ALL Species Are Endangered

If you believe that ALL scientists are in the pockets of corporations, then it shows a lack of knowledge about science in general. Especially if you call these experts "geeks." Sorry, but their knowledge on the subject is more substantial.

What is alive on Earth is called ecosystems. I don't deny that ecosystems are being affected by human activity. But the Earth will survive, as will life in general. If your opinions differ than the research, I would have to side with research.

There is also an old saying that insulting someone actually reflects yourself, so I don't take the insults personally. Why should I?

Peace and love

 

All scientists are controlled by the corporations. How could it be
otherwise? They control the educational instititutions, the
financial institutions, the presses, the rest of the media, and
all of the industries that provide the complex and very expensive
equipment that scientists use.

So instead of telling us the truth, which is that the only way
to preserve the health of the planet is to leave it alone, the
scientists are telling us that technology is the answer.

When it is the abuse and overuse of technology that is
responsible for the predicament we are in.

There you go again, suggesting that it's okay to trash the planet
because life will go on.

It isn't. You are an amoral person, which is exactly the sort of
person that the corrupt institution of science turns out.

Are you happily employed designing weapons of mass destruction
because it doesn't matter of millions of people die because after
all, life will go on?

Again: The scientists, who are all puppets of the corporations,
are not going to come up with a solution to the environmental
problem because they simply will not be allowed to.

The corporations exist because they turn natural resources into
trade goods and they cannot leave the planet alone. They need
more and more and more, forever.

This is a real problem on a finite planet.

Any scientist who told the public that they need to radically
cut back on their consumption would be out of a job, and
blacklisted so fast that his/her head would spin.

Because there's no point in trashing the planet to produce
trade goods if no one will buy them.

Littlefoot

 

Actually, I am quite happy studying mineralogy and working with XRD. It's quite an interesting field.

Yes, mass consumption is a major problem. Yes, man is destroying the ecosystems, although this provides other species with new homes- such as MRSA and other bacteria, fruit flies, rats and other rodents, ornamental plants, pigeons, cockroaches, etc. Man must learn to use what's available instead of producing a bunch of crap only to bury it. One day man will be "mining" garbage dumps.

BTW, all of the so-called "corporate owned" geologists that I know are extremely concerned about the rate of pollution the oil companies are creating and the effect man has on this planet. Some are researching the impact of man on glaciers and the ice caps, with an eye on past warming events as well as other occurrences of similar carbon levels in the atmosphere. I know one man who believes mankind is slowly committing suicide. To say that he is in the pocket of corporations- I don't think so! Maybe you should meet some of these scientists before you make assumptions.

How can you say that I'm "amoral?" You don't know me any better than I know you. Why do you lower yourself to name calling? It's not going to bother me. Why do you keep it up? If anything, it negatively reflects on you...

Peace and love

 

Oh and by the way- you must be confused with the definition of technology. Your solution involves technology. In fact, anything man manipulates- stones for arrows, fire, the wheel, anything that man uses is considered technology. So yes, technology is the answer, whether it is high tech (electromagnetic, high speed trains) or low tech (bicycle).

Peace and love

 

hippie_chick666 wrote:

"Actually, I am quite happy studying mineralogy and working with XRD. It's quite an interesting field."

"Yes, mass consumption is a major problem. Yes, man is destroying the ecosystems, although this provides other species with new homes- such as MRSA and other bacteria, fruit flies, rats and other rodents, ornamental plants, pigeons, cockroaches, etc. Man must learn to use what's available instead of producing a bunch of crap only to bury it. One day man will be "mining" garbage dumps. "

You are projecting a society-economy like this one into the distant
future. That isn't going to happen. We are going to change our
ways, fundamentally, the easy way or the hard way.


"BTW, all of the so-called "corporate owned" geologists that I know are extremely concerned about the rate of pollution the oil companies are creating and the effect man has on this planet. Some are researching the impact of man on glaciers and the ice caps, with an eye on past warming events as well as other occurrences of similar carbon levels in the atmosphere. I know one man who believes mankind is slowly committing suicide. To say that he is in the pocket of corporations- I don't think so! Maybe you should meet some of these scientists before you make assumptions."

You can find real scientists who are investing abductions by
extraterrestrial humanoids. Real scientists with theories that
are severely at odds with mainstream scientific thought.

So what? They don't have the ear of the Media. They don't
control what's in the textbooks at every level of education.
The don't decide the curricula at the largest and most
widespread educational institutions.

The mainstream scientists have that.

"How can you say that I'm "amoral?" You don't know me any better than I know you. "

I just read what you post. You have said, many times here, that
everything's okay because life will go on.

That's an amoral attitude.

But what can one expect from a subscriber to the scientific
paradigm, which tells us that the universe is a mindless machine
and that we are accidentally produced biological machines
that will wear out one day and that our consciousness, our inner
experience, is just an illusion caused by electrochemical activity
in our brains.

That Nature is based on violent competition with the survivors
being the most efficient killers with the best defenses.

" Why do you lower yourself to name calling? It's not going to bother me. Why do you keep it up? If anything, it negatively reflects on you.."

I assess you from what you've posted here.

I call you a 'bitch' because you act like one.

I call you 'amoral' because that's what you call
a person who doesn't care about human suffering, which
all significant environmental damage leads to, one way or
another. Not to mention the rights of other species and
the Earth itself.

If you don't like what I have to say, then run along and post
your sloppy and self-serving arguments elsewhere.

I'll post whatever I want, and you'll live with it.

I realize that you thought you were going to roll right over
me with all that stuff you've memorized from scientific
textbooks.

I am not sorry to have disappointed you.

We could have a real discussion if you'd quite trying
to bully me into submission.

You couldn't do that if your life depended on it.

LIttlefoot




.

Peace and love[/QUOTE]

 

It's quite obvious that I'm wasting my time trying to present facts to someone who believes evolution is out of the question, but aliens exist(?). However, I refuse to stoop to your level of personal insults, which is grounds for banning from the forums. Perhaps you should look at the forum rules before spouting rude remarks.

Anytime you point the finger of blame at someone, remember that there are 4 fingers pointing back at you.

You have entertained me with abuse which I decline to accept. So now the abuse belongs to you.

Peace and love

 

hippie_chick666 wrote:

"It's quite obvious that I'm wasting my time trying to present facts..."

You are wasting your time trying to convince me that ideas
you have memorized from some textbook are facts just because
someone told you they were and you were gullible enough to believe
them.

I know. The high priests of science are quite convinced that they
know more about the nature of reality than anyone else.

But the proof is in the pudding, as the old saying goes, and they
are leading us to our destruction.

Because they cannot act against the interests of the corporations
that fund them.

I've deleted your latest barrage of bitchy prose.

If you don't like what I have to say, then you are free to have
sex with yourself.

Littlefoot

 

I didn't know Buddhist quotes were bitchy prose... Perhaps it's time someone intervened. Personal attacks are off limits and if you can't respect the rules of this forum, perhaps it's best you take your hate elsewhere.

Peace and love

 

I remember when we couldn't eat the fish and clams in N.Y. waters. The fact that we can is not offered as reason to celebrate but is offered as some perspective against the total gloom & doom scenarios posted here.

 

All Species Are Endangered.

Any one of them could be wiped out in the
near future by the depradations of the
global industrial economy.

Many of them already have been and many
more will be.

Which one will be the straw that breaks the
camel's back?

Littlefoot

 

Background extinctions happen all the time. It's just part of life and this isn't the first time it's occured.

Peace and love

 

gardener wrote:

"Then apply to the petroleum businesses the same leverage that has been applied to tobacco. Tobacco ruled during the 1700s and 1800s. It's now just a fringe concern. Can you hope to do that with petroleum?"

No. It's too fundamental to this economy.

"If so then consumers need to look at the consumption of petroleum in commodities that they don't normally associate with it's use. Global economy necessitates transportation of goods, and with that transportation comes the use of petroleum. Are we all willing to look at the hidden costs?"

I am. Most people aren't. They want to save the Earth but they don't want
to change their lifestyles.

"Locally produced goods will equate to more environmentally safe products...will our global economists buy into that? I am thinking not!"

You are right on both counts.

"How about taxing the petroleum industry like we are now taxing tobacco? Think that's going to work?"

No. They only thing that will work is to recreate civilization from the ground
up, basing it upon human power, which is the most efficient form of power
available, and the least polluting.

Not to say that we shouldn't make use of the best of technology, but
most of that is pre-industrial.

Although the phony environmental movement would have us believe otherwise,
there isn't any more destructive and ineffiecient way to produce and distribute
the things we need than industry.

It only seems efficient because the exploited poor people around the
world that subsidize it aren't obvious. In fact, they are deliberately
concealed.

What industry _is_ good at is keeping the good jobs and most of the
money in the hands of a priveleged few: The world's middle class.

Littlefoot

 

I think that we, as humans, were some kind of fluke or accident in the greater scheme of things. We really don't seem to belong in a natural system. Or perhaaps that is entirely governmentally created. Obviously at some point in history we were able to take care of ourselves. But now, the majority cannot. And in the majorities lack of ability to care for themselves, our lives have become a downward spiral. We pollute because we are force fed whatever is "modern" or "expected" or "civilized." We are CAPTIVE in the system of "civilization" which is in place, and it is very nearly impossible to escape it as individuals.

So, we are forced/manipulated into a needy and greedy THING oriented society, then we are told that our personal greed will be the end of us. They terrorize us with scenarios of planet wide destruction that WE are accused of being responsible for. But, isn't this an awful lot like waving a carrot in front of a jack ass, or holding out candy to a small kid and then punishing them for taking it? The powers that be may as well of been slowly poisoning us in our food... That would make US victims of those who run the show.

I totally agree that unless this entire planet blasts itself apart into dust and flings out across the universe, that life of some kind will continue. And it MAY anyhow. How do we know that in the destruction of earth that a new system wouldn't be seeded somewhere else?

I can not see us, as humans, being able to "save" the earth. We are simply too violent and egotistical and we basically cannot seem to HELP but cause some type of harm. There are many who tread very lightly, there are even fewer who can actually say they don't pollute AT ALL (where to dig the outhouse hole???). There are not many totally removed tribal societies left. If there even still are any, they surely must have heard of the great "beast" that devours everything, and they must hide accordingly....

BUT, I am a great believer in BALANCE. I see it happening NATURALLY around me every day. In fact, like negative and positive, yin and yang, yes and no, I believe that BALANCE is one thing that remains constant in the natural world. I also believe that Mother Nature is FAR more powerful than we are. And if Mother Nature REALLY gets out of balance, she will effectively ELIMINATE most of us herself. And life will go on, just hopefully the survivors will have learned something.

A little something I wrote about this subject not too long ago:

http://calhoununderground.wordpress.com/2007/11/18/on-nature-and-balance/

 

The middle class isn't the privileged few. The people with billions are the ones with the power and influence. The middle class are no more than the tools of which the wealthy 1% use. I believe the statistics are something like 1% of the population controls 95% of the wealth. That doesn't sound like the middle class has too many privileges.

Peace and love

 

Here, once again, you demonstrate that your supposed education is simply
parroted from one source or another. You don't think for yourself at all.

Bill Gates, the richest man on Earth, or close to it, is worth about 53 Billion dollars.
There are about 500,000,000 middle class people on the planet.

So if his 'fortune' was divided equally among all of them, they'd each receive
about 106 dollars. Less than a half-day's wage for most of them. One time.

Chicken feed. And there are very few ultra-rich people like Bill Gates.

The vast bulk of the world's wealth is held by the middle-class. They use
people like Bill Gates as scapegoats, pretending that they are just poor
peasants.

But the material priveleges of the middle class are orders of magnitude
higher than those of the world's poor, upon whom they are quite dependent.
The difference between the material priveleges of someone like Bill Gates
and those of the middle class is much smaller.

He just has a bigger middle-class house and a private jet instead of
a shared one. But the world's exploited poor live in hovels and can't
even dream of flying on a jet plane anywhere. Most of them can't
even dream of a bus ride anywhere. They couldn't get the time off from
the plantations and sweat shops and factories and mines they toil
in.

And all of Bill Gates' money is available to middle-class, as loans and
charitable donations to the non-profit orgs they work for, etc.

The same thing applies to the wealth of the other super-rich. How
much money can you spend? What they are really doing is holding
most of it in trust for the middle class.

Littlefoot

 

One only has to open their eyes in an environment where being "poor" is the norm and the wealthy stick out like sore thumbs. These wealthy folks "help" by hiring the "regular" folks to work in their environmental nightmares of oil and gas drilling and mountaintop removal. The wealthy hold all the cards, they get what they want due to their power and influence. The Poorer (average) citizens can stand up in large numbers against the money folks, but they are nothing more than fleas to those with the power. Some folks kiss their asses because they at least pay well in their destruction. And some of us are so disgusted by them and their control over our homes and lives and destruction of the environment, that we would rather BE poor than participate in their evil.
Many of those who work for them begin to become like them. Greedy and evil. The more money and niceties they accumulate working as well-paid slaves, the less they associate themselves with poorer folks. The greedier and more hateful they get.

Yes, absolutely, the rich control everything, everybody else is either their slaves, or refuses to be part of it. But even many of the "rich" are simply glorified slaves. Many seemingly wealthy folks are in debt up to their necks and the BANKS own them. They MUST keep playing the "wealthy employee" game in order to keep paying THEIR bills. They don't even realize they too are SLAVES to the ones who RUN EVERYTHING. These seemingly wealthy people don't even understand the big picture. These apparently very rich folks ARE the "upper middle class". Their well paid slaves are "middle class" to "lower middle".

But all that MONEY isn't worth much according to the financial news. It's a growing illusion. And when the illusion becomes BIG enough and prevalent enough, the only ones left standing will be the mega-rich and the poor.

 

Phanerozoic?

 

http://www.palaeos.com/Timescale/Phanerozoic.htm

Peace and love

 

For dirtydog:

Do keep in mind that the current popular theories of the scientific establishment
and truth are not necessarily the same thing at all.

No one has a time machine. The scientists _believe_ that what
they _think_ are the Laws of Nature have always been the same
as they _appear_ to be now, but they don't KNOW that.

Around the turn of the 20th century, many scientists lost their
jobs and their reputations for insisting that there were particles
smaller than an atom. Science is anything but infallible.

The history of science is a history of theories being presented
as truth and later being shown to be quite erroneous.

Also note that I never said that every species on Earth was going
to be wiped out (although that is a possibility -- any real scientist
will tell you that they are centuries away from any true undstanding
of planetary ecology.)

I said that they were all endangered. That means that any one of them
could be wiped out by the depradations of industrial society.

Which is simply a fact.

As for hippy_chick666, I've tried to carry on an intelligent conversation
with her in the past. She has a blind faith in the scientific establishment,
which precludes any such thing.

Littlefoot

 

No one has a time machine. The scientists _believe_ that what
they _think_ are the Laws of Nature have always been the same
as they _appear_ to be now, but they don't KNOW that.

Around the turn of the 20th century, many scientists lost their
jobs and their reputations for insisting that there were particles
smaller than an atom. Science is anything but infallible.

The history of science is a history of theories being presented
as truth and later being shown to be quite erroneous.
and yet they still search for the TRUTH!