HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » hunter » Journal
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 21 Next »


Profile Information

Name: Hunter
Gender: Male
Current location: California
Member since: 2002
Number of posts: 35,573

About Me

I'm a very dangerous fellow when I don't know what I'm doing.

Journal Archives

Gun fetishes are disgusting.

That's where I aim my wrath.

I've got absolutely nothing against the utilitarian uses of guns.

Hunting for food isn't any less ethical than buying meat at the grocery store so long as it's carefully regulated.

Trophy hunters are disgusting.

Wannabe warriors are disgusting.

I don't think most of our police have the skills or the temperament to use guns appropriately. I've seen them shoot people who weren't shooting back, and people who didn't even have guns.

Most gun fetishists vastly overestimate the value of guns for self defense. One of my great grandmas, who was a suburb hunter and outdoors person all around, would say things like, "If I wanted you dead I'd poison your coffee." She had ZERO tolerance for fools with guns, especially the incompetent city yokels who invaded her territory every hunting season with their ridiculously expensive gear seeking to prove their manliness. And this was before the modern idiocy of military style rifles and the like.

Gun fetishists need to crawl back to their closets. Most U.S.A. citizens don't care enough about guns to bother owning one, and support much stricter regulation of guns. It's a crime that violent and ignorant people, their brains damaged by lead and insecticides and television, enjoy more political representation than saner folk.

Oh, and the second amendment is bullshit. It's not like our Constitution wasn't full of bullshit when it was written, things like the 3/5 person compromise, that were meant to appease horrible white men who kept others as property -- as slaves, wage slaves, even their own wives and children.

I'm not going to stop mocking gun fetishists, nor will I compromise with them. They are wrong, just like racism is wrong, hatred of LGBTQ people is wrong, etc..

Most people in the U.S.A. can't be bothered to own a gun.

A certain number of people like hunters and ranchers use guns for utilitarian purposes. These kinds of guns last forever, since they are usually kept locked away unused.

That leave's "gun culture" as the only market for new guns -- people who already own multiple guns. A lot of the people who participate in that culture probably shouldn't own any guns and might not be given permits in places like Switzerland.

This huge market, driven entirely by gun culture, also makes it easy for mass murderers and violent criminals to obtain these weapons.

I thought this would be a thread mocking the UFO hearings so I didn't click on it. Too easy.

Most UFO theories tend to be lacking in imagination. Any beings able to travel between the stars, or even from the outer reaches of our own solar system, are not going to be zipping about in the equivalent of the Jetson family car.


I've personally had some "Close Encounters of the Third Kind," half of them I attribute to my own mental illness, which sometimes includes hallucinations mostly auditory but sometimes visual, especially when I'm not sleeping enough.

Sometimes I've seen stuff that is later explained. I once happened upon a very early pre-dawn test flight of a stealth fighter back when I was prone to running long distances and minor trespasses.

That first encounter registered in my head as another UFO until the aircraft was publicized. I had a few drone aircraft register as UFOs as well. Military things like this, before they were commonplace:


These things look like they are zipping around at incredible speeds if you misjudge the distance. When I saw them they were probably looking at me.

Meh, that's just Hunter. He's crazy and mostly harmless.

The true interstellar visitors don't need spaceships. They already permeate everything, shifting their awareness around according to their incomprehensible whims.

On the macro-scales of the three dimensional universe we live in, faster-than-light travel is simply impossible.

That's a good thing.

There are many other species out there just like us. They don't play well with others.

The speed of light and all the ways to die in space keep us very well quarantined.

There are plenty of disused cities throughout the U.S.A.

Maybe we could train an army of specialists to refurbish and modernize these cities with high speed internet, excellent public transportation, and carbon-free power sources.

Then we could offer them up for homestead, with free water and utilities for a year, no rent or mortgage for two, first dibs to the people actually doing the reconstruction.

Those who don't make the transition to self-sufficiency in two to five years would be offered more conventional publicly subsidized housing and other opportunities.

All the resources required to do this, money and manpower, could be diverted from our overheated military budget.

I don't think it would take a great fraction of those resources to nearly eliminate homelessness and wage slavery in the U.S.A., and it would also create a more welcoming environment for immigrants and refugees whom we need to prevent demographic senescence.

That probably sounds too much like communism to some people. It's actually an investment in our future.

Libertarians like to believe such progress can be accomplished by the "invisible hand of the free market," but it's not happening. Gentrification is not the same thing. For every "winner" in the gentrification game there are more losers -- mostly lower income people who are driven away by high rents and evictions.

Everything Elon Musk does makes me pessimistic about humanity's future.

He pretty much personifies the lucrative (for him anyways...) kind of false optimism that will destroy what's left of the natural world as we know it. I'm pretty sure he's an apartheid asshole as well.

If we believe wind turbines and solar panels and batteries and electric cars are going to "save the world," we are only deluding ourselves. These will only prolong our dependence on fossil fuels, especially natural gas. In fact, an expansion of these technologies to more humans will only increase the environmental footprint of humanity at large.

Seeing wind turbines on hillsides or at sea, and acres of solar panels growing like cancers on previously undeveloped land, does not give me the warm fuzzies. And there's no way in hell this planet can sustainably support an automobile for every adult human, whether it's electric or not.

Human space exploration does not make me optimistic. I'm fairly certain natural humans won't ever have a significant presence in space beyond low earth orbit. We're just too damned fragile. There have been spectacular advances in computers and robotics since we last sent men to the moon so there's no good reason to send human explorers out into space any more -- it's a waste of resources and humans will only get in the way of actual science.

Robotics make me optimistic.

If we natural humans don't destroy our twenty first world civilization, then it will be our intellectual offspring who colonize this solar system; engineered beings who can safely walk naked on the surface of Mars, or fix a problem on the exterior of a spaceship wearing minimal protective clothing... like putting on a coat before going out into frosty weather, no space suit required. Breathing? What's that?

There are things that make me optimistic. The political and economic empowerment of women, easy access to birth control, and realistic sex education will halt human population growth in its tracks. That's a demonstrated fact.

It delights me every time I hear in ordinary conversation a woman talking about her wife, or a man about his husband.

Durable plastic pipe and sophisticated water treatment systems could bring clean water and indoor plumbing to everyone on earth. Modern treatment plants can turn sewage into irrigation water, or even back into tap water. The sewage that goes down the drain in my house irrigates crops, and some of it gets turned back into tap water. I don't have to feel guilty about my flush toilet. My shits not getting dumped directly into some river or contaminating the groundwater my neighbor drinks.

Vegan and vegetarian diets are becoming increasingly sophisticated, both in their own right and with the greater availability of products that mimic meat and dairy products. It won't be long now before the most popular and least expensive burger in your favorite fast food place is vegan, the same as the milk you pour on your breakfast cereal. Unless you want to pay extra for the "real thing" which, hopefully, won't be some animal tortured in a factory farm and processed by abused workers.

I think everyone in the world deserves a reliable, affordable, supply of electricity. The way to accomplish that is with nuclear power, which is an established seventy year old technology far less dangerous, kilowatt hour for kilowatt hour, than any fossil fuel. Unlike complicated "renewable" energy schemes, the components of a modern electrical grid are mostly made of iron, aluminum and concrete. These materials last a long time and iron and aluminum are easily recycled when they are no longer serviceable, in a way that the components of various "renewable energy" schemes are not, everything from wind turbine blades, electronic waste, and lithium batteries.

I think small modular nuclear reactors built in factories and shipped to places that need electric power have a very promising future. I like living in a nation that never abandoned this line of research so we won't be dependent on Russia or China for this technology when it becomes clear to the majority of us here in the U.S.A. that the fossil fuel industry must be shut down.

There's no point to being an "optimist" or a "pessimist" if you don't have any clear vision of a viable and sustainable future.

Personally, I seek to crush the optimism of anti-intellectual intolerant religions, climate change deniers, racists, homophobes, libertarian twits, etc.

The only birth rate that truly matters is the birth rate for all humans.

There's only one earth and one species of humans who have migrated by land and by sea throughout human history, populating all the continents and major islands except Antarctica thousands of years ago.

All the other concerns about birth rates are based on racism, nationalism, or religion, as expressed by people who believe in some sort of cultural purity, a sort of purity that has never existed even in places like North Korea where dissent is severely punished.

I'd flippantly say the ruling class is fearful of low birth rates because it reduces the number of naive young people they can exploit.

It would be a good thing if human population growth was zero or slightly negative. We humans are exceeding the carrying capacity of our environment.

We can achieve zero population growth by the political and economic empowerment of women, easy access to birth control, and realistic sex education. It's not a coincidence that these are the progressive goals that "conservatives" of many different nationalities and religions oppose.

Nuclear power is the only energy source capable of displacing fossil fuels entirely.

But that would make all these wind energy schemes redundant as well.

Thus all the noise.

Nuclear power is an existential threat to the hybridized wind-solar-gas industry that many self-proclaimed "greens" are invested in.

These renewable energy schemes are incapable of displacing fossil fuels entirely for the simple reason that the sun doesn't always shine and the wind doesn't always blow. At a certain point, usually well below 40% of the total energy demand, adding more solar panels or wind turbines hits a wall of diminishing returns. Additional wind turbines and solar panels have little or no value.

That's not the case with nuclear power. If nuclear power plants are supplying half the power on an electric grid then doubling the number of nuclear power plants will supply all the power on that grid. That's not the case with solar and wind power.

Solar and wind enthusiasts either ignore this reality or they argue for magical energy storage schemes that do not, and in some cases cannot, exist.

A wealthy person can afford a roof covered with solar panels, a bunch of Tesla Powerwalls, and a backup generator powered by vegetable oil produced on their own estate. That's not really an option for all eight billion of us. It's not even a truly green option.

The people with the smallest carbon footprints are going to live in pedestrian friendly cities with nuclear energy delivered directly to their homes over aluminium cables. That's the least resource intensive way to raise living standards throughout the world.

Aggressive renewable energy schemes in places like California, Germany, and Denmark have failed.

They are fundamentally unfair to lower income consumers and have only increased our long term dependence on fossil fuels, especially natural gas.

There's enough gas in the ground to destroy the natural world as we know it, and our civilization as well. It should be left where it is. Hybrid natural gas / renewable energy systems will not save the world.

The current rate structure for solar destabilizes the electric grid and transfers wealth from lower income consumers and apartment dwellers to people who are already wealthy.

I've discussed this on DU in quite a few places. Here's a recent post on rate structures:


I'm a radical environmentalist and I used to be a radical anti-nuclear activist.

Hell, if I was Emperor of Earth I'd ban all personal vehicles with engines larger than 10 kilowatts. I'd also ban the entire factory farm meat and dairy industry. Good thing I'm not Emperor, you say?

But seriously, my politics are practical and Democratic. My Emperor of the Earth proposals are thought experiments.

That being said, I've changed my mind about nuclear power. At this point it's a mature 75 year old technology and the only energy resource capable of displacing fossil fuels entirely.

As the human population approaches 8 billion we've worked ourselves into a very tight corner. At least 99% of us are dependent on high density energy sources for food, clean water, and shelter. Without these high density energy sources (now provided by fossil fuels...) about 40% of us would suffer and eventually die. That's about the same number of us who will suffer and eventually die by climate upheavals if we don't quit fossil fuels.

I'm some sort of socialist. I believe EVERYONE in the world deserves healthy food, clean water and indoor plumbing, comfortable shelter, and a reliable source of electricity. That can be accomplished with nuclear power, and with minimal danger compared to fossil fuels.

We know how we got here and it wasn't in spaceships.

In my strange universe intelligent species who don't obliterate themselves make the leap to near-omnipotence rapidly, before they build any silly things like starships, which would be quite boring as they wouldn't go faster than light.

This big universe is very threatening to certain religious beliefs, in that aliens are more powerful than their gods.

A being like Q, who can pop out of nowhere to harass Jean-Luc Picard in a galaxy of 100-400 billion stars or more, makes humans seem very small and insignificant, which they are.

It's much more comfortable to believe humans are special enough that aliens in space ships are watching us.

The truth is harder. We each have to determine "the meaning of life" on our own, even as nearly omnipotent beings. This meaning cannot be found in science or religion, it's unique to each individual.

On a less philosophical note, funding for UFO studies is easily diverted to less savory pursuits. Suppose you are looking for aliens or rogue artificial intelligences on the internet. Sounds fun, right? You might use the same technology to identify hidden political enemies as well.

Remember the Glomar Explorer? That ship was supposedly looking for manganese nodules on the ocean floor. I remember the popular science articles. The ship was in fact built to recover a sunken Soviet submarine.

In any case, supposing some alien near-omnipotent intelligence is teasing us, then there really isn't anything we can do about it, no defenses we can muster. It's trivially easy for a star-faring people to destroy an emergent civilization that annoys it. Maybe that's what happened to the dinosaurs.

If the space aliens want to talk to us they will. Otherwise we are just monkeys screaming at the airplanes in the sky.

Thought experiment: Anyone here can disconnect from the electric grid and pour sand...

... into their car's engine. Then what?

People say all sorts of things about climate change but most are in some stage of denial.

The right wing still thinks we can burn a lot more fossil fuels without any danger to our civilization. The left wing doesn't yet realize renewable energy schemes in places like Germany, California, and Denmark have failed and further entrenched our long term dependence on natural gas.

Personally I think the human race has worked itself into a corner. There are so many humans we require high density energy sources to keep us all fed and comfortably sheltered. The only energy source capable of replacing fossil fuels entirely (which we MUST do) is nuclear power.

Fortunately nuclear power is a mature seventy year old technology. Even the worst accidents, Chernobyl and Fukushima, caused very little environmental damage in comparison to the daily horrors we are now experiencing as a direct consequence of our fossil fuel use.

The fundamental problem of our society is our economic system. This thing we now call "economic productivity" is a direct measure of the damage we our doing to the natural environment and our own human spirit. Most of us suffer jobs and lifestyles that are not making the world a better place.

The most horrible thing we learned from the accidents at Chernobyl and Fukushima is that humans going about their ordinary daily lives are worse for the natural environment than fallout from a nuclear accident.
Go to Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 21 Next »