Lori Ann Cole and Corey Cole, the creators of the Quest for Glory series, a ground breaking adventure and RP game from the early 90s, are great supporters of critical analysis.
See some of my comments on their forums;
Global Energy (www.theschoolforheroes.com/questlog/784/global-warming-–-what-if-we’re-wrong/#comment-1298);
Our response here should be independent of the reality of climate change and its human influence.
The fossil fuel supply is limited. Currently, it is the only source
which can fuel jet aircraft (based on its high chemical energy to mass
ratio), meaning it will retain a high military value for some time. In a
few hundred years fission fuels required for 20th century nuclear power
plants will become rarer (uranium), meaning the only long term option
is nuclear fusion (hydrogen/helium). Fortunately our supplies are
plentiful. For early generation fusion, this will constitute Deuterium
(extractable from sea water) and Tritium (breedable in fusion reactors),
and then Helium 3 (requiring potentially moon harvesting – although
providing an even cleaner alternative). It will be thousands of years
until either sources are depleted.
With respect to environmental safety; in all designs, there is no
probability of melt down (stopping the reaction basically involves
switching off the power). The radioactive half lives of first generation
fusion power by-products are orders of magnitude less than that used in
fission power (they naturally decay x1000 faster, meaning they do
not stay radioactive for thousands of years). Hydrogen bombs use the
same process, which for reference are 1000 times as powerful as an
atomic bomb (uranium/fission), like that which was dropped on Hiroshima.
The main task of scientists today is to harness nuclear fusion in a
controlled manner (effectively creating a star on earth). The two main
projects working on this at the moment are ITER (based upon a Russion
Tokamak design / magnetic confinement), and LIFE (laser inertial
confinement, promoted by the US at the National Ignition Facility).
Atomic hydrogen constitutes 90% of the visible universe, and helium
nearly 10%. Fusion is the primary source of energy in the universe.
Massive stars are kept from internally imploding as a result of nuclear
fusion: all stars 30% or greater than our own would collapse and become
black holes [/neutron stars], instead of becoming shining power plants for billions of
years. In the case of our sun, nearly 50% of the age of the universe. It
heats the earth to provide wind and wave power, and of course feeds
solar cells directly. Heavy elements including those used in fission
power plants are known to be the by-products of supernovae, and
therefore a result of nuclear fusion. Elements heavier than iron
actually take energy to join, and give energy when split – the opposite
of fusion. Perhaps tidal energy is an to the rule exception, but even
that is affecting the moon’s orbit.
Right now, the world is governed by those who think the 1960s was the
peak of human ingenuity and scientific progress. If human climate
change is both real and negative, then I couldn’t imagine a worst state
of public opinion (mass conformity to a futile ideology). Individual
efforts in 1st world countries are not going to solve the problem (apart
from making us feel good – hence the morality). Wind mills are not the
solution. There is a reason people don’t use “renewable” energy –
economics. One has to solve the economic problem; making it both viable
and competitive. This means funding research and education.
Links:
http://www.iter.org/
https://lasers.llnl.gov/
Personal Freedom (www.theschoolforheroes.com/questlog/1583/debate-and-decide/#comment-1926);
Maybe this is why their games are so good- because they don’t always
share the same concerns as each other and are able to
represent/integrate their synthesis. The truth of any matter is able to
address all concerns...
Regarding the classification of personal freedom. The fundamental
issue is not abortion/birth control; it is both rape and why women are
assumed the burden to control pregnancy themselves. Interestingly
enough, there is a common basis – and it is not human nature, however
suggestible the subconscious may prefer to remain. Rather it is
artificial – a by-product of misrepresentation called objectification.
It is not evolutionarily advantageous for a woman to admit failure in a
man. Neither is it evolutionarily advantageous for a man to concede
weakness or damage, and so women are left with the result. Hence the
common conclusion that these issues (which represent the mitigation of
the result) belong to women and are framed under such terms, despite the
fact their implications obviously go beyond mature female organisms.
...continued (www.theschoolforheroes.com/questlog/1583/debate-and-decide/#comment-2210);
I didn't have any problems with the article as it was obviously bi-directionally biased. That is actually what I found so constructive about it.
Have people given up trying to articulate the division which besets them? Or perhaps they are such great believers in sexual equality (as long as they can retain their fantasies) that they have dismissed all purpose in a conversation that extends to the opposite gender.
To say that people are against women or exclusively homosexually orientated individuals is absurd, and am surprised anyone has fallen for that semantic trap. And this is exclusive homosexuality albeit whose representation in the animal kingdom has yet to discovered- if indeed it is a natural phenomenon. It is interesting that republicans have the dignity to take such nonsense in their stride - rather than declare an equally absurd war on baby girls. They just don't believe that truth is democratic.
Yet any discrepancies in conclusion (or vote as the case may be) signifies a real and present information gap. Why on earth have we failed to address this? What is causing people to feel threatened? Is it perhaps that they have failed to identify the basics- and they are trying to solve the inevitable consequences thereof without realising that their mission is impossible? That any human gain in one hand will result in the sacrifice of another? Is it not that in mutual error we have lost trust in the other? That is what happens when you start to tolerate dehumanisation.
It is fair to say that when a nation classifies the objectification of a human being as artistic freedom of expression they have given up on logic entirely.
They currently have a Kickstarter campaign going for game development on Hero-U(niversity): Rogue to Redemption.
