However, unlike compromise, cooperation is based on the foundation of the integrity of those who work toward a common good, by embracing honesty, good and open communication, and empathy. Empathy most of all, because this is part of the two great commandments Jesus gave us, one of which is to love our neighbor as our self. I'm not talking about selfishness, selfishness hides behind compromise, and it lacks empathy. This point of contention between cooperation and compromise may seem trivial on the surface, but it's not! Compromise by its very nature, promotes a host of unsavory behaviors such as being egocentric, defensive, deceitful, harboring ulterior motives, and other such destructive 'self' oriented conduct, and so it should be deemed soulish, and devilish. When compromise is embraced, it actually puts a stop to cooperation. That is why a house divide against itself won't stand, or a double minded person is unstable in all his ways, he is compromised and therefore lacks integrity. Are you still with me?
When the fruits are examined carefully, the world's brand of homesteading, farming, and survival involves what I would consider to be compromise, not cooperation. This compromising, self-preservation driven motivation is cultivated through the teaching of the inhumane evolutionary mentality known as: the survival of the fittest. We are not animals, we are human beings and we should act as such, with empathy toward those in need. I find it some what of a mystery when people who believe in evolution are also humanitarians, it just seems so contradictory to their philosophy. But when examined closely, their kindnesses are usually cruelties. For example, when government officials bring in a foreign species to cull some local pest, which in turn becomes a problem in the form of a new pest with no natural predators, they then shrug their shoulders and leave the locals to deal with it. East coast residents will recognize this well intended yet dumb move in the form of a stinky little beetle that looks like a ladybug, but isn't.
When something is in great supply, then it is cheap. When a particular fuel supply is abundant and cheap, then you can be sure that it will be in high demand. This is basic economics. We have an abundance of carbon based fuels. However, when our fuel is hoarded, or "conserved" through monopolies, trade embargoes, or made scare through engineered fake shortages, then it starts to get expensive, because demand remains high, while supplies are "low." This selfish type of hoarding also provides an opportunity for unscrupulous people to pull the wool over our eyes, so the wolves can fleece us sheep. Nothing really happens in this world without a reason or cause, whether it comes from natural cause and effect, or through planned schemes. While "green" technologies seem to be a good thing for all concerned, they are actually being forced upon the public by tree hugging hippies and politicians, under the guise of saving their goddess, "mother" earth, and make humanity expendable in the process.
Like Dora the Explorer urges our youngsters...."Let's think! " The sun only shines roughly 12 hours a day at the most, and let us also consider that its strength fluctuates during the day, and according to the seasons. But at least the energy can be stored in batteries, right? Yeah, A LOT of batteries. I just hope they keep their charge, only time will tell if low flow batteries are the answer to all of the tree hugger's prayers to Gaia. And wind power is no better really, and it would take, I don't know, what, hundreds of thousands of acres of concrete based windmills just to generate enough power to replace our current system of coal fired steam turbines that currently make electricity, which runs along power lines that are already existent. If the tree huggers had their way with wind power, then we could "blow off" growing food, since most of the food producing land where the wind blows long enough to be any good would be set in concrete. Tree huggers seem to forget that we humans don't perform photosynthesis, or even grow hydroponically.
We actually need to consume vegetation, and (gasp) meat in order to prevent starvation. Has anyone considered the visual pollution of the hundreds of thousands of wind turbines that would be mucking up majestic views of mountains (rather than valuable farm land) combined with the noise pollution they generate? "Eh what's that Earl? I can't hear what you're saying cause of these darn windmills are making more racket than a mess of hound dogs on a fox's trail! " Anyway, I suppose that harnessing these green energies are fine for remote areas, and as a secondary energy source, but they are not practical to completely depend upon for a small farm, much less a huge metropolis that has a constant need of reliable energy in order to function.
After all, naturally speaking, it makes up only a small part of the atmosphere that we breath, and it is mostly used by plants to make their food and create their off gas byproduct - oxygen. Sure, too much of anything isn't good, even too much oxygen can kill you.
However, unlike carbon-dioxide, carbon-monoxide is a completely poisonous gas that is formed when carbon based fuels aren't fully and completely burned. Just think about that for a moment. We don't exhale carbon monoxide, we exhale carbon dioxide, which is a by-product of a completely burned fuel. Which means we are efficient fuel burners! Anyway, thanks to the attitude of cooperation that says: "We won't give up our reliable fossil fuels, and so we will work to make them better for ourselves, and the environment", we have made great strides in making the reliable and abundant carbon fossil fuels burn cleaner and more efficiently. Sure, it's a far cry from Nikola Tessla's free energy dreams, but it's better than sitting in the dark starving and freezing. When carbon based fuels are burned completely, then there is less carbon monoxide, and when other things are used to limit the really harmful emissions, like sulfur dioxide, and nitrogen oxides, then there is even less pollution. And really, I guess, in a way, we have the tree huggers to thank for these inventions.
Now I'm going to give you a little irony to chew on. Get this...we actually need some of these "pollutants" in our atmosphere to help reflect the sun's radiation, because if we get too much radiation, then we'll fry. What the???? That's right dear reader. A little pollution actually protects us from global warming! But we can't know that otherwise the fear mongering junk scientists who also use the term "the green house effect", to scare us into compliance, won't get their utopia. But, their sacred phrase to scare us into submission is not a good definition of what is really going on, since the earth itself is not a very good green house.
Anyway, do you see how this cooperation attitude is a win win, where no one loses, or has given up anything good? The reality is that fossil fuels are more viable due to the fact they are reliable and controllable, and can be made to burn cleaner. It is the best we have until Jesus possible instates Nikola Tessla's dream of free energy, when he is sitting on the throne in Jerusalem in the coming future. I'm merely speculating on the free energy thing, I don't know that for sure.
To give a real life example of pitting carbon based fuel vs. green energy based methods, lets consider the following example. If a green energy disciple needed to bake a loaf of bread in a solar oven on a cloudy day, well, that just won't happen this side of hell. But, if I had a chunk of wood, a match, and a flat rock or two, then I would soon have a hot loaf of freshly baked bread, while the green energy disciple would go hungry. Well, that is unless of course I had pity on them, and shared my loaf of bread, which is what I would do. Even if it was raining, I could shelter the fire, and the rocks with some branches, and my little carbon based fuel rock oven would still work, and bake the loaf of bread, can that be said for the solar oven? No, I don't think so. Well, what about a wind driven oven? Well, the wind doesn't always blow when it is raining does it?
So once again, the energies of solar and wind, though they can be harnessed, are completely unreliable. Besides, have you ever seen survivalists huddle around a solar powered lantern at night for warmth and protection? What a pitiful sight that would be. No, they make a real wood burning fire out of the parts in that solar lamp. And so, I can safely say that so-called "green" energies, are really meant for the most part, to be used by green things, like plants, rather than humans. And so, this brings me to the fascinating subject of junk science.... continue reading if you dare. Even though the world moves and shakers claim to embrace the goodly spirit of cooperation, what they real mean is they want us to comply with their policies through the evils of compromise. It's like Henrik Ibsen said, "The Devil is compromise."