Science will surely destroy the planet

[Autumnlicious]

I think you'd have to be pretty unobservant not to see that technology is getting exponentially cheaper to produce, more powerful/advanced, and more widely available year by year. Just look at computers. They used to fill up buildings, now something you carry in your pocket is many times more powerful.

Once again, you wave around 'powerful' while completely changing the context. I've noticed that, for example, you've managed to redefine the scope of 'powerful' to encompass a variety of orthogonal factors such as size, processing capability and high energy explosives (that is in reference to your earlier use of 'powerful').

Either way, you're spewing out bullshit and making a mess. You've no evidence towards the 'cheaper side', and the only potential real world link I can evince is Moore's Law for processors. However, reaching the limits of Moore's Law is a very real thing among semiconductor circles, so even then, your postulations turn to dust.

Furthermore, you've yet to explain how your original premise is valid. But I'm not holding my breath, you see, because...

I guess you've never heard of the law of accelerating returns?

http://www.kurzweilai.net/the-law-of-acc...ng-returns

The kook emerges! Ray Kurzweil is a well known futurist (read as bullshit artist) and vitamin huckster (http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Ray_Kurzweil). He also likes to promote pseudoscientific understandings of the brain (http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2010/...dersta.php).

Furthermore, his 'futurist' ramblings are about as trustworthy as John Edward's cold reading (http://spectrum.ieee.org/computing/softw...futurism/0) and loves to use the word 'exponential' a lot. A bit like you, methinks.

It does stand to reason that you are a Kurzweil looney, considering that your similar use of 'exponential' and lazily defined terms makes it difficult to zero in on what you're saying (if you're saying anything... that is).

I created the thread to show that the march of technology will eventually empower anyone on the planet to create a weapon which could potentially destroy it. You've offered no coherent argument as to why this isn't true, but rather are railing against me because I took a shot at your sacred cow.

You started this thread with 'Science doomsday scenario', you lying little shit. It is named "Science will surely destroy the planet". That is not 'the march of technology'.

I've not offered a coherent argument? Are you stupid, or just mentally retarded?

The burden of proof is on you to explain why "Science will surely destroy the planet" (your words, not mine, you asshole). And I criticized your premises.


Had you an ounce of integrity, you'd offer evidence and (gasp!) reason. I've not seen the former and the latter seems to have been replaced by an ill-thought out boogeyman in word salad (exponential!) clothing.

Sacred cow?

That's rich coming from the same guy who's posting videos and fallacies on "Things science cannot explain".

You are contemptible.