Really? Last study I saw on this done by the frasier institute here in canada put energy costs right up around 46% of where yearly expenses go. I'd go hunt for it but far too lazy at the moment.

I think so, too, and I don't think it's a problem. Rather than just telling people they're talking out of their ass, why don't you explain what value is gained by watching it? Obviously there's no factual information in the video that can't be expressed in a few sentences of text, so the only think I can suppose is that you're of the opinion that the greater emotional impact of seeing it has value.

What, precisely, is that value? For me, personally, I can't imagine what it would be. I don't think anything could make me more strongly opposed to the act of beheading an innocent journalist. Seeing it would make that opposition more visceral -- perhaps in an almost literal sense -- but it wouldn't increase my opposition. It wouldn't lower my opinion of the terrorists, either, since it's not possible to hold a lower opinion of them than I do.

So what is the value of seeing it?

Here in Ontario, "windpower" accounts for under 1% of our daily generation. Nuclear accounts for ~70-75%, while hydroelectric makes up ~10% give or take a bit.

http://www.ieso.ca/Pages/Power...

I'm very sorry but your approach does not lend itself to a book (or better yet, a series of books), supplements, a prime time guest appearance on Oprah, glossy magazine advertisements, special (and expensive) foods or really any other aspect of modern merchandising.

Please re work your proposal and come back to us when you've figured out how to make money off of it.

Ah yes, the 'noble savage' approach. While it can hardly be argued that our current civilization doesn't have profound problems the only way we could return to anything resembling a dispersed hunter-gatherer / small tribal society would for human population to drop by a couple of billion. That might be in store for us no matter what we're planning on happening but it isn't a practical road map (you first).

Also, he does a poor job of showing that the various human ills he ascribes to agricultural civilization were indeed caused by or worsened by grains and concentrated cities. There is rather a lack of data in prehistoric times about important parts of history.

Actually, that's not quite true. Having an extended family (ie, grandparents) has been noted in many cultures to afford a survival advantage. It allows for more education time, more time for other family members to get food and shelter and allows for skills to be honed and passed on. So humans may well be different in this respect although extended social groups are found in many animal genera.

Obviously not. They didn't have the metric system in the Paleolithic era.

Give up coffee? Now that's crazy talk.

This. Move your ass so the rest of you keeps moving. You really don't need all that much exercise to keep in basic shape - an hour a day of moderate cardiovascular exercise like brisk walking.

What is amazing is the vast majority of the inhabitants of the Western World don't get anywhere near this.

Kill your television. You can even get Bonus Points for not worrying about how much your cable company is ripping you off.

Certainly. However, traditional Inuit culture was pretty hard on folks. Although some people did make it into their 70's, many died much earlier - often of starvation (and infectious disease whose morbidity and mortality can be strongly influenced by nutrition). Although they rarely got heart attacks (we suppose, there were rather few autopsies done on these folk) and diabetes was almost unheard of, it's hard to call a traditional Inuit elder as 'healthy'. We also really don't know how long traditional peoples typically lived - birth and death statistics were not typically kept in the hinterlands and people's recollection of events 50 years in the past tends to be hazy.

So it always amuses me that the paleo folks think that the hunter gatherer existence represented the pinnacle of human evolution.

Including your brain.

Endless summer!

US starts buying more nuclear power from Canada, quickly pulling a Germany. In 5 years, subsidies much like those in Germany will then be gutted, and there will be a mass rush to build new coal and NG power plants until reactors can be refurbished or built anew.

There is no mod option for "dumb as a post." There's been a dozen peer reviewed papers that have come out in the last year saying the same thing. Once you step away from the political ipcc, things start to become the "land of conflicting scientific opinion."