Borg are an example of the dangers of a society becoming so dependent on their technology that they become enslaved by it. As for Ferengi the race is so comically extreme it's hard to put any kind of label on what they are supposed to represent.
P.S. Come on guys let's steer clear of the personal digs here okay, so far the discussion hasn't turned ugly and we don't want it to.
I would say that starkaos is right about the Ferengi. As for the Borg, it's impossible to say whether you're right, or he is - because we don't really know how they came to be.
Infinite possibilities have implications that could not be completely understood if you turned this entire universe into a giant supercomputer.
Q Who which was introduced the Borg in May 1989 is also about the same time as the end of the USSR. So the Borg are far more likely to represent Star Trek's representation of Communism than technology enslaving our lives. Cell phones only became popular after 1990 and social media didn't exist back then. Computers weren't as available back then. If the Borg were created in the last 10 years, then it would be more likely to represent technology enslaving our lives.
Technologically, we're almost there. Warp drive has been theorised in a practical manner which NASA is testing and we've almost cracked the secret of Nuclear Fusion. NASA can build ion/magnetoplasmadynamic engines. As a species, we are more interconnected by communications than we were 10 years ago and medical technology is advancing every year.
Sociologically, humanity is fractured severely. In the west, everything's peaceful, but look at Africa and the Middle East and you've got tons upon tons of internal strife. In Africa, Western powers are trying to restore the peace, along with the African Union, but in the Middle East, Western powers are arguably the cause of the problem.
All across the West, there's an economic crisis caused by wars, the realisation of AGW, and the decline of oil. Instead of abandoning oil for a sustainable source of energy like solar power, or a more efficient source like nuclear energy, countries like Russia and the United States are looking elsewhere for oil and getting involved in wars that are none of their business, usually making the situation even worse.
That being said, humanity is more unified than we were 20 years ago through the EU, AU, UN and other organisations existing to help us solve our problems. People talk about Iran and North Korea planning to nuke us all, but Iran just wants to provide for her people and wants to move past all the distrust she's imbued from other countries as much as anyone else, and NK is a small country who can't even assemble a nuclear weapon capable of reaching much further than Japan and China will never let them bring the world to the brink of WWIII.
As a species, I think we're starting to realise our potential.
The issue of relying on technology to make things easy, TV to babysit the kids, Microwave ovens and TV dinners to avoid cooking, driving to the corner instead of walking, taking the elevator instead of using the stairs, all the little technological conveniences that people take advantage of to make their lives easier have been around a great deal longer than the 80s and as the technology has advanced people have become more dependent on it, that becomes a danger if our technology becomes too advanced.
If something is not broken, don't fix it, if it is broken, don't leave it broken.
People have been relying on technology to make their life better ever since Ughtug picked up a stick. This is what is called progress. Sometimes, things get too easier, other times it is that lazy or misstep that moves humanity along. Sure, the microwave and television has brought out the worst, but it has far more positive progress than negative.
Will humanity progress and achieve greater and greater enlightenment, work to reduce scarcity, and create a better future for the generations ahead of us? Yes. Almost certainly.
Will we build a faster than light engine? I don't think so. Interstellar travel is one of the more dubious concepts that science fiction ever presents us with. And not just the faster than light concept- inertial dampers, deflector shields, accounting for the temporal anomalies that would come with speeds that fast, carrying foods and water and essential gasses, avoiding asteroids and debris, refueling, etc... etc... It's just not plausible- if even possible.
Will humanity progress and achieve greater and greater enlightenment, work to reduce scarcity, and create a better future for the generations ahead of us? Yes. Almost certainly.
Will we build a faster than light engine? I don't think so. Interstellar travel is one of the more dubious concepts that science fiction ever presents us with. And not just the faster than light concept- inertial dampers, deflector shields, accounting for the temporal anomalies that would come with speeds that fast, carrying foods and water and essential gasses, avoiding asteroids and debris, refueling, etc... etc... It's just not plausible- if even possible.
Warp Drive kinda gets around the relativistic speed problem. According to the Alcubierre theory, your spacecraft wouldn't actually accelerate at all. NASA is even testing whether an Alcubierre drive can work.
Also, never say anything is impossible. In the words of Jean Luc Picard 'something's only ever impossible until it's not!' The very definition of progress is making possible what is not already so.
Warp Drive kinda gets around the relativistic speed problem. According to the Alcubierre theory, your spacecraft wouldn't actually accelerate at all. NASA is even testing whether an Alcubierre drive can work.
Also, never say anything is impossible. In the words of Jean Luc Picard 'something's only ever impossible until it's not!' The very definition of progress is making possible what is not already so.
I'd like to be proven wrong, and it's certainly possible. I just honestly don't think it's very plausible.
One thing is certain. We're on the verge of the holodeck experience even if it's not touch. Well, there are certain companies... nvm... but 2014-2015 will be the years of visual virtual reality.
You are looking at the beginning of the end of humanity here. Virtual sex will completely do away with procreation. It will be like that episode of Seaquest DSV.
"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censored, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably."
If there is a technological breakthrough that allows affordable travel to other inhabitable planets I could see the world becoming more trek-like. But if we all just remain here on Earth forever then things will most likely only get worse as battles for resources like oil, land and water become more contentious as the population grows and said resources dwindle. When you look at satellite images of the earth, most of the land is already in use by cities or farms. What will happen when the population is 2 times what is now...how about 10 times?
You are looking at the beginning of the end of humanity here. Virtual sex will completely do away with procreation. It will be like that episode of Seaquest DSV.
That is what Maturation Chambers are for.
As far as humans being screwed if we can't develop FTL travel and colonize worlds like Earth, we still have a ton of area available in the Oceans and in Canada. Most of Canada's population is focused in Southern Canada with the population density decreasing the further north we go.
We can also adopt similar methods like what China is using for population control, but it doesn't seem to be necessary since families are having less children.
Essentially, the only reason for interstellar travel for humans is for survival. If an asteroid devastates Earth and destroys all life on Earth, then it is not the end of the human race.
The world is full of pessimist ho look very lo lowly upon the future, but do you think t star Tek could eve be real? Could people realty come together and work to better themselves? I myself don't think so. People are too concerned about themselves to worry about the greater good, generically. Though I do view the future optimistically. But at do you think?
Star Trek is built upon a dangerous world of utopian ignorance.
The Borg for example; it's ridden itself of all self-thought but it's highly efficient to be one thought and one voice, without all the bickering between each other to achieve their goals.
The Borg is a commentary on the dangers of collectivism (communism and socialism).
The theory published by Alcubierre shows that faster than light travel is possible. The caveat is that you have to create a force that causes space to expand in order for it to work. We can already make space compress, mass does that. The problem is that we don't know yet how to create negative mass. Once we do that, we can send probes at warp speed to collect data for us so we know what we're getting into. The interesting thing is that it would not cause any kind of time dilation at all. Time would pass just as it would when you're standing still because relative to local space, you are sitting still. It can exceed the speed of light because the space around it is moving, not the ship and space can go as fast as it wants since it's space the determines the speed of light. You should really do your research instead of speaking like you have good reason to dismiss others who actually know something about the subject.
Total collapse is not likely. As more nations reach a higher standard of living, they tend to start having fewer children. And as we're pressed to make better use of our resources, we'll find ways to make things that were scarce into abundance. It might get kinda hairy for awhile, but technology and progress will win out. We're not heading for a distopian future like Mad Max.
Go here and show your support for a better Foundry!
Yup, it sure will. It's inevitable in the grand scheme of things. It will just take a bit more time than Gene expected it for us (as in Human species) to get there.
But you can bet that one day the ideas of Star Trek or sth. very similar will become reality. And it's a safe bet, I bet ya'. :cool:
...and, that is why utopian societies always historically fail.
I dislike how the word utopia seems to be applied by some people as some sort of detraction. Besides that, it's not utopian, it's just more advanced. There will always be problems for mankind to solve and there will always be hardship to bear. People who lived more than 500 years ago would probably call our society utopian. But a utopia is a perfect society, without flaw. The issue with that is once you reach perfection, you have nothing to strive for. I can't honestly imagine that humanity will run out of challenges to overcome. New discoveries always present new challenges. The day we run out of questions to answer is the day we give up asking them.
Go here and show your support for a better Foundry!
The theory published by Alcubierre shows that faster than light travel is possible. The caveat is that you have to create a force that causes space to expand in order for it to work. We can already make space compress, mass does that. The problem is that we don't know yet how to create negative mass. Once we do that, we can send probes at warp speed to collect data for us so we know what we're getting into. The interesting thing is that it would not cause any kind of time dilation at all. Time would pass just as it would when you're standing still because relative to local space, you are sitting still. It can exceed the speed of light because the space around it is moving, not the ship and space can go as fast as it wants since it's space the determines the speed of light. You should really do your research instead of speaking like you have good reason to dismiss others who actually know something about the subject.
Since we have absolutely no reason to believe that negative mass exists, or can be created- my entire original point stands. The theory is predicated on the existence of something that we have no evidence of. That's not exactly a minor issue to sidestep.
And what is with people here getting so needlessly contentious over matters of such minor disagreement?
Though we may like to think of ourselves as Civilised and the top species on the planet, this is far from the truth..
Murder, cheating, Stealing, Wealth are but a few things that corrupt our World.
We call ourselves civilised yet most countries you have to pay for the basic necessities just to stay alive.. to Live somewhere, to be able to eat, to be able to have a supply of water, heat to keep us warm, for basic medical care - In what we call "Civilised" countries, you must pay for all (or most) of this! Not very civil eh?
As a species, we are too busy destroying the very World that actually gives us life. We haven't found that happy balance of Give and take.
When we've finished starting wars with and stop trying to force beliefs onto people (whether they are religious, personal or some crazy new cult), maybe, just maybe the human race will take that next big step.
I fear It will take a cataclysmic event for us, the human race, to take a step back and re-evaluate what is really important. Hopefully, we wont have left it too late by then..
We call ourselves civilised yet most countries you have to pay for the basic necessities just to stay alive.. to Live somewhere, to be able to eat, to be able to have a supply of water, heat to keep us warm, for basic medical care - In what we call "Civilised" countries, you must pay for all (or most) of this! Not very civil eh?
Someone has to provide those resources, and if you want them to be plentiful and available, you need to incentivise those providers. Scarcity is still a challenge for humans, and we deal with that challenge in the most civil way possible.
As a species, we are too busy destroying the very World that actually gives us life. We haven't found that happy balance of Give and take.
We've improved upon the world. We've created cities and farms and homes where only the cold, wet, cruel forces of nature dominated before. We've persevered in spite of natures resistance. We've manipulated nature to better our own circumstances.
When we've finished starting wars with and stop trying to force beliefs onto people (whether they are religious, personal or some crazy new cult), maybe, just maybe the human race will take that next big step.
Largely speaking, we have. Fewer people around the world each decade perish as a result of war and international conflict. Nothing is going to end overnight, but the trends are absolute- wars are going the way of the dinosaur.
I fear It will take a cataclysmic event for us, the human race, to take a step back and re-evaluate what is really important. Hopefully, we wont have left it too late by then..
Only time will tell.............
I think we know what is important. There is no reason to be pessimistic.
I dislike how the word utopia seems to be applied by some people as some sort of detraction. Besides that, it's not utopian, it's just more advanced.
Yeah, I can see your point.
'Star Trek' is technically based upon a conservative and liberal society, which uses legalism to enforce a desired form of human behavior. Starfleet has a set of military style regulations that limits a person's actions (conservative & liberal) and speech (liberal censorship). Everyone on the Enterprise is required to wear a specific color, uniform style, and hair style (cleanly groomed).
I do not see a universe stretching government system (Federation) as something positive.
If you need to maintain tolerance through government regulations (Starfleet & Federation), the society advertised in 'Star Trek' is the same as we have today. Only one difference... Its enforced through a military styled government and educational system.
'Star Trek' has a lot of great philosophies about the future; however, the message it sends is that legalism will keep everything in order.
I want our species to explore the galaxy, live in 'absolute' tolerance, and technologically evolve. I just do not want them to happen through legalism. I want them to happen naturally.
=======
On a side note, Gene Roddenberry was an adulterer and capitalist. He was not a saint.
Since we have absolutely no reason to believe that negative mass exists, or can be created...
Negative energy density (which is what's required, not negative mass) can be created currently via the Casimir effect. In fact, NASA's current experiment involves firing a laser between two large, extremely smooth steel plates placed less than a micron apart in order to look for the warping of space predicted by Alcubierre's theory. (The issue, of course, is that even the slightest vibration of the equipment throws the laser off, so its beam isn't passing between the plates any more. Personally, I recommend tethering an experimental package to one of the struts of the ISS - hard to imagine a less vibrational environment than that - but since I don't work for a space agency, there's not much I can do about it.)
And I still maintain that those of you carrying on endlessly about how essentially terrible humans are take far too short a view. Even over my own lifespan, I've seen massive improvements. And if you want to carry on about religious terrorists, find me the terrorist group responsible for even one-tenth as many deaths as during the Crusades - even if we only count the deaths on one side. 9/11 was terrible, the Madrid train bombings were horrific, but neither was even a twinkle in the eye of the sack of Acre.
Negative energy density (which is what's required, not negative mass) can be created currently via the Casimir effect. In fact, NASA's current experiment involves firing a laser between two large, extremely smooth steel plates placed less than a micron apart in order to look for the warping of space predicted by Alcubierre's theory. (The issue, of course, is that even the slightest vibration of the equipment throws the laser off, so its beam isn't passing between the plates any more. Personally, I recommend tethering an experimental package to one of the struts of the ISS - hard to imagine a less vibrational environment than that - but since I don't work for a space agency, there's not much I can do about it.)
Interesting. Thanks for educating me on the subject.
Negative energy density (which is what's required, not negative mass) can be created currently via the Casimir effect. In fact, NASA's current experiment involves firing a laser between two large, extremely smooth steel plates placed less than a micron apart in order to look for the warping of space predicted by Alcubierre's theory. (The issue, of course, is that even the slightest vibration of the equipment throws the laser off, so its beam isn't passing between the plates any more. Personally, I recommend tethering an experimental package to one of the struts of the ISS - hard to imagine a less vibrational environment than that - but since I don't work for a space agency, there's not much I can do about it.)
And I still maintain that those of you carrying on endlessly about how essentially terrible humans are take far too short a view. Even over my own lifespan, I've seen massive improvements. And if you want to carry on about religious terrorists, find me the terrorist group responsible for even one-tenth as many deaths as during the Crusades - even if we only count the deaths on one side. 9/11 was terrible, the Madrid train bombings were horrific, but neither was even a twinkle in the eye of the sack of Acre.
Thanks for that, I was unaware it was negative energy and not mass. I was mistaken. It's really exciting and fascinating stuff to read about.
Go here and show your support for a better Foundry!
Pessimistic as it might make me look, I don't think we'll ever acheive what we saw in Trek.
There is just too much against us. As someone said in an earlier post, we haven't really changed in several generations and we're actually getting worse.
Technology, for example, whilst presenting us with numerous advantages is also making us lazier and less willing to socialise in an actual face-to-face sense.
Terrorists acts based on warped religious beliefs.
The murder of soliders, by the very people they were sent to help/protect.
Racism - whilst this has, arguably, improved a little it definitely still exists. Just look at some of the small-minded reactions that some here in the UK displayed toward the Polish, and now Romanian, immigrants who came over here to look for work
Greed - the rich get richer whilst the poor get poorer.
Countries such as North Korea, with it's dictatorship's intolerance of anything that doesn't conform to their way of thinking.
That isn't to say that acts of kindness etc don't still occur - they do, on a daily basis, performed by, for exmaple. Doctors and those soliders fighting (and dying) for their countries, in countries that thank them by murdering them. But the sad fact does seem to be that the negatives outweigh the positives.
I could go on - but the point is, Trek is based on the human race changing due to first contact with another species. But in truth, what chance would Alien's stand on a planet where the dominant species can't even live in peace with each other?
I don't think we're getting worse, I think because of the advent of the internet and more interconnected information systems we're much more aware of our problems than at any other time in history. That's a good thing because the first step to problem solving is identifying and understanding the problem. The more we talk with each other, the more we will start to adjust our behavior from a collection of individuals to an interconnected community.
Go here and show your support for a better Foundry!
'Star Trek' is technically based upon a conservative and liberal society, which uses legalism to enforce a desired form of human behavior. Starfleet has a set of military style regulations that limits a person's actions (conservative & liberal) and speech (liberal censorship). Everyone on the Enterprise is required to wear a specific color, uniform style, and hair style (cleanly groomed).
I do not see a universe stretching government system (Federation) as something positive.
If you need to maintain tolerance through government regulations (Starfleet & Federation), the society advertised in 'Star Trek' is the same as we have today. Only one difference... Its enforced through a military styled government and educational system.
'Star Trek' has a lot of great philosophies about the future; however, the message it sends is that legalism will keep everything in order.
I want our species to explore the galaxy, live in 'absolute' tolerance, and technologically evolve. I just do not want them to happen through legalism. I want them to happen naturally.
=======
On a side note, Gene Roddenberry was an adulterer and capitalist. He was not a saint.
I have to agree with your point about legalism. Societies like that tend to exist for the exploitation of the masses to the benefit of the few. It is not something to look forward to.
Comments
I would say that starkaos is right about the Ferengi. As for the Borg, it's impossible to say whether you're right, or he is - because we don't really know how they came to be.
Infinite possibilities have implications that could not be completely understood if you turned this entire universe into a giant supercomputer.
Sociologically, humanity is fractured severely. In the west, everything's peaceful, but look at Africa and the Middle East and you've got tons upon tons of internal strife. In Africa, Western powers are trying to restore the peace, along with the African Union, but in the Middle East, Western powers are arguably the cause of the problem.
All across the West, there's an economic crisis caused by wars, the realisation of AGW, and the decline of oil. Instead of abandoning oil for a sustainable source of energy like solar power, or a more efficient source like nuclear energy, countries like Russia and the United States are looking elsewhere for oil and getting involved in wars that are none of their business, usually making the situation even worse.
That being said, humanity is more unified than we were 20 years ago through the EU, AU, UN and other organisations existing to help us solve our problems. People talk about Iran and North Korea planning to nuke us all, but Iran just wants to provide for her people and wants to move past all the distrust she's imbued from other countries as much as anyone else, and NK is a small country who can't even assemble a nuclear weapon capable of reaching much further than Japan and China will never let them bring the world to the brink of WWIII.
As a species, I think we're starting to realise our potential.
Trials of Blood and Fire
Moving On Parts 1-3 - Part 4
In Cold Blood
Will we build a faster than light engine? I don't think so. Interstellar travel is one of the more dubious concepts that science fiction ever presents us with. And not just the faster than light concept- inertial dampers, deflector shields, accounting for the temporal anomalies that would come with speeds that fast, carrying foods and water and essential gasses, avoiding asteroids and debris, refueling, etc... etc... It's just not plausible- if even possible.
Warp Drive kinda gets around the relativistic speed problem. According to the Alcubierre theory, your spacecraft wouldn't actually accelerate at all. NASA is even testing whether an Alcubierre drive can work.
Also, never say anything is impossible. In the words of Jean Luc Picard 'something's only ever impossible until it's not!' The very definition of progress is making possible what is not already so.
Trials of Blood and Fire
Moving On Parts 1-3 - Part 4
In Cold Blood
I'd like to be proven wrong, and it's certainly possible. I just honestly don't think it's very plausible.
You are looking at the beginning of the end of humanity here. Virtual sex will completely do away with procreation. It will be like that episode of Seaquest DSV.
- Judge Aaron Satie
@DevolvedOne
That is what Maturation Chambers are for.
As far as humans being screwed if we can't develop FTL travel and colonize worlds like Earth, we still have a ton of area available in the Oceans and in Canada. Most of Canada's population is focused in Southern Canada with the population density decreasing the further north we go.
We can also adopt similar methods like what China is using for population control, but it doesn't seem to be necessary since families are having less children.
Essentially, the only reason for interstellar travel for humans is for survival. If an asteroid devastates Earth and destroys all life on Earth, then it is not the end of the human race.
Individualism makes us stronger.
Our unique physical and philosophical differences are what makes life awesome.
The Borg is a commentary on the dangers of collectivism (communism and socialism).
USS WARRIOR NCC 1720 Commanding Officer
Star Trek Gamers
The theory published by Alcubierre shows that faster than light travel is possible. The caveat is that you have to create a force that causes space to expand in order for it to work. We can already make space compress, mass does that. The problem is that we don't know yet how to create negative mass. Once we do that, we can send probes at warp speed to collect data for us so we know what we're getting into. The interesting thing is that it would not cause any kind of time dilation at all. Time would pass just as it would when you're standing still because relative to local space, you are sitting still. It can exceed the speed of light because the space around it is moving, not the ship and space can go as fast as it wants since it's space the determines the speed of light. You should really do your research instead of speaking like you have good reason to dismiss others who actually know something about the subject.
@Skurf
Total collapse is not likely. As more nations reach a higher standard of living, they tend to start having fewer children. And as we're pressed to make better use of our resources, we'll find ways to make things that were scarce into abundance. It might get kinda hairy for awhile, but technology and progress will win out. We're not heading for a distopian future like Mad Max.
Yup, it sure will. It's inevitable in the grand scheme of things. It will just take a bit more time than Gene expected it for us (as in Human species) to get there.
But you can bet that one day the ideas of Star Trek or sth. very similar will become reality. And it's a safe bet, I bet ya'. :cool:
Only way for us to get there is to remove all the lunatics from decision making positions. Lunatics exist in every political party.
I dislike how the word utopia seems to be applied by some people as some sort of detraction. Besides that, it's not utopian, it's just more advanced. There will always be problems for mankind to solve and there will always be hardship to bear. People who lived more than 500 years ago would probably call our society utopian. But a utopia is a perfect society, without flaw. The issue with that is once you reach perfection, you have nothing to strive for. I can't honestly imagine that humanity will run out of challenges to overcome. New discoveries always present new challenges. The day we run out of questions to answer is the day we give up asking them.
Since we have absolutely no reason to believe that negative mass exists, or can be created- my entire original point stands. The theory is predicated on the existence of something that we have no evidence of. That's not exactly a minor issue to sidestep.
And what is with people here getting so needlessly contentious over matters of such minor disagreement?
Murder, cheating, Stealing, Wealth are but a few things that corrupt our World.
We call ourselves civilised yet most countries you have to pay for the basic necessities just to stay alive.. to Live somewhere, to be able to eat, to be able to have a supply of water, heat to keep us warm, for basic medical care - In what we call "Civilised" countries, you must pay for all (or most) of this! Not very civil eh?
As a species, we are too busy destroying the very World that actually gives us life. We haven't found that happy balance of Give and take.
When we've finished starting wars with and stop trying to force beliefs onto people (whether they are religious, personal or some crazy new cult), maybe, just maybe the human race will take that next big step.
I fear It will take a cataclysmic event for us, the human race, to take a step back and re-evaluate what is really important. Hopefully, we wont have left it too late by then..
Only time will tell.............
Beta player - forum knows jack as to when I started
_____________________________________________________
They are few, and growing fewer with each passing year. We dwell on the exceptions, ignoring the rule.
Someone has to provide those resources, and if you want them to be plentiful and available, you need to incentivise those providers. Scarcity is still a challenge for humans, and we deal with that challenge in the most civil way possible.
We've improved upon the world. We've created cities and farms and homes where only the cold, wet, cruel forces of nature dominated before. We've persevered in spite of natures resistance. We've manipulated nature to better our own circumstances.
Largely speaking, we have. Fewer people around the world each decade perish as a result of war and international conflict. Nothing is going to end overnight, but the trends are absolute- wars are going the way of the dinosaur.
I think we know what is important. There is no reason to be pessimistic.
'Star Trek' is technically based upon a conservative and liberal society, which uses legalism to enforce a desired form of human behavior. Starfleet has a set of military style regulations that limits a person's actions (conservative & liberal) and speech (liberal censorship). Everyone on the Enterprise is required to wear a specific color, uniform style, and hair style (cleanly groomed).
I do not see a universe stretching government system (Federation) as something positive.
If you need to maintain tolerance through government regulations (Starfleet & Federation), the society advertised in 'Star Trek' is the same as we have today. Only one difference... Its enforced through a military styled government and educational system.
'Star Trek' has a lot of great philosophies about the future; however, the message it sends is that legalism will keep everything in order.
I want our species to explore the galaxy, live in 'absolute' tolerance, and technologically evolve. I just do not want them to happen through legalism. I want them to happen naturally.
=======
On a side note, Gene Roddenberry was an adulterer and capitalist. He was not a saint.
And I still maintain that those of you carrying on endlessly about how essentially terrible humans are take far too short a view. Even over my own lifespan, I've seen massive improvements. And if you want to carry on about religious terrorists, find me the terrorist group responsible for even one-tenth as many deaths as during the Crusades - even if we only count the deaths on one side. 9/11 was terrible, the Madrid train bombings were horrific, but neither was even a twinkle in the eye of the sack of Acre.
Interesting. Thanks for educating me on the subject.
Thanks for that, I was unaware it was negative energy and not mass. I was mistaken. It's really exciting and fascinating stuff to read about.
I don't think we're getting worse, I think because of the advent of the internet and more interconnected information systems we're much more aware of our problems than at any other time in history. That's a good thing because the first step to problem solving is identifying and understanding the problem. The more we talk with each other, the more we will start to adjust our behavior from a collection of individuals to an interconnected community.
My character Tsin'xing