not 
going to feel any pain, but you're sure as hell going feel some fear the 
night before thinking about it.


 John k Clark


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Natural gas: The fracking fallacy

[John Clark]

On Mon, Dec 22, 2014 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List <
everything-list@googlegroups.com> wrote:

>> In the USA oil production rose by more than half a million barrels per
>> day between 2007 and 2011 to the highest level in 15 years, and in that
>> same year the USA exported more gasoline and diesel than it imported for
>> the first time since 1949. And in 2012 USA oil production increased by
>> another 760,000 barrels a day, the largest yearly increase since records
>> about oil production started in 1859. But incredibly 2013 beat even that
>> record, oil production in the United States rose by another 992,000 barrels
>> a day! And in 2014 the USA overtook Saudi Arabia to become the largest
>> producer of oil on planet Earth, it was already the largest natural gas
>> producer in the world and has been since 2010.
>>
>
> > Yes, so what?
>

So the "false projections" about the USA becoming the next Saudi Arabia
turned out to be true.

> I was under the mistaken impression that you understood what reserves
> mean,
>

And I was under the mistaken impression that you understood that
historically the proven oil reserves of a country have remained about as
constant as the New York Stock Exchange, it changes every time a new oil
discovery is made, and even more important, it changes  every time a new
technology is developed that allows for the economic extraction of oil in
places where it had previously been uneconomic.


> > Reserves measure what is in the ground that can be recovered.
>

Reserves measure what is known to be in the ground that can be recovered
economically with existing technology.

>> Explain to me how the Saudi's will make more cash when oil is selling at
>> $60 a barrel then it did when it was selling at $130 a barrel. Is this some
>> new form of mathematics?
>>
>
> > Are you trying to be ironic or cute? Clearly the Saudi's feel they can
> endure the loss now in order to drive a large portion of the higher cost
> producers out of business.
>

So your theory is that the price of oil collapsed from $130 to $60 because
of some sort of byzantine conspiracy of the Saudi's, but your theory just
does not fit the facts. During the time of the oil collapse Saudi Arabia
did NOT increase their oil production, they kept on using the same old
technology and their production remained constant. However during that time
the USA  started using a new technology, and they increased their oil
production, and did so DRAMATICALLY. And the USA increased its gas
production even more. There is no need to invoke sinister plots by James
Bond style villains, it's a simple rule of economics that when the supply
of commodity X increases the price of commodity X falls.

And the free market ensures that the sort of silly conspiracy you're so
concerned about could never work. I manufacture 99% of the worlds widgets,
you make 1%. I want to drive you out of business, so I figure I'll lower my
price until you go broke and then I can jack them up to anything I want. So
now you lose money on each
widget you sell, the trouble is I do too. I have 99 times as much money as
you do, but I'm losing it 99 times faster. Even worse, because the price is
very low the demand for widgets is huge, and if prices are to remain low I
must build more factories (or oil wells) and increase production. I'm
losing money faster and faster,
meanwhile you just temporally halt production in your small factory and
wait for me to go broke. It won't be a long wait.

 John K Clark





 John K Clark widget

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Intelligence & Consciousness

[Bruno Marchal]

On 23 Dec 2014, at 01:37, Russell Standish wrote:


On Sat, Dec 20, 2014 at 09:39:57PM -0800, meekerdb wrote:

consciousness is favored.  Personally, I think "integrated" is a
vague concept and amounts to "and then a miracle happens" without
some further elucidation.

Brent



See arXiv:1405.0126 for a quite explicit quantification of what
"integrated" means.

I haven't yet had a chance to fully digest the paper, or take a
position on it, but it seems the charge of it being a vague concept is
not valid.


Interesting. The conclusion are close to what we can expect from  
diagonalization, without diagonalization.
They asks for []p & p, and got only the []p, and grasp well the  
insuperable problem of getting the "t" (without going at a meta-level  
where we can take it temporarily for granted, as we manage the  
theology of a machine much simpler than us).


May be I assume here that []p & p integrates the []p, from the person  
perspective. The "[]p" can only be felt as some multiple disconnected  
assembling, like a body.


You are right, using "vague" is not valid here.

Bruno





Cheers
--


Prof Russell Standish  Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coders
Visiting Professor of Mathematics  hpco...@hpcoders.com.au
University of New South Wales  http://www.hpcoders.com.au

Latest project: The Amoeba's Secret
(http://www.hpcoders.com.au/AmoebasSecret.html)


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google  
Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,  
send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/



--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen

[John Clark]

On Mon, Dec 22, 2014 at 5:06 PM, Bruce Kellett 
wrote:

 > And as for the fear of death stuff, are we asked to believe that if you
>> learned right now that tomorrow morning at 9am a firing squad was going to
>> put several bullets into your brain you wouldn't be the slightest bit
>> apprehensive and would go to bed tonight just as you always do and sleep
>> like a baby without a care in the world?
>>
>
> No, I wouldn't fear death even then. bravest
>

Then you're either the bravest man who ever lived or you're full of
bullshit. I think it's far more likely that you're full of bullshit.

> I might worry about the possibility of pain.


With several bullets inserted into your brain with high power rifles you're
head will explode within a fraction of a second and you're not going to
feel any pain, but you're sure as hell going feel some fear the night
before thinking about it.

 John k Clark

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen

[Bruno Marchal]

On 22 Dec 2014, at 23:10, Bruce Kellett wrote:


Bruno Marchal wrote:
Would do accept to be tortured, here and now, with the promise of  
1) 1000,000 $, 2) total amnesia of the torture?


These artificial situations are hard to evaluate. I would say,  
however, that people are often prepared to put up with considerable  
pain and inconvenience if they think the endpoint is of sufficient  
importance. Amnesia of the pain and suffering is not usually a  
relevant consideration.



Indeed, as big pain are also technically hard to forget and abstract  
from. But in those afterllife consideration, and assuming the  
computationalist hypothesis, those question makes theoretical sense,  
and indeed can correspond to different theo-technological practices,  
and with the math, we can interview machines on such questions, in the  
different points of view (that machines can't avoid when looking  
inward in the Gödelian classical sense).


Bruno



Bruce

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google  
Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,  
send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/



--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen

[Bruno Marchal]

On 22 Dec 2014, at 22:20, LizR wrote:


On 23 December 2014 at 09:14, meekerdb  wrote:
Would do accept to be tortured, here and now, with the promise of  
1) 1000,000 $, 2) total amnesia of the torture?

But then I would have forgotten you owed me a $1,000,000.

The stipulation was only that you would forget the torture.


Thanks Liz.

But you too seem to avoid the question. Of course it is a difficult  
one. To legalize such practice is equivalent with legalization of  
torture (with consent, this does not legalize rape or sex under  
coercion, unless it is part of the accepted contracts). A prospect  
which makes sense in a civilization where self-duplication is in  
practice (maybe when living in virtual environments).


A future tip: encrypt your Gödel number, if possible quantum  
mechanically, as soon as possible. Protect yourself.


Bruno






--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google  
Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,  
send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/



--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen

[Bruno Marchal]

On 22 Dec 2014, at 21:14, meekerdb wrote:


On 12/22/2014 4:43 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:


On 21 Dec 2014, at 20:06, meekerdb wrote:


On 12/20/2014 11:05 PM, Bruce Kellett wrote:
Most legal systems punish murder more than any other crime, and  
those that have the death penalty reserve it for the worst  
offenders. Most criminals know that if they threaten a person  
with death they are more likely to comply than with other  
threats. Most religions, in the absence of any evidence, promise  
an afterlife. I think this all supports the fact that it is a  
common human trait to fear oblivion, even if as John says it's  
just a matter of taste.


Stathis Papaioannou


It might be a common human trait to fear oblivion, but it is even  
more irrational than belief in an afterlife.


Bruce



"I do not fear death, in view of the fact that I had been dead for  
billions and billions of years before I was born, and had not  
suffered the slightest inconvenience from it."'(Mark Twain)


Would do accept to be tortured, here and now, with the promise of  
1) 1000,000 $, 2) total amnesia of the torture?


But then I would have forgotten you owed me a $1,000,000.


"total amnesia" on the torture. Of course not of event preceding the  
torture. I pay you in advance if you insist.


I guess you are joking.

But still, you forget to answer.

A quasi (comp) equivalent question is the following one. I pay you  
1000,000 $ if you accept to be duplicated, and the copy will be  
tortured to death. I let you introduce delays if it give you the  
feeling it is less risky, but oif course if you said yes to step 4 you  
know this is an illusion.


Should we made such transaction illegal?






If no, the Mark Twain argument is less convincing.

Note that Mark twain provides here an argument for after-life. If I  
could come from nowhere, why would that not be possible again? is  
it not the case all the time? Who are we, really?


Indeed.  As far as I know Twain may have thought another life was  
possible.  He only satirized the Abrahamic idea of an after-life in  
heaven or hell.  But why would it be HIS after-life if he didn't  
remember his prior life?


It is HIS after-life because he makes the SAME errors.

Bruno





Brent
"Now then in Earth these people cannot stand much church - an
hour and a quarter is the limit and they draw the line at once a
week.  That is to say, Sunday.  One day in seven; and even then
they do not look forward to it with longing.  And so - consider
what their heaven provides for them: "church" that lasts forever,
and Sabbath that has not end!  They quickly weary of this brief
hebdomadal Sabbath here, yet they long for that eternal one;
they dream of it, they talk about it, they think they think they
are going to enjoy it - with all their simple hearts they think
they think they are going to be happy in it!
It is because they do not think at all; they only think they
think.
--- Mark Twain, Letters from Earth

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google  
Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,  
send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/



--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Intelligence & Consciousness

[Bruno Marchal]

On 22 Dec 2014, at 20:14, LizR wrote:

Sometimes allegedly conscious beings behave very unintelligently.  
However using Bruno's distinction intelligent behaviour is conscious  
(goal directed etc) but competent behaviour isn't.


So we have 3 classes of being

1 conscious
2 intelligent
3 competent

2 inplies 1 but 1 doesn't imply 2 so 1 is wider than 2. 3  
isexclusive from 1 and 2.


But how then to distinguish competence from intelligence?



With a joke.

Competence discerns and builds of itself.

Intelligence laughs of itself.

Intelligence is needed to recognize our error , which is needed to  
develop competence, but competence when developed can make  
intelligence sleepy, laughing of the others, feeling superior, saying  
a lot of stupidities, etc.


Competence is the art of winning.
Intelligence is the art of loosing.

Somehow.

Bruno








--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google  
Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,  
send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/



--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen

[Bruno Marchal]

On 22 Dec 2014, at 19:13, John Clark wrote:


On Sun, Dec 21, 2014  Bruce Kellett  wrote:

> No one is denying that death results in oblivion.

Then what are we arguing about?

> But that is not the point.

It isn't?!

> My claim was that no one has experienced oblivion. In common  
parlance, we routinely say that everyone experiences death at the  
end of their lives. Hence the distinction made between death and  
oblivion in this context.


So this entire death vs oblivion debate has nothing to do with the  
nature of reality, it's about grammar and how one particular  
language out of the 7000 in use on this planet happens to use 2 words.


And as for the fear of death stuff, are we asked to believe that if  
you learned right now that tomorrow morning at 9am a firing squad  
was going to put several bullets into your brain you wouldn't be the  
slightest bit apprehensive and would go to bed tonight just as you  
always do and sleep like a baby without a care in the world?


You can fear for your life being too much short, without any fear of  
"oblivion".


Typically, and oversimplifying for pedagogical clarity,  in occident  
we oppose death with life, like if those were different state of a  
person. In orient, they oppose more easily death with birth, making  
them different event which can happen. In the average, in orient, they  
have the "correct" (with respect to classical computationalism) fear  
of death, which is not the fear of oblivion, but the fear of a  
possible bad next birth. According to their theories, that might  
depend on the "karma", which is only an abstract notion of causality.  
This makes sense, as our action here and now determine the good-bad of  
our next instants, and of the next instants of people *very* similar  
to us: our children grand-children, etc.


Bruno




 John K Clark


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google  
Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,  
send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/



--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen

[Jason Resch]

On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 at 6:47 PM, Bruce Kellett 
wrote:

> John Clark wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Dec 21, 2014  Bruce Kellett  wrote:
>>
>>  Evolution gave living things an instinct for self-preservation. But you
 can have such an instinct operating healthily and still not fear death.

>>>
>> Unrelated? Bob and Don are crossing a street when a large truck turns
>> a corner and is heading straight for both of them. Bob has a fear of
>> death but Don has a instinct for self preservation, please tell me
>> about the unrelated and very different procedures Bob and Don use to
>> get out of the way.
>>
>
> They should both jump for safety! Don's instinct for self preservation
> makes this jump instinctive -- and successful. Bob's fear of death leads
> him to freeze in his tracks, and he is killed.
>
>
>>  It [death] is not something to be feared because no-one has ever
>>> experienced it
>>>
>>
> Your paraphrase is very telling. I said no-one has ever experienced
> oblivion, not that no-one has died [death]. Plenty of people have died, and
> many have suffered from the experience of dying. But since we all die at
> some point, fearing death is scarcely rational. Fearing suffering is
> rational, however, because we actually experience that and rationally try
> to avoid it.
>
>
I don't think John's motivations stem from a "fear of death" but from an
"unwillingness to die". I see how your line of reasoning implies the former
is irrational, but I think we're just taking the former too literally,
where what we really mean is the latter.

Jason

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen

[Jason Resch]

On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 at 5:30 PM, LizR  wrote:

> On 22 December 2014 at 08:06, meekerdb  wrote:
>
>>
>> "I do not fear death, in view of the fact that I had been dead for
>> billions and billions of years before I was born, and had not suffered the
>> slightest inconvenience from it."'
>> --- Mark Twain
>>
>> I have a suspicion that wasn't really Mark Twain, although I know it's
> often credited to him. People didn't say "billions and billions of years"
> much in those days (they do a lot more now, perhaps thanks to Carl Sagan).
> But I'd be happy to be proved wrong - do you know the original source?
>
>
Good catch, I wouldn't be surprised if you're right. Although it's worth
noting Carl Sagan never used the term "billions and billions" either, but
people ended up associating that phrase with him.

Jason

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen

[Jason Resch]

On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 at 3:29 PM, Bruce Kellett 
wrote:

> Jason Resch wrote:
>
>> On Sunday, December 21, 2014, Bruce Kellett > > wrote:
>>  > Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
>>  >> On Sunday, December 21, 2014, Bruce Kellett <
>> bhkell...@optusnet.com.au > wrote:
>>  >>
>>  >> What's wrong with oblivion?
>>  >>
>>  >>  Most legal systems punish murder more than any other crime, and
>> those that have the death penalty reserve it for the worst offenders. Most
>> criminals know that if they threaten a person with death they are more
>> likely to comply than with other threats. Most religions, in the absence of
>> any evidence, promise an afterlife. I think this all supports the fact that
>> it is a common human trait to fear oblivion, even if as John says it's just
>> a matter of taste.
>>  >>
>>  >> Stathis Papaioannou
>>  >
>>  > It might be a common human trait to fear oblivion, but it is even more
>> irrational than belief in an afterlife.
>>
>> Why do you think belief in an afterlife is irrational?
>>
>
>
> If you read more carefully, you will see that I did not claim that. What I
> said was that fear of oblivion was more irrational than belief in the
> afterlife. That leaves open the question of whether belief in the afterlife
> is irrational or not.
>
>
Yet if you read it *even *more carefully, you will see that you did not
simply write "more irrational", but you said "even more irrational", which
implies you think there is at least some degree of irrationality in the
belief in the afterlife.

Jason

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen

[zibblequibble]

On Tuesday, December 23, 2014 2:40:53 AM UTC, stathisp wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tuesday, December 23, 2014, Bruce Kellett  > wrote:
>
>> zibblequib...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>> On Monday, December 22, 2014 10:06:21 PM UTC, Bruce wrote:
>>>
>>> John Clark wrote:
>>>  >
>>>  > And as for the fear of death stuff, are we asked to believe that
>>> if you
>>>  > learned right now that tomorrow morning at 9am a firing squad was
>>> going
>>>  > to put several bullets into your brain you wouldn't be the
>>> slightest bit
>>>  > apprehensive and would go to bed tonight just as you always do
>>> and sleep
>>>  > like a baby without a care in the world?
>>>
>>> No, I wouldn't fear death even then. I might worry about the
>>> possibility
>>> of pain. I might worry about the injustice and arbitrariness of it 
>>> all.
>>> But mostly I would be concerned for those who depend on me here and
>>> now.
>>>   The degree of this concern would depend on my age when this 
>>> happens,
>>> the number of those dependants, and their degree of dependency.
>>>
>>> Bruce
>>>
>>>
>>> Turing Test Fail  
>>>
>>
>> Have you never heard of, or seen, courage in the face of death? Often 
>> taken as the true test of manhood!
>>
>
> It wouldn't require courage if death were no big deal. 
>

that's exactly right. And sometimes at the very end, life has been made 
cheap, or we cheapened our own lives. And we don't really care. 

And then the other person at the very end, somewhere else, in someone 
else's world. Who had the courage to live life and earn the love of others 
and accept theirs in return also. Who has to die and cannot bear the 
reality of its meaning. It means you leave today and you never see all 
those people that love you and you love them, again. 

See I'd look on that as someone who had lived fearlessly. To face the fear 
of failure of rejection of abandonment of loss, right through, which is 
what a person has to do to get a big life. The final test of that is having 
something unbearable to lose, when that days  comes.

Most do show courage in the end for all that. Life is kind in that way. 
Only asks from you what you spent your life doing best. 

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen

[zibblequibble]

On Monday, December 22, 2014 10:18:55 PM UTC, Bruce wrote:
>
> zibble...@gmail.com  wrote: 
> > On Monday, December 22, 2014 10:06:21 PM UTC, Bruce wrote: 
> > 
> > John Clark wrote: 
> >  > 
> >  > And as for the fear of death stuff, are we asked to believe that 
> > if you 
> >  > learned right now that tomorrow morning at 9am a firing squad was 
> > going 
> >  > to put several bullets into your brain you wouldn't be the 
> > slightest bit 
> >  > apprehensive and would go to bed tonight just as you always do 
> > and sleep 
> >  > like a baby without a care in the world? 
> > 
> > No, I wouldn't fear death even then. I might worry about the 
> > possibility 
> > of pain. I might worry about the injustice and arbitrariness of it 
> all. 
> > But mostly I would be concerned for those who depend on me here and 
> > now. 
> >   The degree of this concern would depend on my age when this 
> happens, 
> > the number of those dependants, and their degree of dependency. 
> > 
> > Bruce 
> > 
> > 
> > Turing Test Fail   
>
> Have you never heard of, or seen, courage in the face of death? Often 
> taken as the true test of manhood! 
>
> Bruce 
>

 Bruce, Courage is acting in the face of fear, where the action speaks to 
virtue. Having no fear is something entirely different. People are born 
that way sometimes. And sometimes people are temporarily desensitized by 
events in a theatre or war or a sub-culture gone awry. The dy secret of 
PTSD is that it is almost always not about what is done to us, but 
something that we did, or allowed to be done. 

Answer to your question..I've seen enough. Your characterizations of fear 
exhibited a disjoint. Al the stuff about oblivion and that fear of death 
was culturalthis wasn't thought through. That's the best that can be 
said. But then you gave a very descriptive depiction of fear in a runaway 
paragraph, that rang very true. 

One has to be logical and marry up the incongruity best as can. I think it 
says you've had experiences of fear that you still struggle with. You 
described your own fear. 


-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen

[Quentin Anciaux]

2014-12-23 11:04 GMT+01:00 Bruce Kellett :
>
> Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
>
>> On 23 December 2014 at 17:46, Bruce Kellett 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
>>>
 On 22 December 2014 at 23:04, Bruno Marchal  wrote:

> On 22 Dec 2014, at 06:01, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
> On Monday, December 22, 2014, Samiya Illias 
> wrote:
>
>> If death leads to oblivion, then there isn't much to worry about.
>>
>
> Atheists worry about death as much as theists.
>
>
> Atheists might worry about death, but less so than a believer in Hell.
> Some
> atheists believe that death is the end of consciousness and thus of
> worries,
> but if you believe in some after-life, you might fear unknown
> happenings,
> or suffering, etc.
>

 Perhaps, but some may prefer Hell to oblivion, while others try to
 kill themselves after a minor setback. It depends on the person.

>>>
>>> An odd notion, that: some people might prefer Hell to Oblivion. But that
>>> aside, you seem to think that it is only fear of death (and/or Hell) that
>>> keeps people from widespread mayhem and self-destruction. I must admit
>>> that
>>> I have a healthier view of humanity.
>>>
>>
>> I do in fact think that it is the belief that death constitutes a harm
>> to the person who dies that keeps people from widespread mayhem and
>> self-destruction. I think this is also the case for religious people
>> who claim to believe that the deceased will go to Heaven, because deep
>> down most of them know it's bullshit. To be fair, there is no logical
>> reason why death should be considered this way, it's just the way most
>> people think.
>>
>
> You might be right about most people, I can't really comment. But I prefer
> to be rational, and encourage others to be so also.


I can't see how fearing or not fearing death can be rational at all,
knowing we don't know exactly what death implies... The fact that death is
the apparent end of interaction with our reality can lead to have good
reasons to avoid it, and so fearing it could be rational... I heard your
argument about oblivion and so what ? why because after the fact you
wouldn't care would mean you shouldn't care here and now ? So instead of
insulting other people about not being rational and you because you're so
good is, you should try to be more humble.

Quentin


>
>
> Bruce
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Everything List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>


-- 
All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. (Roy
Batty/Rutger Hauer)

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen

[Bruce Kellett]

Stathis Papaioannou wrote:

On 23 December 2014 at 17:46, Bruce Kellett  wrote:

Stathis Papaioannou wrote:

On 22 December 2014 at 23:04, Bruno Marchal  wrote:

On 22 Dec 2014, at 06:01, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
On Monday, December 22, 2014, Samiya Illias 
wrote:

If death leads to oblivion, then there isn't much to worry about.


Atheists worry about death as much as theists.


Atheists might worry about death, but less so than a believer in Hell.
Some
atheists believe that death is the end of consciousness and thus of
worries,
but if you believe in some after-life, you might fear unknown happenings,
or suffering, etc.


Perhaps, but some may prefer Hell to oblivion, while others try to
kill themselves after a minor setback. It depends on the person.


An odd notion, that: some people might prefer Hell to Oblivion. But that
aside, you seem to think that it is only fear of death (and/or Hell) that
keeps people from widespread mayhem and self-destruction. I must admit that
I have a healthier view of humanity.


I do in fact think that it is the belief that death constitutes a harm
to the person who dies that keeps people from widespread mayhem and
self-destruction. I think this is also the case for religious people
who claim to believe that the deceased will go to Heaven, because deep
down most of them know it's bullshit. To be fair, there is no logical
reason why death should be considered this way, it's just the way most
people think.


You might be right about most people, I can't really comment. But I 
prefer to be rational, and encourage others to be so also.


Bruce

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: I signed up to be cryogenically frozen

[Stathis Papaioannou]

On 23 December 2014 at 17:46, Bruce Kellett  wrote:
> Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
>>
>> On 22 December 2014 at 23:04, Bruno Marchal  wrote:
>>>
>>> On 22 Dec 2014, at 06:01, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
>>> On Monday, December 22, 2014, Samiya Illias 
>>> wrote:

 If death leads to oblivion, then there isn't much to worry about.
>>>
>>>
>>> Atheists worry about death as much as theists.
>>>
>>>
>>> Atheists might worry about death, but less so than a believer in Hell.
>>> Some
>>> atheists believe that death is the end of consciousness and thus of
>>> worries,
>>> but if you believe in some after-life, you might fear unknown happenings,
>>> or suffering, etc.
>>
>>
>> Perhaps, but some may prefer Hell to oblivion, while others try to
>> kill themselves after a minor setback. It depends on the person.
>
>
> An odd notion, that: some people might prefer Hell to Oblivion. But that
> aside, you seem to think that it is only fear of death (and/or Hell) that
> keeps people from widespread mayhem and self-destruction. I must admit that
> I have a healthier view of humanity.

I do in fact think that it is the belief that death constitutes a harm
to the person who dies that keeps people from widespread mayhem and
self-destruction. I think this is also the case for religious people
who claim to believe that the deceased will go to Heaven, because deep
down most of them know it's bullshit. To be fair, there is no logical
reason why death should be considered this way, it's just the way most
people think.


-- 
Stathis Papaioannou

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.