How about this scenario?

[3.14Participant 54]

Hello all

i was wondering these day about some rather odd scenario. But i would like to share it with you

we all know that many man these day prefer to get out of mainstream. mgtow or hermits or grass eating in japan. many of these man prefer to flip a burger or stay secluded rather than compete in this world

now …as we know mostly men are behind tech revolutions and inovations.as more men opt to not play the game and keep a low profile most likely we will se a slowdown in tech advance

on one side of the coin than can be a bad thing….but on the other  it can be a good one. why? environment degradation. tech is good and science is good. but we all know that tech in consumeristic markets is polluting the environment

can be all that a self regulating scheme on a grand scale pe mother nature?

consumerism + feminism + strange lwas => man opt out => less men develop tech => less new tech to pollute => clean water + happy men going their own way?

or my scenario is dumb and paranoid?

 

 

[ILiveAgainParticipant]

I think it will have some affect on tech and nature but another angle I can see is ‘positive discrimination’ as far as women are concerned.

Pushing women in fields such as tech will eventually lead us to going backwards …. because they can’t innovate and are risk adverse. Thus boundaries won’t get pushed.

Men have put there very lives at risk …. test pilots … astronauts etc. Many have died. War always sees huge advances but it was men once again.

So with these men walking away and women incapable of push forward …. there will be a slowing down in every aspect.

This may be good for ‘nature’ but it may also stop someone inventing a solution.

[RoyDalParticipant]

I’m not so sure that less tech is the solution to pollution. For example, Delhi and Beijing are notorious for air pollution so intense that it is actually poisonous. I believe this is because they will not go to the expense of installing high tech anti-pollution devices as the Western World has done.

Society asks MGTOWs: Why are you not making more tax-slaves?

[JollyMisanthropeParticipant 3356]

Would be nice if somebody could figure out how to get rid of those submerged garbage piles in the ocean that are as big as Texas.

The Children of Doom... Doom's Children. They told my lord the way to the Mountain of Power. They told him to throw down his sword and return to the Earth... Ha! Time enough for the Earth in the grave.

[StargazerParticipant 12505]

A significant percentage of consumption is either done by men to impress females or paid for by men and given to females. If men stop spending their time and money chasing pussy and start spending it on themselves, they could work less, produce less, consume less and, generally speaking, slow down or stop the encroaching destruction of the planet.

So here’s the deal: next time you catch yourself doing something because you think it might get you laid or please a female (or the opposite, to not do it would prevent you from getting laid or make a female angry) simply do not do it. Let the female get angry and go without the pussy. Save that money and when you’ve got enough of it, cut back your hours and just enjoy yourself.

Honestly, how many of us really need mobile phones to talk to each other? You want to talk to a man, use a CB or HAM radio or, better yet, just meet him at a bar. No need for a phone. And without females, how much money would a man spend going out to dinner in a given month? $20? Zero?

Stop doing anything that you do for females and keep the money for yourself. I promise you’ll see a cleaner, calmer, happier world as a result.

[DakotaParticipant 341]

Jevons Paradox.

It basically says that the more efficient you are technologically the higher the consumption of resources.  Example:  People used to get crazy about turning off lights to REDUCE energy use.  But, since energy efficient bulbs are on the market, people don’t worry about turning them off anymore and so energy consumption INCREASES.

Wikipedia:  In economics, the Jevons paradox; occurs when technological progress increases the efficiency with which a resource is used (reducing the amount necessary for any one use), but the rate of consumption of that resource rises because of increasing demand. The Jevons paradox is perhaps the most widely known paradox in ecological economics. However, governments and environmentalists generally assume that efficiency gains will lower resource consumption and are an effective policy for sustainability, ignoring the possibility of the paradox arising.

All of this feeds into my notion that the world is a snowball headed for hell; the more you try and SLOW it down, the FASTER it goes.  So put your seat-backs and tray tables in their up-right position cause this mutherfuka is going down.

 

[3.14Participant 54]

very interesting points of view lads

as for myself i will keep a low profile focusing on developing my neurons and sense of modesty

did you notice that modesty is viewed as a bad thing?

[treelville..miamiParticipant 893]

Yes I agree with that totally, whenever women get involved things get watered down, dumbed down if you will. Its evident wherever they’ve gotten involved, tech will suffer but then so will the military, police, firefighters. The economy,real estate, education and healthcare. Its almost as if they bring down the entire quality of living. They are constantly shooting thems lives in the foot and will rinse this place of any male ingenuity. All that will be left is the proverbial female sheep. Progress will probably come to a screaching halt.

"The wounds of honor are self inflicted"

[DurdenParticipant 1051]

Advanced technologies could also clean up these things. The ideologies are messed up where we no longer respect the the thing that gave our species life. We only pay attention to it when it effects us. With different ideologies we could clean it up within a decade at very most. Its consumerism more than technology revolution.

It's only after we've lost everything that we're free to do anything

[3.14Participant 54]

unfortunately i think changes are to a such magnitude that is rather hard to stop

climate change was buffered by the ocean (and it still is). but it is easier to stop

these changes at the start. for example it is easier to solve this problems at 300 ppm co2 rather than 404 ppm as it is now. it is the proverbial snowball effect

this is a very hard nut to crack even with all nations in some combined effort (as US Russia China relations are rather cold now…..)

i did some research about mass extinctions in the past. most bright minds of today agree that we are in the middle of the 6th and it is close in badness to Permian Triassic one that to the K-T one that wiped out the dinos

i think that we are in some very dangerous zone that can even mean the demise of our civilisation as we know it. not in the way of some stupid movie (bang bang we are gone) but in the decades to come we will se states fail, medical systems fail and agriculture fail. on top of this most likely climate refugees – Indus and Yangtze valley to most probalbe candidates

[DilbertParticipant 281]

I was in a Target store (like Wal-Mart) yesterday.  About 80% of the display space was devoted to stuff only women purchase.  Next time you are at a shopping mall notice the number of stores devoted to women.

Just think of the savings and better directed resources if we cut off their shopping privileges…

It is for very good reasons the Devil chose to tempt Eve not Adam...

[Author]

Posts