Erasmus : Why Enk?
EnK is about creating a new world order – a religion so to speak. A religion with no God. Humanity must look to itself to assure its own fate. Our explosive growth in science and technology in the last two centuries has arisen through the effort of many individuals, and of organisations of individual peoples – companies, societies, organisations and nations.
Knowing so little – we have been able to learn a great deal. But the frontier and complexity of the technological era continues to grow. Many of our greatest challenges now exist at the social rather than at the technological level. The Science is easier than making the changes in our society necessary to enable the advances.
To fail to plan is to plan to fail. Look at the British Empire – which once dominated most of this planet. A failure to create a structure through which the members of the Empire were able to continue working together in many aspects affecting our common society, guaranteed the fragmentation of the Empire into its constituent nations, accelerated by the events of the First World War and Second World War.
There has been no agreement to work together for purposes of – mutual defence, mutual research, mutual industrialisation, or in fact at any of the facets which underpin our civilisation. This role has defaulted to the United Nations – but at a much diminished level.
Humanity cannot allow the necessities of day-to-day politics to dictate its progress to solve the problems of tomorrow. Humanity requires a commitment of individuals and groupings of individuals to carry the banner of civilisation.
When the Russians launched the Sputnik, and the Americans were unable to match their accomplishment, the Western world re-engineered its educational programs to emphasise the sciences.
We need a similar commitment to the future. Perhaps some individual in a basement somewhere will deliver us a mathematical understanding of gravity. But I believe we are much more likely to succeed if as a planet of nations we systematically give opportunities to our best to work at solving this problem, if need be to work at this problem all their lives.
Short term government budgets do not encourage sensible and intelligent people to choose to devote their lives in the chase of an esoteric goal, likely to be of negligible value to them. Maxwell never became rich from developing his mathematical theory of electromagnetism. It is likely that the Pioneer of gravitational theory will likely also benefit very little from such a discovery.
And our best and brightest cannot see prospects for a reasonable life, they will make sensible choices which deliver them an easy life – but nothing for humanity. And I cannot blame them for making such a decision. I have seen how government science pauperises researchers. To fail to plan is to plan to fail.
The catastrophic collapse theory of civilisation beckons to me. The weak link in our civilisation is industrial food production. Food is a commodity with substantial lag times between intention to produce and the arrival of the final product. It is also the most rate limited of our production processes.
We produced just enough for a lot of us – but not all of us to get by. A single failure in a critical subsystem – be it a volcano, a meteorite, or climate change can create a set of circumstances leading to global hunger and starvation. The burgeoning world population guarantees that any crisis in food production will affect billions – likely triggering wars and global devastation as people seek to survive in any way they can.
Other threats lurk behind our awareness as well.
Erasmus : CENSORED. CENSORED "ref ...................." by order of “Frobisher” authorised by “The Commandant”.
EnK wants us all to accept that we have a role in making and sustaining our civilisation. We can no longer accept reliance on the occasional largesse of a government, the occasional largesse of the rich and the sacrifices of a few.
We have problems to solve, difficulties to face and a population of over 7 billion people to feed. It is possible to devastate our planet. Believing oneself to be green and an asset to humanity because one prefers photoelectric energy to coal my book relegates you to idiot status. The issues are far more complex involving the definition of need, the application of finance and capital for innovation, and the direction of changes in multiple areas.
Yes photoelectric energy is a greener technology than coal – in the long-term. But what do we as a government or a people do to encourage change in these areas. Companies require a return or profit to make their efforts sustainable. This creates a brake on technological development and a very slow pace of problem-solving.
You can best see the difficulties faced by companies with this in a very quixotic example – gas hot water systems. In Brisbane, gas hot water systems have moved from running a pilot light twenty-four hours a day- to activating only on demand – allowing a considerable savings in energy.
The newest round of innovation has delivered gas hot water systems that activate with as little as 9 L per minute of water flow. However, water-saving shower nozzles deliver perhaps less than 9 L per minute of water flow. It looks like you can’t save water and energy at the same time.
This is a simple problem, solvable with implementation of technology allowing gas hot water systems to activate with say just 6 L of water per minute of flow. But to make this change costs money. So you must sell the old innovation to pay for the new. Government rarely dips its finger into these muddy waters.
To fail to plan is to plan to fail. The world is becoming a complex place. Social financial capital as pooled by the governments of nations around the world can be a tool for technology and innovation – but I cringe at the prospect of allowing this to be the responsibility of short-sighted politicians. We need to as a group stand up and tell our governments what we want and to stand over and watch them to make sure they do what we want.