Daniel Pinchbeck, How Soon is Now, Heavy-Handed Climate Apocalypse Stuff |343|

Discussion in 'Skeptiko Shows' started by Alex, Mar 21, 2017.

  1. Alex

    Alex New

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2013
    Messages:
    2,513
    Daniel Pinchbeck, How Soon is Now, Heavy-Handed Climate Apocalypse Stuff |343|
    by Alex Tsakiris | Mar 21 | Consciousness Science, Skepticism

    Share
    Tweet
    SHARES0
    [​IMG]

    Daniel Pinchbeck, was a pioneer in exploring consciousness, but now he’s sure the world will end if we don’t trade carbon credits.
    [​IMG]

    photo by: Climate change collage
    Welcome to Skeptiko, where we explore controversial science and spirituality, with leading researchers, thinkers and their critics. Today’s guest definitely fits in that category. Daniel Pinchbeck is a leading thinker about consciousness and he has a lot to say about science in his new How Soon Is Now. So why did we wind up having a conversation that sounds like some kind of frick’n political debate? I don’t know, but I think I have some ideas and I need to talk about them, because this crap has been going on for too long now. Ever since this crazy election in the United States, a lot of people in the parapsychology, near-death experience, extended consciousness, whatever you want to call this realm, have been on tilt:

    Alex Tsakiris: Well earlier on you were kind of defending the mainstream media as saying, “Hey, they don’t get everything wrong.” Certainly they don’t get everything wrong…

    Daniel Pinchbeck: There is no inconsistency in my perspective, it’s highly coherent. I’ve spent years developing it. I feel that you’re not… like I don’t know, maybe we need to spend six hours haranguing this out, I don’t think it’s going to happen in one podcast. It’s highly coherent and it’s systemic. We have a systemic illness going on. People are lost, people are confused, people are scared, the whole system is designed to make them that way.

    We can put this thing back into balance, but first we have to have the imagination that it’s possible, and that’s what great thinkers like Oscar Wilde and Buckminster Fuller and Hannah Arendt, to help us to have that imagination, so we have to realize that it doesn’t have to be this way, that we could actually create a harmonic system that works in resonance, in harmony with the ecology of the earth as a whole system.

    We could do that, okay? Just in the same way we figure out how to fly, just in the same way we figure out how to make smartphones and extract all these weird minerals and fossil fuels from the environment. We could not turn our attention to how do we make this thing work for all human beings, for our entire human family? We have the technical capacity to do that, as Buckminster Fuller said, it’s a design problem and it’s an imagination problem.

    Alex Tsakiris: Okay. I think it’s okay to disagree, so I don’t have a problem that you don’t see my ideas as coherent or even sensible or anything like that, or that I don’t see yours as coherent, I mean that’s really not the issue.

    Daniel Pinchbeck: I’m going to meet you at the same level of force that you’re meeting me, because otherwise I feel that I’m not even getting a listening here. I’m sorry, you know?

    Alex Tsakiris: That’s why I paused before, to make sure you had a chance to talk. So let me kind of respond to what you’re saying, in really a new way, okay, that I think relates to your book in an important way and a way that is synergistic with my approach, because is it possible that the material world, that we’re talking about right, because there’s this spiritual, extended consciousness world, that we were talking about earlier on, that may exist and may have a totally different set of rules than this material “end justifies the means” [world we’re talking about], those two worlds could be different in some important ways, that we don’t realize. I’m just throwing that out as a possibility. So, isn’t it possible that it’s true what a lot of spiritual teachers tell us, is that in some way we don’t quite understand, the world is always perfect just the way that it is?
     
    Ian Gordon likes this.
  2. Michael Larkin

    Michael Larkin Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2013
    Messages:
    1,999
    Alex's questions at the end of the podcast:

    What do you think we can do to increase the chances that intelligent people will be able to have real dialogues (about issues of concern to Skeptiko listeners?) and get past the polarising political situation we're currently in? Do you think that will happen, or do you think we are fundamentally stuck in a way that is not going to immediately fix itself?
     
  3. Charlie Primero

    Charlie Primero Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2017
    Messages:
    586
    Pinchbeck must have been isolated in a fluffy bubble of narcosis since 2012.

    This is why all his AGW talking points are old, stale, well-debunked crap from five years ago. He never gets challenged and thus forced to examine them. The same goes for his stale 8th grader Venus Project-teir economic tripe that was fashionable seven years ago.

    The reason Pinchbeck flips-out like a spoiled child at any sign of disagreement with his paradigm is that he is accustomed to interviews with hipster podcast sycophants who fawn over his self-contradictory word salads due to the celebrity he enjoys in his niche market.

    Pinchbeck’s job is to sell Global Marxism to the “Consciousness” crowd. He really sucks at it, I think because he is lazy. He doesn’t even realize the very political technology he thinks so revolutionary, the Internet, is exactly what is subverting the advance of his One-world Government Global Marxism.
     
    Last edited: Mar 21, 2017
  4. K9!

    K9! New

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2013
    Messages:
    1,549
    I guess Pinchbeck rarely leaves his echo chamber.
     
  5. Steve

    Steve Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2013
    Messages:
    1,426
    Thanks for the fascinating interview Alex & Daniel.

    My real interest in this is basically along the same lines as Alex. I find the whole situation since Brexit/Trump happened really interesting. Seems to me that we're being forced to look at situations we really don't like and somehow come to terms with them. Daniel was wound up by Alex, similar to Ed May on the surface, but I think it was for different reasons. Daniel couldn't get his head around Alex having very different views on things, where I felt with Ed it was simply ego talking, maybe it's the same thing?

    The world being 'perfect' to me, means that it's doing what it's meant to do, warts and all. The warts are grossly overblown by the media, just go outside to watch the sunset to get some perspective. While you're there, be grateful that you can! They are what's important. Not saving the world, that's above our pay grade. Alex has the right idea when he talks about Amma, the hugging saint. Look at yourself, be kind, show compassion. If we were to worry about the world, we'd go mad in no time.

    If it is perfect, and I think it may be, I think it helps to have a worldview that 'believes' in consciousness surviving death. If we're here to learn and grow, there would be very little point if everything was hunky dory, there wouldn't be anything to grow from. I like this idea, it makes sense.

    Once more, I found myself feeling sympathy for Alex. (No need I know!) At the same time, if there weren't people like Daniel around, there would be no 'disagreement'. I think the big lesson is to come to terms with having differing viewpoints. The trick is to change our thinking, not the world. The world will change along with our thinking.
     
    Ian Gordon, K9!, Alex and 2 others like this.
  6. People have to understand how politicians and "news" media are brainwashing them into thinking the other side is either stupid or evil. When they learn the tricks used to manipulate them, they will see through the illusion and realize most people are okay. Different people in different circumstances are affected by political policies in different ways so they will have different opinions on which policy is best. When they realize that each side to every issue can be explained in a reasonable way they will realize the hate and fear mongers on both sides are the real obstacle to solving problems because they make civil discussion impossible and cause people to reject the results of democratic processes.

    http://ncu9nc.blogspot.com/2017/03/most-news-stories-are-crafted-to.html

    Most News Stories are Crafted to Misinform and Manipulate You



    Problems can be identified and solutions found without experiencing anger, fear, and hate. But we are programmed by the media to react with those emotions every time we think of the other political party or hear their views expressed. It is a major cause of political polarization in the US.

    Contents

    Introduction
    Trolling and Provocateurs
    Media Tricks
    Addiction to the News
    Firehose of Falsehood: Modern Propaganda

    Introduction

    Those of us who follow the news on TV, radio, newspapers or the internet are bombarded by so many unreliable sources of information if we don't make a concerted effort to pay attention to whether the information is reliable or not, we are very likely to be misinformed and manipulated by journalists, politicians, and political organizations who are taking advantage of us to advance their own personal agenda. The vast majority of what is considered "news" is crafted to get your attention, influence your opinion, make you react the way they want, and keep you coming back for more. Accuracy is of secondary importance. The news rarely gives you an accurate objective representation of reality. We are programmed by the media to react with anger every time we think of the other party or hear their views expressed. It is a major cause of political polarization in the US. Politicians and journalists will not help solve this problem. They are the main beneficiaries of polarization and the main causers of it. This post should help you understand why and how the news media misinforms and manipulates you. With that knowledge you will be able to see through the illusions spun by media manipulators.
    ...​

    More at the link.

    and here:

    "A Constructive Approach to the Conservative / Liberal Divide": The political polarization in the US is caused by journalists and politicians who are misleading the public. Research by sociologist Jonathan Haidt shows that all people throughout the world have the same five basic intuitions about morality. The differences between liberals and conservatives occur in slight preferences about which aspects of morality they think are most important. Liberals and conservatives have much more in common than they have differences. However, journalists and politicians gain personally by portraying these differences as a matter of smart vs. stupid or good vs evil. This is a scam. Good, intelligent people can disagree. Every scientific controversy shows that the interpretation of facts is only an opinion. If people will stop being fooled by this deception, the hate mongers will become powerless and our society will be able to solve problems through civil discussions based on mutual understanding and respect.
    http://ncu9nc.blogspot.com/2016/01/jonathan-haidts-constructive-approach.html

    "What Someone Should Say at a Political Rally": "I could go through every issue that divided us in the last election and show that both sides have legitimate concerns."
    http://ncu9nc.blogspot.com/2017/02/what-someone-should-say-at-political.html
     
    Last edited: Mar 21, 2017
    Red likes this.
  7. "To The Horror Of Global Warming Alarmists, Global Cooling Is Here" by Peter Ferrara: "The CO2 greenhouse effect is weak and marginal compared to natural causes of global temperature changes." Natural causes such as ocean currents and solar cycles are a better explanation for the climate data than CO2 produced by human activity.
    https://www.forbes.com/sites/peterf...obal-warming-alarmists-global-cooling-is-here

    "The Global Warming Fraud, Explained" by John Hinderaker: "The climate alarmists assert that various positive feedbacks, principally an increase in the main greenhouse gas, water vapor, will amplify that scientifically-defensible one degree increase into something like six degrees. EVERY SINGLE THING you have ever read about the supposedly baleful effects of CO2 is based on that unproven assumption. Actually, the net feedbacks–clouds are the great unknown–may be negative rather than positive."
    http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2016/12/the-global-warming-fraud-explained.php

    "Climate Change in 12 Minutes - The Skeptic's Case" by Stefan Molyneux



    https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2017/03/lindzen-personal-paoc-explanation-final.pdf
    * The UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) no longer claims a greater likelihood of significant as opposed to negligible future warming,

    * It has long been acknowledged by the IPCC that climate change prior to the 1960’s could not have been due to anthropogenic greenhouse gases.

    * Yet, pre-1960 instrumentally observed temperatures show many warming episodes, similar to the one since 1960, for example, from 1915 to 1950, and from 1850 to 1890. None of these could have been caused by an increase in atmospheric CO2,

    * Model projections of warming during recent decades have greatly exceeded what has been observed,

    * The modelling community has openly acknowledged that the ability of existing models to simulate past climates is due to numerous arbitrary tuning adjustments,

    * Observations show no statistically valid trends in flooding or drought, and no meaningful acceleration whatsoever of pre-existing long term sea level rise (about 6 inches per century) worldwide,

    * Current carbon dioxide levels, around 400 parts per million are still very small compared to the averages over geological history, when thousands of parts per million prevailed, and when life flourished on land and in the oceans.

    ...

    Respectfully yours,
    Richard S. Lindzen, Professor Emeritus of Atmospheric Sciences
    Scientific theories are judged by their ability to make predictions. The repeated failure of climate alarmists' claims should make everyone a "climate change skeptic".

    https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/opi...rophets-of-eco-apocalypse-wrong/#.WNGccjFtk66
    History keeps proving prophets of eco-apocalypse wrong

    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/04/02/the-big-list-of-failed-climate-predictions/
    The big list of failed climate predictions
     
    Last edited: Mar 21, 2017
  8. David Bailey

    David Bailey Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2013
    Messages:
    4,009
    Alex,

    I was sorry that the podcast never got on to Daniel's earlier interests, but I guess he has become obsessed with his new concerns......

    I'd like to answer your question in an optimistic way. I think what everyone tends to forget, is that politicians and many media people are a hard-nosed crowd that do things almost exclusively to benefit their careers. Maybe readers should say that 10 times over to themselves before reading further because it explains everything - let's call that proposition P for a shorthand.

    Because of P, we should assume that there are virtually no politicians or media people who are genuinely interested in LBGT, climate change, the rights of immigrants, the rights of religious minorities, etc.

    These people fake an interest in these issues because they think it gets them re-elected, or because it furthers their media career. They also think that these issues make ordinary people feel guilty, and so more easily manipulated.


    Now for the first time, they are beginning to realise that a lot of people in the US and the UK have rumbled their nonsense. In Britain, Mrs. May's government is riding high because she is taking a firm stance on Brexit. Most of us in UKIP thought the government would renege on the referendum, but it seems like they have finally realised that the way to be popular, is to do what the people want. I hope something similar will happen in the US - they are about 6 months behind us on this.

    I am optimistic that this is an idea that will spread - self-centred politicians aren't so bad when they see it is in their personal interests to be doing what people actually want done.

    (Sorry about using so much boldface in the above!)

    I have puzzled and puzzled about what was the real reason for the climate scam. I think the clue may lie in the fact that India and China and other Third World are permitted to open new coal-fired power stations almost without limit. These same countries are clamouring for vast 'climate reparations'. There are all sorts of kick-backs and cream-offs in all that for UN officials. This idiotic issue was never about anything but making money, and transferring wealth from Western countries to the Third World - but not to the people, but to the local corrupt officials.

    What I do find disturbing, is that people like Daniel, who seem to be able to see through the veil regarding reality, can still get snared on this phoney issue. I mean Daniel mentioned in passing all the thousands of nuclear weapons primed to launch at short notice - doesn't he think that is an infinitely more important issue than minuscule changes in temperature?

    Alex, I was sorry you voted for Hillary - even if you repented later - was Pizzagate the most important issue for you? For me, the number one issue was that Hillary wanted to confront the Russians in Syria - possibly starting a nuclear war, and she knew that most of the opposition to Assad was from terrorists armed by the US!

    David
     
    SwiffFiffteh likes this.
  9. I saw an interview of a member of congress where he was asked why he used such inflamatory language when talking about the other party. He said it was because he was getting calls from constituents who were really mad about what was going on.

    We don't have leaders, we have panderers.

    Politicians won't help us solve this problem of polarization. It has to come from the bottom up.

    http://ncu9nc.blogspot.com/2016/01/jonathan-haidts-constructive-approach.html
    Milton Friedman:

    No we don't need to change congress. Excuse me. People have a great misunderstanding about this. People in congress are in a business. They're trying to buy votes. They're in the business of competing with one another to get elected. The same congressman will vote for a different thing if he thinks that's politically profitable. You don't have to change congress. People have a great misconception in this way. They think the way you solve things is by electing the right people. It's nice to elect the right people but that isn't the way you solve things. The way you solve things is by making it politically profitable for the wrong people to do the right thing.

    ...

    I do not believe that the solution to our problem is simply to elect the right people. The important thing is to establish a political climate of opinion which will make it politically profitable for the wrong people to do the right thing. Unless it is politically profitable for the wrong people to do the right thing, the right people will not do the right thing either, or if they try, they will shortly be out of office.
     
    Last edited: Mar 21, 2017
  10. Nelson

    Nelson Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2017
    Messages:
    141
    On the contrary, it doesn't explain many things. Many of these people are psychopaths. They are reckless and know that the MSM will cover for them on the big issues. There is a globalist agenda. It's admitted. Whether Hillary or the other candidate, both were war candidates, despite the rhetoric of the latter. Just look at what he's doing now: sending more troops to encircle Russia, and other sovereign countries on the list to destroy.

    This is not what people were expecting based on rhetoric before the election. Politicians would be more popular if they'd keep their promises but they never do. The new president on foreign policy is Bush/Obama: it's always the same. That's because there's an agenda steering things in the same direction: destruction of families, destruction of tribes/sovereign nations, and the rolling out of global government.
     
    Last edited: Mar 21, 2017
    Judith likes this.
  11. I think this phenomenon is part of the problem:

    Meditation is a good way to give your analytic brain a rest and strengthen your empathic network.
     
    Judith likes this.
  12. Nelson

    Nelson Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2017
    Messages:
    141
    Actually it is orchestrated from those higher up in the food-chain. Lower level UN employees from the Third World don't have the leverage. Rather, it is the highest level globalists who want a global tax as a forerunner to full-blown global government.
     
  13. Alex

    Alex New

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2013
    Messages:
    2,513
    It did feel a bit like a time warp :)
     
  14. Alex

    Alex New

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2013
    Messages:
    2,513
    nice!
     
    Steve likes this.
  15. David Bailey

    David Bailey Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2013
    Messages:
    4,009
    I am not certain, but I think his problem is that all the talk of the Russian plot to put him in power has rather tied his hands at the moment. The extra troops in Eastern Europe is a rotten idea, but was planned before he came to power. you should remember that President Trump has made no attempt to assert the US in Syria - totally counter to Hillary's policy.

    I think President Trump (for all his problems) is infinitely preferable to a President Clinton!

    David
     
    SwiffFiffteh likes this.
  16. The eastern European countries do not have a secret plan to start a war with Russia. They are legitimately afraid because of Russian annexation of territory from Georgia and Ukraine. They want US/NATO troops in their countries to prevent a war not to start one.
     
    SwiffFiffteh likes this.
  17. Steve

    Steve Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2013
    Messages:
    1,426
    Maybe. The way I see it is that Russian messes about with countries whose peoples are in conflict and a certain percentage of them want to be part of Russia. Imagine if there were thousands of Chinese or Russian troops placed so close to the USs borders? It's one rule for the US another for everybody else. (Except Israel)
     
  18. Alex

    Alex New

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2013
    Messages:
    2,513
    totally agree... much, much more likely.

    not my finest hour :) I never imagined Trump had a chance (he didn't in California... where I live... but that's besides the point... a wasted vote is a wasted vote)

    I didn't grock Pizzagate until after the election. I really didn't follow the election. Election night (after I heard that Trump was on his way to winning) was the first time I watched any MSM news coverage in years.
     
  19. Alex

    Alex New

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2013
    Messages:
    2,513
    probably true.
     
  20. I always become suspicious when there is a debate and one side tries to shut down the other through threats, censorship, and ridicule. I have learned many wonderful and fascinating things by studying what I am not supposed to look into.
     
    Last edited: Mar 22, 2017

Share This Page