ZPE_Logo
  
Search        
  Create an account Home  ·  Topics  ·  Downloads  ·  Your Account  ·  Submit News  ·  Top 10  
Mission Statement

Modules
· Home
· Forum
· LATEST COMMENTS
· Special Sections
· SUPPORT ZPEnergy
· Advertising
· AvantGo
· Books
· Downloads
· Events
· Feedback
· Link to us
· Private Messages
· Search
· Stories Archive
· Submit News
· Surveys
· Top 10
· Topics
· Web Links
· Your Account

Who's Online
There are currently, 153 guest(s) and 0 member(s) that are online.

You are Anonymous user. You can register for free by clicking here

Events

Hot Links
Aetherometry

American Antigravity

Closeminded Science

EarthTech

ECW E-Cat World

Innoplaza

Integrity Research Institute

New Energy Movement

New Energy Times

Panacea-BOCAF

RexResearch

Science Hobbyist

T. Bearden Mirror Site

USPTO

Want to Know

Other Info-Sources
NE News Sites
AER_Network
E-Cat World
NexusNewsfeed ZPE
NE Discussion Groups
Energetic Forum
EMediaPress
Energy Science Forum
Free_Energy FB Group
The KeelyNet Blog
OverUnity Research
Sarfatti_Physics
Tesla Science Foundation (FB)
Vortex (old Interact)
Magazine Sites
Electrifying Times (FB)
ExtraOrdinary Technology
IE Magazine
New Energy Times

Interesting Links

Click Here for the DISCLOSURE PROJECT
SciTech Daily Review
NEXUS Magazine

Most Terrifying Video You'll Ever See
Posted on Wednesday, November 07, 2007 @ 22:25:51 UTC by vlad

General "What's the worst it can happen?" ... Global Warming ... Argument for action:

Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch%3Fv=bDsIFspVzfI

 
Login
Nickname

Password

Security Code: Security Code
Type Security Code

Don't have an account yet? You can create one. As a registered user you have some advantages like theme manager, comments configuration and post comments with your name.

Related Links
· More about General
· News by vlad


Most read story about General:
Z machine melts diamond to puddle


Article Rating
Average Score: 0
Votes: 0

Please take a second and vote for this article:

Excellent
Very Good
Good
Regular
Bad


Options

 Printer Friendly Printer Friendly


"Most Terrifying Video You'll Ever See" | Login/Create an Account | 4 comments | Search Discussion
The comments are owned by the poster. We aren't responsible for their content.

No Comments Allowed for Anonymous, please register

Re: Most Terrifying Video You'll Ever See (Score: 1)
by malc on Thursday, November 08, 2007 @ 00:36:49 UTC
(User Info | Send a Message) http://web.ukonline.co.uk/mripley
S'Funny I'm sure I've posted those logical choices here quite a while ago and came to exactly the same conclusion.  You also have another interesting outcome.  If you look at what actually happens when you invest in low carbon, non polluting, alternate technologies and methods of production they DON'T incur a cost.  Up front yes, but long term they turn out to be cheaper!!!!!! This means the left hand side is a win-win scenario.  What the left hand does do is to CHANGE who generates and thus controls wealth.  At the moment that lies in the hands of the oil companies........nuff said really!

You will also find a reticence to change from governments due to tax revenue collection.  Currently it is easy to tax centralised generation of energy (coal,nuclear, gas etc power plants) and a proportion of sales of a fuel (tax on petrol, gas again!, etc).  Now if we have to change it has to come from a form of energy generation that does not include the purchase of a constant source of fuel ie. we generate it ourselves such as solar, wind etc.  How does a government tax the wind or the sun shining!  It can't it knows it can't hence why the following is occurring:

1. An attempt to build exceptionally large (centralised) wind farms rather than encouraging domestic generation.
2. The re-emergence of nuclear which can only ever be centralised and "must be" a solution due to the intermittent nature of "our nice green attempt at wind farms".

Can you see the pattern...........

regards,

Malcolm



Re: Most Terrifying Video You'll Ever See (Score: 1)
by Veryskeptical on Thursday, November 08, 2007 @ 17:43:33 UTC
(User Info | Send a Message)
Actually this is a well known problem in its basic form and the solution chosen here is the minimax solution. That is choose the action that minimizes the worst possible outcome. As such it is a very conservative approach to the problem as it shows that risk aversion is the dominant motive of the players. Moreover as it takes no account of the probablilities it does not matter how small the risk actually might be. The objective is absolute avoidance.

In practice, one would expect that most people, at least those who have a good sense of the personal cost will be looking for a better solution. This would suggest introducing probabilites into the problem. If the probability of the worst case scenario coming true is small enough then chosing B and doing nothing would be more rational from an expectations point of view. However that does mean bearing a non zero risk of the worst case scenario coming true. No doubt some people will be willing to bear the risk and others will not. This immediately returns to the current divisive scenario we already bear.

And it is not completely clear as stated in the video exactly what the outcomes in each box really are. That also provides plenty of grounds for argument. Also one thing not mentioned is the time horizon for the worst case outcome. If it is far enough in the future it might well be discounted at a high enough rate as to not scare anyone very much. After all, I learned in grade school that the sun will some day ( in a few billion years) expand into a red giant star and consume the earth. Scary, right, but somehow I am not very worried. The end of the world as we know it one hundred years from now may not motivate too many people to act now. Furthermore most of this damage may occur somewhere else far away from me, so its not my problem. Am I a moral scoundral? Perhaps, but so what? I like to think of myself as a hard headed pragmatist.

And, of course, for followers of this site and similar sites there is always the possibility if there is time enough for a technological fix (new energy or something else) to sweep the problem away. So far from offering a solution I think this excercise only panics the uncritical and gullible into backing the author's point of view.



 

All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner. The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2002-2016 by ZPEnergy. Disclaimer: No content, on or affiliated with ZPEnergy should be construed as or relied upon as investment advice. While every effort is made to ensure that the information contained on ZPEnergy is correct, the operators of ZPEnergy make no warranties as to its accuracy. In all respects visitors should seek independent verification and investment advice.
Keywords: ZPE, ZPF, Zero Point Energy, Zero Point Fluctuations, ZPEnergy, New Energy Technology, Small Scale Implementation, Energy Storage Technology, Space-Energy, Space Energy, Natural Potential, Investors, Investing, Vacuum Energy, Electromagnetic, Over Unity, Overunity, Over-Unity, Free Energy, Free-Energy, Ether, Aether, Cold Fusion, Cold-Fusion, Fuel Cell, Quantum Mechanics, Van der Waals, Casimir, Advanced Physics, Vibrations, Advanced Energy Conversion, Rotational Magnetics, Vortex Mechanics, Rotational Electromagnetics, Earth Electromagnetics, Gyroscopes, Gyroscopic Effects

PHP-Nuke Copyright © 2005 by Francisco Burzi. This is free software, and you may redistribute it under the GPL. PHP-Nuke comes with absolutely no warranty, for details, see the license.