Lagboltz
Well-Known Member
Your sense of responsibility is overwhelming. If you would only move to the left quite a bit then you would be perfect.
-
Discuss politics - join our community by registering for free here! HOP - the political discussion forum
Global Warming & Evolution: WHO are The Scientists?
- Thread starter TheJPRD
- Start date
Werbung:
Gipper
Well-Known Member
never happen.
Lagboltz
Well-Known Member
You and I know it's not as much as general gun deaths. My major point was that the rage of 9/11 led to taking irrelevant action in Iraq and I compared that to the gun control issue being driven by the rage of whackos indiscriminately shooting kids. That is what is now driving public opinion, not body count.
Let's put assault rifles in the same category as grenades, rocket launchers, artillery, flame throwers, etc. Those weapons would surely be useful for the potential overthrow of the government, and should be included in the philosophy of you and our forefathers. Yet those weapons are outlawed.
TheJPRD
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2012
- Messages
- 417
I might agree with about a "Medicare Death Panel", but with 2 qualifications: (1) We must also include a "Medicaid Death Panel", AND (2) I'm given the sole power to appoint the members of both panels! Ahhhhh, "There's the Rub", huh? Your suggestion may sound great to you.... until you consider the potential make-up of such panels!
Lagboltz
Well-Known Member
I was joking. As far as I'm concerned there is no good solution to overpopulation. It's a dilemma.I might agree with about a "Medicare Death Panel", but with 2 qualifications: (1) We must also include a "Medicaid Death Panel", AND (2) I'm given the sole power to appoint the members of both panels! Ahhhhh, "There's the Rub", huh? Your suggestion may sound great to you.... until you consider the potential make-up of such panels!
TheJPRD
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2012
- Messages
- 417
I knew you were joking, Lag. My response was intended more for those who might have thought you were serious.
TheJPRD
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2012
- Messages
- 417
Unless I'm mistaken, the moderate-Liberal in this thread and the moderate-Conservative in this thread have come to the same conclusion about climate-change/global-warming? I believe that Lagboltz and I have agreed that the real objective of those who direct the work of climate-change scientists is population-control AND population-reduction. Anyone here want to volunteer to be liquidated???? It would save a lot of time and paperwork. 
Unless I'm mistaken, the moderate-Liberal in this thread and the moderate-Conservative in this thread have come to the same conclusion about climate-change/global-warming? I believe that Lagboltz and I have agreed that the real objective of those who direct the work of climate-change scientists is population-control AND population-reduction. Anyone here want to volunteer to be liquidated???? It would save a lot of time and paperwork.
And here I thought it wsa just about money...
Lagboltz
Well-Known Member
You are right. In your particular case population control is about money. Hmmm... I wonder how much does a hit man costs.
all depends on the object of your disaffection. I have friends in low places...
Lagboltz
Well-Known Member
The same conclusion? That's scary.Unless I'm mistaken, the moderate-Liberal in this thread and the moderate-Conservative in this thread have come to the same conclusion about climate-change/global-warming? I believe that Lagboltz and I have agreed that the real objective of those who direct the work of climate-change scientists is population-control AND population-reduction. Anyone here want to volunteer to be liquidated???? It would save a lot of time and paperwork.
Someone said that overpopulation can never destroy the earth; the earth will just shake us off like fleas.
we know the result of too many dinos, crapping everywhere, eating anything that didn't eat back.
they HAD to go.
steveox
Well-Known Member
Hobo1
Well-Known Member
It seems to me we give a lot of thought power about issues where we have very little solid information. Global Warming: is it good or bad? Do we have enough information to know how to stop it? (no) Will science discover that carbon dioxide is not the cause of global warming? On and on.
Earlier in this thread I quoted a source that has strong evidence that global population growth was slowing and may level off at 10 billion people. But who knows how people will respond when things start to get crowded? Look at Europe where the population growth rate is clearly downward.
These, and things like potential water/food shortage, etc. are well worth studying so we can get more solid facts. If we discover that action must clearly be taken to solve a clearly dangerous situation, then we can start talking from the basis of facts - not guesses.
Perhaps our largest problem is that most countries in the world do not want to work to together. A few weeks ago delegates from 190 countries around the world met in Doha, Qatar, to try to find some consensus about how to proceed - and the meeting was a failure. Each country is too busy looking out for their own best (short term) interests.
I have the feeling that we, and many other debates like ours, are wringing their hands about these subjects --- but right now human beings are simply going to go forward into the future. Right now it looks like we are powerless to change anything. Perhaps a scientific break through or simply change in human attitudes will provide a solution. But right now what will be, will be.
Earlier in this thread I quoted a source that has strong evidence that global population growth was slowing and may level off at 10 billion people. But who knows how people will respond when things start to get crowded? Look at Europe where the population growth rate is clearly downward.
These, and things like potential water/food shortage, etc. are well worth studying so we can get more solid facts. If we discover that action must clearly be taken to solve a clearly dangerous situation, then we can start talking from the basis of facts - not guesses.
Perhaps our largest problem is that most countries in the world do not want to work to together. A few weeks ago delegates from 190 countries around the world met in Doha, Qatar, to try to find some consensus about how to proceed - and the meeting was a failure. Each country is too busy looking out for their own best (short term) interests.
I have the feeling that we, and many other debates like ours, are wringing their hands about these subjects --- but right now human beings are simply going to go forward into the future. Right now it looks like we are powerless to change anything. Perhaps a scientific break through or simply change in human attitudes will provide a solution. But right now what will be, will be.
Werbung:
Lagboltz
Well-Known Member
^^^^ It seems what you are saying is that you know what you don't know. Where have I heard that before?
From individuals to world leaders, it looks like all opt for short term gain at the expense of long term prosperity. In a test 70% of 4 year olds, allowed to forgo one marshmallow now for two marshmallows fifteen minutes later couldn't hold out.
We choose to have our own destruction in the future rather than sane planning now.
From individuals to world leaders, it looks like all opt for short term gain at the expense of long term prosperity. In a test 70% of 4 year olds, allowed to forgo one marshmallow now for two marshmallows fifteen minutes later couldn't hold out.
We choose to have our own destruction in the future rather than sane planning now.
Similar threads
