Saturday, May 03, 2008


JSH: It's a puzzle

I have to solve the problem and I'm running out of time. You all are part of a massive puzzle that I'm trying to unscramble and if I don't then nasty things happen, but more and more it looks like if I do, nasty things happen.

Part of the problem seems to be a natural conflict between evolution and civilization.

Civilization makes it easier for more people to survive, while evolution works best by killing off those who make stupid mistakes, so there is a continual battle of evolution against stability, without which humanity wouldn't exist as it would never have evolved.

Counter pressure against evolution seems to explain people like George W. Bush and Dick Cheney.

Their mistakes somehow don't matter. It has little impact on their survivability, but in a situation where mistakes don't matter, then negative memes can flourish until they reach a catastrophic tipping point, and stupidity once again causes death, and then evolution kicks in again with a vengeance.

Rising autism rates in the US may simply be the counter-force against evolution as humanity devolves slightly until stupidity reaches a level that civilization can no longer keep most people alive, which is where we are rapidly going.

So the answer may be that there is no solution but to wait, as inevitably as stupid people, like modern mathematicians keeping a one hundred plus year old error in place so that they can play at doing math, by controlling the world push, it to the brink, at which time necessarily there will be this huge die-off as evolution re-asserts itself.

Like how many of you really understand global warming?

My guess is that roughly 90% of you do NOT.

That probably is about a critical level above which humanity's devolution will be steep enough that it will no longer be able to maintain civilization at the level necessary to maintain stupid people like George W. Bush, or modern "pure math" mathematicians, where we're seeing critical pressure as hunger strikes much of the world.

But that can't be the full answer. And when is the critical point? It has to be within the next 10 years.

But is it possible for a 90% die-off rate? If so, then most of the people alive today will not be alive in 10 years, as evolution breaks the civilization barrier and once again forces forward development of the human race, and puts a negative on stupidity so that failure means death.
So evolution is the natural force antagonistic to civilization, and seeks to topple it.

And it is an irresistible force while civilization is a movable object.

The balance cannot be maintained as a species devolves when evolutionary pressures are removed until it loses the ability to maintain against those pressure whatever its solution.

Humanity has the solution of civilization so wrapped in the solution must be the key for evolution to re-assert, so we have a world now which is oddly tranquil in the face of global warming, well, because it's not "smart" enough to fully understand what's happening.

Which is evolution asserting itself to beat the solution of civilization.

Or maybe I need more brainstorming but I think I'm closing in on the answer, and it's not pretty.

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?