All it takes is one mad (evil or crazy) scientist to destroy the human race, according to Michio Kaku. So does government have a role in ensuring these technologies are not used for nefarious -- even catastrophic ends?
Vaclav Klaus -- the great Czech president and free-market reformer -- will keynote at the 2012 Heartland Climate Change Conference in Chicago. If you share Klaus's views about the threat of environmentalism as a veiled form of central planning, you should attend this conference. It's a fascinating event with great speakers and lots of food for thought. The Heartland conference is also the culmination of powerful scholarship and a decade's worth of sane thinking that has served to counter a conserted power grab by the radical environmental left.
Interestingly, the conference takes place just after one of the world's leading climate alarmists, James Lovelock, admits to being an "alarmist"...
It's an amazing time to be alive. (If you're dead, I apologize. I don't mean to offend.) We aren't yet living the Jetsons yet, but we've got cars that drive themselves. (Wait, no, we do have flying cars.) Anyway, I'm still excited about what I see in the video above. Just wait: in ten years, we may see the flying car technology integrated with the driverless technology. So what are the impediments to implimentation?
Why must "dreaming" about science and space mean a government monopoly?
Neil deGrasse Tyson is a great guy and a great persona. Heck, he could be the next Carl Sagan. But I don't understand why he argues that NASA is a dreammaker -- i.e. why failure to fund NASA more than it's being funded somehow represents the drying up of dreams. I mean seriously: is he suggesting that Newt Gingrich is correct that we should be aiming for Mars with the same body that gives us the postal service, the Afghan War and Solyndra? Allow me another minute or so to slice up Tyson's shilling for NASA.
It's Friday. You may be saying "TGIF" to yourself because you don't like where you're sitting. If that's the case, watch this video. Even if you're pretty happy, it's worth a look. Then join me below the fold.
So the truth is out. And it really is inconvenient: The earth is probably warming a little bit -- and man probably doesn't have that much influence. If we were to take draconian measures to change our minscule contribution, we'd be shooting ourselves in the economic foot (especially when we can currently do absolutely nothing about the behavior of the sun).
Indeed. Have you seen Unstoppable Solar Cycles? Free To Choose Network produced this video to tell the other side of the story.
Hillel the Elder -- an ancient Rabbi -- said: "What is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow: this is the whole Torah; the rest is the explanation; go and learn." It doesn't get any simpler than that. I don't want to wax too idealistic. But what if everyone practiced Rabbi Hillel's version of the golden rule? Really, this is the essence of libertarianism. We also call it the non-harm principle. What if everyone practiced it?
Some people won't be happy. But there's a film coming out that defends plentiful energy -- including fossil fuels -- as a key ingredient of economic growth. Many overlook the relationship between energy and economic growth. But there is a strong correlation between growth and plentiful energy--one that looks to be connected to thermodynamic law. Consider: