Blog

About the Ads

Monday, November 3, 2008, 8:28 PM

Sorry CA readers, we've tried to pull the political ads but they keep coming back. 

There's not much we can do about it because we can only block specific sources of ads and we have no way of knowing where these things are coming from before they arrive.

  1. They will end tomorrow
  2. We do not condone or encourage any particular ads.  They just show up.
Endorsed Financial Adviser Endorsed Financial Adviser

Looking for a financial adviser who sees the world through a similar lens as we do? Free consultation available.

Learn More »
Read Our New Book "Prosper!"Read Our New Book

Prosper! is a "how to" guide for living well no matter what the future brings.

Learn More »

 

Related content

7 Comments

krogoth's picture
krogoth
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 18 2008
Posts: 576
Re: About the Ads
Political ads don't bother me. Scientology ads do.
JMCSwan's picture
JMCSwan
Status: Bronze Member (Offline)
Joined: Oct 19 2008
Posts: 40
Re: About the Ads (D-Day: Final Reckoning!!)

When each of us as an individual decides to buy something, we first consider the price. Yet society at large has long bought the idea of continual growth in population and production without adding up the final reckoning.

In the book's chapter defining the deceptive powers of exponential growth and the apparent suddenness with which it approaches a fixed limit, the authors describe the French Riddle of the Lily Pond. In this riddle, the lily pond has a potentially virulent lily that apparently will double in size each day. If the lily grows unchecked it will cover the entire pond in 30 days, choking off all other forms of life in the water by the time it covers the entire pond. If a skeptic waited until 50% of the pond was covered before taking any remedial action to save the pond, when would he act? The answer: on the 29th day of the month! But by then, it would be too late. 

For a publication that is almost 30 years out of print, it is fascinating that anyone still even remembers what the book said. I have occasionally been privately amused at the passion this Club of Rome work still evokes. As I have heard this study thoroughly discredited, I have wondered whether the anger this book still creates is the equivalent of getting livid at a bartender "the morning after," when one's headache was so wicked. Could the core angst this work still generates result from a backlash or an embarrassment by these same critics for embracing these shortage concepts and then being proved wrong?

The group all shared a common concern that mankind faced a future predicament of grave complexity, caused by a series of interrelated problems that traditional institutions and policy would not be able to cope with the issues, let alone come to grips with their full context. A core thesis of their work was that long term exponential growth was easy to overlook. Human nature leads people to innocently presume growth rates are linear.

The most amazing aspect of the book is how accurate many of the basic trend extrapolation worries which ultimately give raise to the limits this book expresses still are, some 30 years later. In fact, for a work that has been derisively attacked by so many energy economists, a group whose own forecasting record has not stood the test of time very well, there was nothing that I could find in the book which has so far been even vaguely invalidated. To the contrary, the chilling warnings of how powerful exponential growth rate can be are right on track. The thesis that it is easy to misjudge this type of growth has also been proven by the volumes of misguided criticism that the report engendered.

Instead of rolling up their collective sleeves to begin addressing serious energy issues, these kibitzers spent their precious hours attacking the few voices of energy sanity. Over the years, the energy economists' incorrect dismissal of this important work was not only a mistake but their criticism also turned somewhat mean-spirited and at times even shrill! What a sad conclusion for such a well-intended work to finally produce.

Lurking in the backdrop of this silly, misinformed chirping was a body of statistics, all in the public domain, that were proving that many of the key issues raised by The Limits to Growth were not only serious, but the magnitude of the problem was growing as the gap between the rich and the poor widened and the poor population expanded at a much faster pace than the rich.

Perhaps the ultimate irony capping all the other mistakes which too many energy planners made as the 20th Century came to an end is that the work they lambasted so viciously turned out to be true.

Perhaps it is irrelevant that all the mileposts raised as red flags in The Limits to Growth have so far been met. After all, there is ample time to correct any seriously dangerous trend. Correct?

In the book's chapter defining the deceptive powers of exponential growth and the apparent suddenness with which it approaches a fixed limit, the authors describe the French Riddle of the Lily Pond. In this riddle, the lily pond has a potentially virulent lily that apparently will double in size each day. If the lily grows unchecked it will cover the entire pond in 30 days, choking off all other forms of life in the water by the time it covers the entire pond. If a skeptic waited until 50% of the pond was covered before taking any remedial action to save the pond, when would he act? The answer: on the 29th day of the month! But by then, would be too late.

The world can debate when corrective action needs to begin, if exponential growth suddenly shows all the classic signs of pending overshoot. But everyone should agree that waiting until the proverbial 29th day is a classic and unrepentable blunder of the first order.


EXCERPTS: ~ An Energy White Paper: Revisiting The Limits to Growth: Could The Club of Rome Have Been Correct, After All?, by Matthew R. Simmons, Simmons & Co. Intl. ~

RE:

When each of us as an individual decides to buy something, we first consider the price. Yet society at large has long bought the idea of continual growth in population and production without adding up the final reckoning

I observe that those who vote for the DemoPublicans, have not considered the price.

Among others: A National Draft; subsequent to: RAND Lobbies Pentagon :: “A Second 9/11: Start War: Need allot of dead people to wake America Up!″ :: US Military Doctrine

JMCSwan

 

caroline_culbert's picture
caroline_culbert
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Oct 2 2008
Posts: 624
Re: About the Ads
[quote=JMCSwan]

 

When each of us as an individual decides to buy something, we first consider the price. Yet society at large has long bought the idea of continual growth in population and production without adding up the final reckoning

I observe that those who vote for the DemoPublicans, have not considered the price.

JMCSwan

 

[/quote]

 

Maybe you could expand on your comment here.

What price have we not considered when voting "Democratic"...

...what "price" is it if we vote otherwise...

you don't seem to be offering up any solutions-- just long, rambling proses ending with irrelevant quotes that offer no advice to the reader... very vague messages.

Why don't you just tell everyone what your religion is and where all of your ideologies stem from?  I assume you're pentacostal after watching that video (which you removed off your website).

Maybe then others would have some idea as to where you're coming from .

krogoth's picture
krogoth
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 18 2008
Posts: 576
Re: About the Ads

Looks like the score is Caroline 10   Swan  0

We still have a lot of game left, folks. So stay tuned. And now a word from our sponsers.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rqtr_RvR3sY 

barrt's picture
barrt
Status: Silver Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 25 2008
Posts: 171
Re: About the Ads
hahahahahaha!!
cannotaffordit's picture
cannotaffordit
Status: Gold Member (Offline)
Joined: Jun 12 2008
Posts: 273
Re: About the Ads
We normally enjoy reading the comments from other subscribers, and very often learn a lot from them.  However, if Chris is going to allow this kind of trash on here, I think we'll have to give it up.  I think you can find a more suitable blog site for this stuff, not this one, which we use for important information that we need, as we all try to survive and prosper in these crazy times.  Thank you.
JMCSwan's picture
JMCSwan
Status: Bronze Member (Offline)
Joined: Oct 19 2008
Posts: 40
JMCSwan: Last Post: Ari-Verderci All: (JAG-PRH Reasons Provided)
Caroline_Culbert:

Maybe you could expand on your comment here.

What price have we not considered when voting "Democratic"...

...what "price" is it if we vote otherwise...

you don't seem to be offering up any solutions-- just long, rambling proses ending with irrelevant quotes that offer no advice to the reader... very vague messages.

Why don't you just tell everyone what your religion is and where all of your ideologies stem from? I assume you're pentacostal after watching that video (which you removed off your website).

Maybe then others would have some idea as to where you're coming from .

Price: Not sure what you don't understand, I said in an earlier post and repeatedly elsewhere, but perhaps you did not see those posts: The PRICE for voting DemoPublican is an Upcoming National Draft: A Very Large "SURGE" in the 'War on Terror' (Overpopulation), requiring significant Depopulation.
The alternative option was: Constitution Party: Abolishing the Federal Reserve, as described in Libertarian Economics: Why Austrian Economics Matters More Than Ever, by Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr.
There are plenty of solutions I have offered, perhaps not the type of solutions you are interested in; since they require PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY, ACCOUNTABILITY AND ABOVE ALL HONOUR AND RADICAL HONESTY.
I have not removed any videos from my website, ever; perhaps you are a little confused. You are welcome to assume whatever you want.
As for where I am coming from: Let's say my colleagues work at Ft. Benning, Cheyenne Mtn. Arlington Sq.... and Insider Trading is their Middle Name.... A significant number of them thinks that a world of Radical Honesty -- F**K Political Correctness and all the Collateral Damage that Goes With It; if they can't tolerate us.
A world where honour reigns, because men and women want to be honourable, not because they have to be; or are censored and banned, and ordered not to be, but to be two-faced hypocrits.
A world where people want to be honourable because being 100% honourable is not different to being 100% true to yourself, the essence of all 'spirituality', 'philosophy' and 'personal growth'.
In such a world, arguments are honourably settled between individuals, as a matter of honour; and becuase they WANT TO, as we do in the Radical Honesty community, not via police, prisons, hate and revenge; but face to face... with love, fun, sex, absolute freedom and forgiveness.
This being my last post to Chris Martenson Blog and Forums: Reasons Attached henceforth:
I am not able to hate in half measures, or to love in half measures, I am not able to give up half my soul. I have either to give up my whole soul or give up nothing.”
Felix Dzerzhinsky, "Iron Felix", KGB
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 1:47 AM
Mr. Martenson, (CC: Amanda)
C/O: Mr. Townsend
Business Manager
Chris Martenson.com
1. Guess, you don't understand Brittish humour...
2. You don't understand cryptology, nor are you interested in providing your readers with an experiential lesson in learning how intelligence agents communicate information via the media, using cryptology.
3. As a participant in Stanley Milgrams Obedience Experiments; you would have qualified as an exceptional Little Eichmann! Congratulations.
4. However; as HL Mencken said, I believe in only one thing: liberty; but I do not believe in liberty enough to want to force it upon anyone.
5. Accordingly your message received loud and clear: (i) Brittish Humour, (ii) Cryptology Experiential Learning to enable Martenson.com users to comprehend and learn for themselves the difference between information and intelligence analysis; and consequently (iii) Martenson.com would prefer his readers remain ignorant "Ignorance is Bliss; or is it Suicide: What You Know and Don't Tell Them Will Destroy Them" We the Brittish Crypto Liberty NOT WANTED, NOR APPRECIATED AT MARTENSON.COM.
No problem. Shall Respect Your Request, until you Notify me by Email you have changed your mind, if ever; and if never; no big deal.
Regards,
Lara Braveheart
On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 12:33 AM, Erik Townsend wrote:

Hi Lara,

Chris Martenson asked me to e-mail you regarding your posts on PeakProsperity.com.

We feel that some of your posts are not appropriate for the site. In fairness, we have been remiss in not writing up and posting a clear set of rules for the forums and blog comments, so I don’t mean to suggest that you’ve broken our official rules… We don’t have a well defined set of official rules yet, and that’s been our error. We’re working behind the scenes right now to establish clear rules for posting on the site, and once they’ve been published, we intend to enforce them with a 1-warning system.

I want to make sure you don’t take this the wrong way. I personally am very impressed with how articulate and complete your posts are. You’re obviously well informed and have lots of interesting viewpoints on many topics. The issue here is “a time and a place for everything”. Chris would like to keep the discussion on the site focused on the economy, energy, and the environment. We intend to implement firm policies prohibiting personal attacks of any kind (even on public figures like Warren Buffet), confrontation with other users, partisan political discussion, etc.

Don’t get me wrong – I think the sort of opinions you assert are important, and the Internet is an excellent place for everyone who cares about such issues to express their opinions and be heard. But there are myriad political discussion sites on the net, and we believe that the sort of posts you’ve been putting up lately would be more appropriate for a different web site. We’re trying to keep PeakProsperity.com focused on the messages of the crash course, and we welcome submission of factual data that relates to those messages. Although we do tolerate users sharing their opinions within reason, we don’t feel that the sharply critical posts you’ve been contributing fit the site’s intended purpose. Again, I think those posts contain some great ideas, and I hope you’ll continue expressing your views. But PeakProsperity.com is not the place for such provocative and potentially controversial posts, and there are plenty of more appropriate outlets on the Internet.

At this particular moment, this is just a polite request to please either tone down your posts considerably, or take them to a different web site. Once we’ve established and published a set of formal rules, we’ll be taking a more proactive approach to moderating the user forums.

Thanks for your understanding,

Erik Townsend

Business ManagerPeakProsperity.com

 

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Login or Register to post comments