Peterkin

As of when? I would sincerely like to know. In my youth when I hung out with Catholics, I don't recall them being taught this doctrine. Certainly, it's not been their a historical stance. I would also like to know what steps the Church as an organization has taken to bring about universal health care, save rain forests or mitigate income disparity. If it does, it could be quite effective, even in influencing governments.

The gag came off at c. 5pm. Does it go back on at 8 again? (I surmise it's to monitor the activity of new members, in case they attempt leafleting or proselytizing. I accept the need for such vigilance, but find it a bit irksome to keep receiving notifications to which I can't respond.)

The plastic bottles are a symptom. They are made from fossil fuel, the extraction of which is often accompanied by horrific oil spills. Their manufacture requires a great expenditure of energy, usually in the form of more fossil fuel and accompanied by waste products spewed into the air, land and water. They are then filled from a local spring that used to provide sustenance to a local ecology, and transported in giant shipping containers by behemoth cargo ships, churning and polluting the oceans, and decanted into transport truck that require highways to cut through natural habitats and use more fossil fuel to burn and spew into the air, water and land. Then they're schlepped home in more automobiles, half or so consumed, and tossed on verges, forest patch, parks, streets and eventually collected in garbage dumps, or end up in the lakes and oceans, where they kill aquatic animals, and break down into carcinogens. They just happen to be the symptom that convinced me of the patient's terminal condition. Wouldn't that rather depend on what and who was being taxed and how the revenues were used? Most western governments don't have the legislative power to enact the draconian that would be necessary to make any real dent in the effects of climate change. (It's already changed and will keep on changing; the only meaningful choices now regard mitigation.) Investing public funds in public works - renewable energy generation, clean transport technology, green jobs and housing, local food productions, etc. - is about the only way governments can help their citizens survive the changing environment. Some of the European ones have been doing that - not enough! - but the muscular capitalist ones resist such initiatives with all their might. ... and then get stuck with humongous bills for repair to wrecked bridges, dams, towns and highways after each catastrophic weather event.

What religion has ever suggested equal sharing or sensible resource management? Some prophets propose kindness, co-operation and tolerance, but they're quickly martyred (and any sincere adherents, eliminated) and that's the only way organized religion wants them. Organized religion is as attached to its hierarchy of power and privilege as any other patriarchal system. If we haven't learned by now, it's unlikely.

We have a technologically advanced civilization, compared to earlier civilizations we've had, and yet we don't behave very differently. Interstellar travel capability is no more a basis for assuming that entities are peaceful than transoceanic travel capability was - as the Taíno and Mi'kmaq and other indigenous peoples learned to their chagrin. But since the technological discrepancy here is greater, and the alien species doesn't share our predatory past, I was assuming that, if they were not benevolent, they wouldn't bother to make contact: they'd just take what they wanted and ignore us, unless we got in their way. Even if they were merely curious, they could study the planet without necessarily talking to the inhabitants, maybe even without us ever being aware of them. (Although, in Star Trek, the well-meaning humans studying less advanced species are so clumsy that they're accidentally discovered by some native and have to do damage control. That's the kind of situation I envision as most likely. Unless the template for first contact is more like Childhood's End or The Day the Earth Stood Still or Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy . It could go any number of different ways.

Well, I understand "like" - or thought I did, until just now, when I read the suggestion that using it could trigger the self-destruct sequence. I'm pretty sure I'm not ready for that. I don't understand the others, so I won't use them until I see more of how things work here. (PS *heart* the emoji selection.)

That would depend to a very large extent on the attitude and behaviour of the visitors. Obviously, our leaders would be shaking in their boots in the face of technology that far advanced, so they probably 🤞 wouldn't do anything stupid, like to try to attack the aliens. I'd like to think they would let the UN be the interface - if that's the right word - but am afraid that at least some nations' leaders would look for an "in" - some way to gain special favour for their own regime, and make us all look like sneaky opportunists. That, however, doesn't apply to the armed lunatic fringes of every stripe, who would almost certainly do whatever the stupidest thing is in the circumstance: frontal assault. I assume they'd be vapourized, which wouldn't go down well with their compatriots. So, right away, we're bound to have frictions and fractiousness. The scientists, creative people and their readers/followers/students would be thrilled, vindicated, euphoric and curious enough to piss off the aliens with unwanted attention. Not as integrated units. They already have sects, sub-denominations and factions; those differences would suddenly grow into rifts. The Pope might be able to put a single voice to Roman Catholicism, at least for a short time, but protestants reactions would be all over the place, and soon at one another's throats. Muslims, too - at least two main factions contradicting each other, probably more like four or five. The Jews would probably be okay with it; top rabbis would be sent from several countries to talk directly with the aliens regarding their belief. Native populations with animistic traditions would be okay, too. I have no guess as to the attitude of Hindus and and Buddhists. I wouldn't be surprised, though, if a great many marginal believers of all religions fell away all at once, and the power of religion generally were fatally weakened.

I don't have to manage or think about it very much anymore. I knew it was end-game in 1976, after no significant action had been taken on the recommendations of the First Earth Summit, after half a dozen attempts to introduce birth-control in other countries, and freedom of choice in the US had failed (it did a little better here) but especially after I encountered my first example of bottled water - shipped from France to Canada (wrap your head around that and see if it doesn't explode!) later to be followed by millions more - in non-returnable, non-recyclable (recycling wasn't introduced in Toronto until 1982) plastic bottles. I could see that we were doomed. I don't recall being angry. Exasperated, disappointed, ashamed, disgusted and profoundly sad. I've had little flare-ups of anger over particular actions, events and speeches since then, but nothing strong enough to survive that ocean of sorrow. Building bigger things and taking bold, blind steps is what got us into this extinction-spiral.

Hello. I just followed The Vat over from the late sciencechat forum. As with iNow, it's not my first shipwreck... but I'm really not up for many more. Especially given Covid and my woefully curtailed activity and human contact in the walking world. I'm retired; run a small online book business with my old partner, live in rural Ontario, where we feed a bunch of useless feral cats, grow ungrateful vegetables and write books - including a couple of science fiction ones, if that qualifies me for consideration. If it doesn't, I used to be a medical technologist back in the 20th century. *Got my second shot today! And it doesn't hurt yet.*