Skeptic Project

"I imagine if you asked TZM members they'd tell you that they could do it tomorrow."

-------------

"When will they actually start doing things you think? They want to build a "research city", right?

http://www.thevenusproject.com/images/stories/Looking-Forward-v2.pdf</em> <<
Looking forward was a fictional book written to relay social concepts. I'd like to comment on a few of your interpretations on them.

Page 4 says:

"Looking forward is an imaginative and fascinating book...

Looking Forward is much similar to a philosopher inventing a scenario to get across an idea, think: Plato's Cave or Murdoch's Ego-driven man.

>> I know a lot of people won't agree with me, but I think if the Venus Project society ever came about, we would end up with the same kind of New World Order that the first Zeitgeist described. <<

If that's the case then I guess we're all for a control grid. If it creates greater harmony than we have now and a global high standard of living then, I'm sorry, but I'm all for it.

>> >"I submit the conjecture that you can identify a crank idea from the fact that its proponents catastrophize an imaginary, benign, overblown or manageable problem which the crank idea allegedly solves."<

And now the Venus Project is being sold by Peter Joseph as the answer to the conspiracy theories that Zeitgeist propagates. <<

Peter is not selling it as a solution to any conspiracy theory. It's being contended based on the present economic, social and environmental problems we are facing - none of which rely on any conspiracy theory whatsoever.

Also, the environmental problems especially are not overblown. It's fucking insane what we're doing when you understand where it's going to take us.

>> If these guys were really doing things by the scientific method, they probably shouldn't listen to Fresco on a lot of things. By the time this future society came about, people would be able to create better inventions then Fresco's designs. [1] Plus a lot of his ideas are impractical already. There are reasons why city planners don't build round cities like that, the trafic would be all messed up, and the way he explains it, people would have to travel all across town to use city services.[2] In the future are people just going to do things just because Jacques Fresco said to design it that way, even if it isn't the best way to do things? <<
[1]: You're right.
[2]: Actually, many city planners have proposed circular cities precisely because it would fix many traffic problems. Canberra was supposed to be one such city, but the idea got lost in the tradition of building cities as they are - so it's only partially circular.
And no, city services are everywhere as in any sane city of today.

@Matt:

>> @Ed,

I think Looking Forward is pretty relevant to understanding Fresco's weird mix of 1960s free love and science fiction. <<
Unfortunately The Venus Project has nothing to do with either of these. What do you even mean by 'free love'?

>> The original question this thread poses still stands I guess. <<
It certainly does because I'm yet to see you construct any formal arguments in favor of your question (which is really actually a contention) and until you do this thread will be a messy discussion that can't answer that question.
Not only do you need to create a formal argument for it, you also need to specifically define what you mean by cult and new age.

>> @Brenton,

That isn't a solution. That's a fantasy. Fresco's writings are not a solution to anything but getting Fresco laid. <<
Fresco didn't invent the solution of a systems approach. Countless scientists advocate such a thing, not just The Venus Project and technocrats.

>> "Though, honestly, I think in time The Venus Project will get Government support."

I take it personally when people steal from the society I live in. Those are my tax dollars. You live in Australia. Courting people who accuse this country of murdering its own people is bad enough. But when you start stealing tax dollars from society, you are robbing legitimate groups of needed funds. That can't be allowed. <<
Hahahaha! I can't believe you thought I was talking about the US government. The United States will probably be one of the last countries on Earth (save for probably China and North Korea) to even consider a resource-based economy.

When I said Government Support I was referring to Iceland, most specifically, which already has two people in their parliament that supports this direction (which is a pretty big deal when you consider how small their parliament is).

In many ways this could already work in Iceland because they've already got the energy problem solved and have been working for quite a while to move away from fossil fuel dependency. Then after that they could begin to nationalize food production and start putting up more geothermally heated greenhouses so that they don't have to import any food at all. And so on...

Iceland would actually probably be the ideal place to begin this, once the issue that they are a little bit deficient in many resources is overcome.

Please feel free to submit an audit form to the IRS. The Venus Project is pretty clear that they have a not-for-profit as well as a for-profit arm.

I'd also add that The Venus Project has never accused the US government of murdering it's own citizens on 9/11 - Jacque has stated many times that The Venus Project doesn't support Zeitgeist I at all. This is one area where Peter J really does a huge disservice to The Venus Project by not at this time adding disclaimers to ZeitgeistMovie.com (as well as an FAQ on the Movement site) that clearly states that Zeitgeist I has nothing to do with the work of the Movement or The Venus Project and should not be confused of having any correlation. I hope to see such a disclaimer soon.

>> From the same site:

This is bullshit. These guys are defrauding the government. <<

They can't just spend their tax free income on whatever they like. They have to account for it in all cases or else they lose their NPO status.

@advancedatheist:
>> "But I like the inconveniences."

<<

I think what's written in that part is pretty obvious. In the same way if you refuse to take a necessary vaccination you are declaring that you want the freedom to contract that virus or disease. If you declare you're against sharing the Earth's resources (financial or material) then you're declaring the freedom to allow others to live in poverty, etc,.
But you don't need to agree with The Venus Project to agree with using medicine or sharing the Earth properly.

>> Men naturally form dominance hierarchies, so, yes, you'd probably see the alpha males competing for the highest status positions even in a "scientifically" designed society, just so they can attract and shag the hottest young women. And women would exploit the Venus Project's welfare system to support their bastard children fathered by alpha male cads so that they don't have to subject themselves to the indignity of marrying and putting out for beta males. <<
I can't believe you'd say that (referring especially to the bolded text) because even in high school Psychology this is not taught, but rather that an environmental aspect is what comes in to play with such issues.
The work of Robert Sapolsky is just one good example of the silly idea that hierarchy is inherent and unalterable in terms of human societies.
There will always be hierarchy per se, but it's role and the what it actually means to human societies constantly changes.
By the way, the accusation that welfare systems are bad for human development is really quite ignorant. The countries that have the strongest welfare and state run enterprises (education, medicine, etc,) tend to be surveyed as having the happiest people with the higest literary standards, etc,.
See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Development_Index

>> Fresco also catastrophizes the current social system, when the empirical evidence shows that people in high GDP developed countries, and even in several middle income developing ones, live generally satisfying lives.

The Human Condition/The Venus Project <<
Fresco's never said that the standard of living is becoming worse in developing or developed countries. In many it is, in many it is not. The contentions are much wider than that, and it's statements like that which make me wonder if you've read the orientation guides or referenced the lectures (which, by the way Edward refuses to 'debunk' because he considers those to be sound) or you probably wouldn't make that statement.

All I'll say is this: this system requires endless economic growth with often finite resources that are not being renewed at a high enough rate to provide for all.
What's going to happen when China and India, for example, realize that they cannot bring their whole population up to the West's living standard because of the way we do things today? I'm not making this India and China statistic up - well respected academicians such as Jared Diamond have written long volumes that contend this strongly in part of their volumes.

The Venus Project is not a 'solution to the human conditon'. It's a possible solution to the socio-economic and environmental problems that are inherent within the present economic system.

>> Correct. But Rand, like Fresco, promoted a crank world view, in my judgment, because she predicted our destruction if we stay on our current course. We could only save ourselves by adopting her radical alternative, despite the fact that humans excel at muddling through.

Fresco just promotes a different version of the same sort of argument. <<

The idea that you think Fresco is the only one predicting huge problems for civilization if we don't change is really silly. That's pretty mainstream within scientific fields such as climatology and other environmental fields.

>> I'd like to ask the Shitegeisters the same thing I ask Objectists and Austrian economists: Suppose we do everything you propose, and it fucks things up even worse. What do we do then, brainiac?

Conservatives make an excellent point about the dangers of fooling around with pragmatic, inherited social systems which work well enough, otherwise known as: If it hasn't broken, don't fix it. <<

Problem being that it is broken and millions and millions who don't even know of The Venus Project agree fundamentally on that. Not just from an economic perspective but also based on what this system is causing environmentally and in terms of human relations.

If it doesn't work, try something else until you find something that does work. This system is great, but it cannot be sustained - so we will either change before we are forced, or do so when there's no other choice.

@Anticultist:
>> http://anticultist.wordpress.com/about/</p>

Everything you need to know about this potential cult, including its refusal for financial transparency with evidence of dialogues between a member and Roxanne Meadows. The identity of Peter Joseph, The legal dispute and failing of trademarking of RBE by the venus project with documents, and other important facets they dont like discussing on their official forums.

Ex members spill the beans on the inner workings and information not many know. <<

I'm glad you call it a potential cult because I've been reading your blog for ages (as well as having posted a widely circulated response [which I'm updating soon] to your blog which you've ignored, it seems: http://thezeitgeistmovement.wordpress.com/2010/01/05/the-problems-with-the-anti-cultist-critic/) and you still haven't defined what a cult is and how The Zeitgeist Movement fits that description. I actually appreciate some of your content on that blog, too. The information on Peter is great because you also found out about the Brzynski (spelling?) film which is going to be screened in Byron Bay - thanks to that blog post I'm thinking about flying up to Byron Bay to check it out at that screening.

Where's the dialog between a member and Roxanne Meadows? I can't find it and I'm wondering why because dialogging with them is as easy as picking up the phone and dialing.

There was obviously going to be a legal contest about the trademarking of the term 'resource based economy' because it's such a general term.

>> We havent even touched on the finite resources of the earth yet, and how this RBE society claims to make everyones equity value the same on earth, talk about decentralised logistical nightmares. [1]

Doesnt much sound like the fantasy land they sold it on in reality. <<
[1]: Not quite. We claim that we technically can provide basic necessities for all people and that we have a duty to do so.

[2]: Based on the premise that you can provide for all there is no need whatsoever to take from anyone. That'd only be necessary if there wasn't the technology to produce enough and there had to be rationing - which, by the way, I personally (this is not an official statement of The Venus Project) am not against: you do not have the right to have more than others if there are people who are starving. I personally think that a 'poverty tax' might be a good idea where literally 1-5% (based on income bracket) of individual incomes is taken directly from those of affluent nations (about 1 billion of Earth's people at present) and sent as aid to the most poverty stricken nations. That's just one way we could begin to provide for those in mass starvation.
For example the UN's Millennium Development goals, it is projected, would only take about 190 Billion to meet ... well that's not really much when you divide it up between 1 billion affluent people.

[3]: Of course. The Venus Project proposes the most fundamental cultural change in history. There are enormous stumbling blocks to overcome. It's very difficult. But do you shy away from altruism and equality because of that? Black and Gay rights once seemed very difficult.

[4]: Which resources are you talking about? Energy, food and many necessary resources are entirely renewable.

[5]: I cant understand what you're saying. It's not a centralised system that's being proposed. The proposition is for an inter-dependent central database that is a combination of thousands if not millions of independent monitoring [production, distribution, et al,.] systems all over the globe.
What you're saying is akin to saying that because a car has many monitoring systems that are continuously monitored that it can't possibly work out.

[6]: I'll restate. Based on the premise that you can provide for all there is no need whatsoever to take from anyone.

>> and it has a for profit matt:

Jacque & Roxanne have been involved in 7 + private businesses as directors with different people since 1970 <<

What's your point? They're not allowed to make profit to keep themselves alive?

>> So since Peter/Jacque have no credentials in the matters they are discussing we can safely say no cedentials in sociology, no credentials in psychology, no credentials in architecture, no credentials in science, no credentials in city design, no credentials in philosophy, no credentials in anything. So what does this all mean Brenton ?[1]
Are we actually agreeing that Peter shouldnt be talking about this stuff as if he knows anything about it, and should simply add a disclaimer that anything he says is merely an opinion of his own. Same goes for Jacque since hes just an old guy who has shacked up in his cave for the last 40 + years with no credentials either, just a few jobs he claims to have done.[2]

Yes this is Pdr under this name, I am using it on here if thats ok by you ? its ok by the blog owners
[1]: It doesn't really mean anything. A person can understand chemistry without being a chemist. I'd also add that just because somebody doesn't have official credentials doesn't mean they cannot comment on or suggest something. I also referenced this in my article to the AntiCultist blog when I talked about the Wright Brother's and quoted Time Magazine. http://thezeitgeistmovement.wordpress.com/2010/01/05/the-problems-with-the-anti-cultist-critic/</p>

[2]: Jacque is well respected by many architectural schools. That's all I have to say in that area. Countless uncredentialed people have contributed amazing things. For example the Wright Brothers, but also people like Karl Marx who didn't do particularly well in school (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Marx#Education) yet contributed amazing commentary on Capitalism (much of which has turned out to be scientifically validated - and I can reference that when I come back) and society in general.

[3]: History has to do with the fact that Peter's commentary on credential-ism had nothing to do with The Venus Project in particular. If you paid attention he said he was talking about 'subjective fields' such as history, arts and economics. This is why Peter continually appeals to authorities in his lectures, so that there is no need to rely on anything as his opinion whatsoever.

[4]: Jacque also has technical blueprints of all his designs - this is why architectural schools have infrequently sent students to conference with The Venus Project.
He doesn't make those public in terms of publishing them or putting them on his website because he doesn't have the money to pay for patents at this time.
Even so, his designs are not necessary for a resource-based economy.

[5]: We do, Pdr. Watch the lectures that Peter has done, watch the lecture that I'm giving on Zeitgeist Day, etc, etc,.

[6]: We've spoken about your logistic issues above, however, none in the Movement disagree with you. Science is the path but a resource-based economy needs to be created in a working self-sustaining environment to be fully validated - yes.

[7]: What do you mean? Everything is social engineering in one way or another and we all engage in it.

[8]: So instead rather than making a formal argument you'd rather fall onto the pathetic path of defamation as you have consistently done in every discussion I've had with you. Well done.

>> We all know that people like Brenton are going to continue arguing this till they're blue in the face, no matter what contrary opinion or evidence you have, and until the entire idea fails and goes away like the last made up fad people like him are gonna be blabbering on about it.

And so the cycle repeats with the follower types looking for answers. <<

And I'm especially going to continue arguing it when you provide no solid evidence against it, other than baseless attacks!

@Muertos:
>> Zeitgeist Movement is as simple as this: utopia cult + conspiracy theories. That's it. That's the whole enchilada. Take away the conspiracy theories and you've got a smooth-talking self-promoter who's angry at the world and making money and Internet fame from saying so (Merola) and a washed up, warmed-over 60s New Age guru (Fresco) going through the motions, trying to hustle followers like any other utopian cult. <<
Well done. You contributed attacks, buzz-words and absolutely nothing else. You didn't even define 'utopian cult' so we essentially, like Matt, can't have any idea what you're talking about.
And not to mention that conspiracy theories have absolutely nothing to do with The Zeitgeist Movement.

That's all from me until mid-March. I feel like I need go vomit after sitting here writing all that. Have a good day y'all!

I depart with these words, which Edward might understand but which will be ambiguity to you all ;):
Hef ekki hugmynd um hvort til sé guð
hvort dauðinn færi mig í meira stuð
ég staldra við um stund ef heyri sagt
að skilaboð að handan hafi borist

Now wait, by Titanic did you mean the movie or the ship?

The market for 1960's sexual utopian science fiction is huge!

This is a joke, right? I'm not thinking of Titanic, I'm thinking of Battlefield Earth with cable porn. [1]

Straight to DVD and Cinemax after ten.

"[3]: Of course. The Venus Project proposes the most fundamental cultural change in history. There are enormous stumbling blocks to overcome. It's very difficult. But do you shy away from altruism and equality because of that? Black and Gay rights once seemed very difficult."

Anybody else notice how these zeitgeist cult members believe that the more they argue and get the last word in with people who disagree with them and their ideology, the more they believe they are validating that their ideology is the best ? [1]

It somehow seems that by them arguing their beliefs about trivial and pedantic points they are justifying it to themselves that their entire belief structure is unbreakable, even though they have nothing of substance or value to give you to prove it. [2]

I can do that too Brenton I can argue that the planet mars is made of chocolate powder, and all we need to do is add milk to it and we can have milk shakes forever.
Dont tell me otherwise because I will just argue that I am right forever and that makes me right.
Mr Choco TM is the best, his ideas about chocolatey milky goodness are the greatest yum yum chocolate milk shake forever weeeeeeeeeeee. You should watch all his videos about making the same chocolate milk shakes over and over and over till you understand. [3]

When he gets a few more years on him he will look back at this time of his life and blush at how naive and arrogant he was with all the forum members he has pestered worldwide.