Webmaster Forum

Go Back   Webmaster Forum > The Webmaster Forums > Forum Lobby > Controversial Social Issues

Controversial Social Issues Discussions concerning controversial social issues. Topics include politics, religion, culture, social and economic issues, etc. Respect required at all times.


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Share |
  #1  
Old 10-13-2007, 10:45 PM
John Scott's Avatar
John Scott John Scott is offline
Individualist
 
Join Date: 09-27-03
Location: Wherever I want.
Posts: 28,046
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Global Warming, Pollution and Wildfires

Ever since mankind got its hands on Borate bombers, and more recently Phos-Chek, mankind has decreased the natural occurrence of forest fires. It was the US gov't policy for decades to put out forest fires as soon as they occurred.

This of course flies in the face of nature. Before mankind, forest fires cleared entire forests, and left them ready for new growth (regeneration).

So now, the enviormentalist promote and and have secured a policy to allow forest fires to burn when they do not threaten cities, homes or human life.

Now, I must say, forest regeneration is good and all. But doesn't it seem odd, that if they really believe that the earth is turning into an oven, that they would allow forest fires to add more to the that?

Oh, but forest fires only add a negligible amount of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere, you say.

In 1997 and 1998, the total amount of carbon dioxide released into the atmosphere was 6 gigatonnes. Of that, 2.57 gigatonnes came from a single forest fire (a huge forest fire in Indonesia).

With all the forest fires world wide, it's conceivable that forest fires are the leading cause of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. And furthermore, unlike other smaller causes of carbon dioxide pollution, forest fires create great heat, which creates an effect which propels the pollution into the upper atmosphere (green house, baby).

So I got to ask, do these environmentalist seriously believe that we are facing a global warming calamity? And if so, why not act like it and stop forest fires?
 
Reply With Quote

Advertisement

Advertisement

  #2  
Old 10-14-2007, 05:15 PM
intruth's Avatar
intruth intruth is offline
Contributing Member
 
Join Date: 01-16-06
Posts: 377
iTrader: 0 / 0%
well I guess 1st they need to explain why Mars is warming 4 times faster than earth with 0 population...
 
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 10-14-2007, 09:44 PM
South's Avatar
South South is offline
v7n Mentor
 
Join Date: 10-13-03
Posts: 2,489
iTrader: 1 / 100%
You're trying to make logical sense out of the liberal mindset? I applaud your guts for the undertaking but I'm afraid you're headed for failure.

Farmers and sportsmen are America's working conservationists, and are conservatives. We understand the realities of it because we live among the real life results of it daily and know how to help it help us as humans.

Liberal conservationists dream up these outrageous ideas and will spend unthinkable time, man hours, and other resources into scrubbing an otter clean only to watch it be eaten by a gator two minutes later. They, of course, applaud themselves for the effort and give each other awards for it.

America's successful entrepreneurs and major businessmen are by and large conservatives. They understand the sometimes harsh realities of commanding a successful financial enterprise and are deemed cold-blooded and mean by many liberals.

Those who fail in real-life business can be found at universities teaching others the principles of business. They know the material but don't seem to "get" how to make it fly in real life. You'll usually find them voting in the "D" column and marching in the pro-union rallys.

Why are the media and most higher education positions filled with society's hard left? Because these are theory-based, observational positions. They deal in life's what-ifs and ought-to-bes with little acceptance for or understanding of the limitations of real life consequences.

Why are people for the most part very liberal when very young and more conservative as life rolls on? Because young people have yet to experience life at that level. So whether you're just too young to have been through the fire enough to get it...or you just live your life inside the shelter of a classroom where your life revolves around theory more than practical application, you're ideas are based on idealistic fantasies.

These are people who will support killing of innocent babies while condemning killing of convicted murderers.

These are people who will support amnesty for millions of people living illegally in our country, then support socialized medicine....and actually think it won't go bankrupt.

These are people who will write a bill disallowing companies from collecting race information on applications, then another bill requiring that race be taken into consideration when hiring.

These are people who claim to care about American jobs by standing with labor unions, then vote to raise wages forcing companies to send thousands of jobs out of country.

And yes...these are people who will scream and wail about global warming, then suggest that a strong participating factor be allowed.

Liberals don't live within the confines of reality. Good luck on your quest for logic.
 
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 10-14-2007, 09:53 PM
South's Avatar
South South is offline
v7n Mentor
 
Join Date: 10-13-03
Posts: 2,489
iTrader: 1 / 100%
And yes, they should let the fires burn when human interests aren't endangered by it. Earlier this year we had a massive fire a couple of hours from where I live. I was told by officials of the park that while it was devastating in some aspects, it was desperately needed for the swamp.

Farmers burn the land in controlled burns frequently.
 
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 10-15-2007, 06:50 PM
Atom's Avatar
Atom Atom is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: 10-12-03
Location: Tennessee, USA
Posts: 32,608
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Why doesn't there exist a third or even a fourth mindset with any significance? That's what I don't understand. Two basic mindsets. Something seems not right about that.
 
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 10-15-2007, 07:33 PM
South's Avatar
South South is offline
v7n Mentor
 
Join Date: 10-13-03
Posts: 2,489
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atom View Post
Why doesn't there exist a third or even a fourth mindset with any significance? That's what I don't understand. Two basic mindsets. Something seems not right about that.
I don't know. I guess with most situations there's a natural either/or. Absolutes have a right and a wrong...so any third or more positions would really be just complacency or indecision...no? Yes? No?

Kinda like the voters who watch TV then vote for the candidate with the best ads?
 
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 10-15-2007, 07:37 PM
Atom's Avatar
Atom Atom is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: 10-12-03
Location: Tennessee, USA
Posts: 32,608
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Quote:
Originally Posted by South View Post
I don't know. I guess with most situations there's a natural either/or. ...
But, in politics? Doesn't seem right to me.
 
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 10-15-2007, 07:47 PM
Atom's Avatar
Atom Atom is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: 10-12-03
Location: Tennessee, USA
Posts: 32,608
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Quote:
Originally Posted by South View Post
... Kinda like the voters who watch TV then vote for the candidate with the best ads?
Yeah, they'd be the types that wouldn't even wonder why there's really only two choices.

I guess it's just plain easier for everybody all the way around. It's a shame we can't come up with something better.

Last edited by Atom; 10-15-2007 at 07:53 PM.
 
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 10-16-2007, 06:28 AM
South's Avatar
South South is offline
v7n Mentor
 
Join Date: 10-13-03
Posts: 2,489
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atom View Post
But, in politics? Doesn't seem right to me.
Isn't it inevitable, though? Most people choose affiliation based on certain things they feel strongly about. Even though there's an ocean of stuff that goes with it they are choosing sides based on those things.

Maybe there is a third direction, we just need the right climate for it. Here's what I mean.

I vote Republican. Pretty much always have. I do that because the Republican platform as it stands is the right one. This season Giuliani will most likely get the nomination. He supports abortion which is something I can't vote for. He's weak on immigration...basically a social Democrat with an (R) by his name.

Assuming I'm right about him getting the nomination, I will not be voting Republican in the national general election for the first time since I've been old enough to vote. Many people here in the bible belt feel the same way. Even though I realize that a third party can't win and I'll be helping to put Hillary Clinton in the Whitehouse, I've decided I'm ok with that for two reasons.

1) I followed my conviction. I did not cast a vote for a man who supports government sanctioned murder.

2) The Republican party will realize that it can't just put anything with a (R) by it and expect to get the vote. Stick with the base or lose. That's it.

Plus, maybe it's best for America to get a four year dose of good, old fashioned tyrannical socialism from Hillary. If that doesn't slap people sober nothing else is going to.
 
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 10-16-2007, 08:27 AM
Atom's Avatar
Atom Atom is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: 10-12-03
Location: Tennessee, USA
Posts: 32,608
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Quote:
Originally Posted by South View Post
Isn't it inevitable, though? Most people choose affiliation based on certain things they feel strongly about. Even though there's an ocean of stuff that goes with it they are choosing sides based on those things.
Right, but we are forced to choose sides with the current system, even though it may be due to a natural mechanism. Why do we have to settle for this? I believe it's because of the sheer power of money (human greed, another natural mechanism?), and politics is something that naturally goes along with that power.

Last edited by Atom; 10-16-2007 at 08:31 AM. Reason: removed last sentence
 
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 10-16-2007, 08:33 AM
StrongInTheArm's Avatar
StrongInTheArm StrongInTheArm is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: 04-24-07
Posts: 9,310
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atom View Post
Why doesn't there exist a third or even a fourth mindset with any significance? That's what I don't understand. Two basic mindsets. Something seems not right about that.
I think it is because the other possibilities generally exist between the poles of right and wrong. They have more difficult cases to make, cases which are more difficult to understand, more complicated to explain and thus more time consuming. Who has time to listen to and understand the complex. Thus our modern world discussions revolve around the two poles instead.

You see that there are shades of grey, but it is easier to persuade if an argument is couched in black and white, good vs. evil. The media can only tackle subjects of this nature. They have to dumb down to the lowest common denominator.

Perhaps the real question is why do we allow them to get away with it?
 
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 10-16-2007, 09:05 AM
Atom's Avatar
Atom Atom is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: 10-12-03
Location: Tennessee, USA
Posts: 32,608
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Quote:
Originally Posted by StrongInTheArm View Post
...Perhaps the real question is why do we allow them to get away with it?
I must have slipped my previous post in just before you submitted your post. Yes, I think that is a question worth exploring, and I've stated that I think that the power of money itself is the problem. To add to this, money automatically equals control and increases proportionally. But somehow it just doesn't seem right to me in politics. I don't really know why yet, maybe more posts are needed, they often contain some of my answers.

Last edited by Atom; 10-16-2007 at 09:09 AM. Reason: added "in politics"
 
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 10-16-2007, 09:09 AM
Rankenstein's Avatar
Rankenstein Rankenstein is offline
v7n Mentor
 
Join Date: 11-14-05
Location: Manchester
Posts: 3,140
iTrader: 0 / 0%
The way the American Right talks about Liberals is hilarious. It's impossible, apparently, for the mythical Liberal ever to do anything good. It's impossible for the mythical Conservative ever to do anything wrong. Seriously, it's like listening to a kid speak about fairies - the most childish level of debate possible, literally.

The American Right voted in as President a man who has since doubled the nation's debt in six years. Conservatism? Comedianism more like. Is that the way to run a business?

But he's unimportant. The latest news just in is that the Yangtze river dolphin is extinct. Killed by massive river pollution. But I guess that's just the harsh reality of polluters...some deem them cold blooded and mean, but they understand....well, they understand nothing, and South? With the best will in the world, you don't half talk rubbish sometimes. There is no logic evident anywhere when listening to a hardline Republican waffle on about whatever it is they waffle on about, Liberals mostly. It's a pity there weren't more of these Liberal Conservationists (as if that phrase had direct relevance to any group that actually exists in the real world, as opposed to merely in a frightened Republican mindset) to scrub the river dolphins' water clean....but that would have been a dumb unthinkable waste of time, wouldn't it South? South? You should be ashamed of yourself, not for what you said, but for believing that it made sense.

Anyway, forest fires? I suppose they've been happening for millions of years. So I wouldn't think that they were the cause of warming, but right now they can't be helping matters. Interesting point. I think the main cause of all the shilly-shallying is that there isn't a quorum of opinion and we don't really know what we're doing. Should we have methane collectors on cows? Should we stop forest fire's burning? Maybe the regeneration more than takes care of the CO2 produce by the fires in the long run? Who knows? We haven't been tuned in to the problem for that long. Some people say there isn't a problem, and we shouldn't dismiss that view, but IMO it's quite likely that we are causing problems and doing nothing about it isn't the answer.
 
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 10-16-2007, 11:27 AM
StrongInTheArm's Avatar
StrongInTheArm StrongInTheArm is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: 04-24-07
Posts: 9,310
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atom View Post
Right, but we are forced to choose sides with the current system, even though it may be due to a natural mechanism. Why do we have to settle for this? I believe it's because of the sheer power of money (human greed, another natural mechanism?), and politics is something that naturally goes along with that power.

All systems of governance rely on the majority to choose in one way or another an individual to govern them. Is there another way? Perhaps governance by referendum, but then who implements the policies decided upon? Cos that's a form of power in itself. Or are you suggesting we as individuals govern ourselves, that would be anarchy I think.

Power and politics should not mix, but those with money always want to influence those with the ability to weal power over them and their concerns. Politics is about governance of society, which should not be influenced by just the concerns of that small minority that has money. Society is made up of all the people, politics is responsible for all the people. The concern of money is usually to make more money, which can be diametrically opposite to societies best interests.
 
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 10-16-2007, 03:50 PM
Atom's Avatar
Atom Atom is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: 10-12-03
Location: Tennessee, USA
Posts: 32,608
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Quote:
Originally Posted by StrongInTheArm View Post
All systems of governance rely on the majority to choose in one way or another an individual to govern them. Is there another way? ...
Yeah, how about representative direct democracy?
 
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 10-16-2007, 07:31 PM
John Scott's Avatar
John Scott John Scott is offline
Individualist
 
Join Date: 09-27-03
Location: Wherever I want.
Posts: 28,046
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rankenstein View Post
The way the American Right talks about Liberals is hilarious. It's impossible, apparently, for the mythical Liberal ever to do anything good. It's impossible for the mythical Conservative ever to do anything wrong. Seriously, it's like listening to a kid speak about fairies - the most childish level of debate possible, literally.

The American Right voted in as President a man who has since doubled the nation's debt in six years. Conservatism? Comedianism more like. Is that the way to run a business?

But he's unimportant. The latest news just in is that the Yangtze river dolphin is extinct. Killed by massive river pollution. But I guess that's just the harsh reality of polluters...some deem them cold blooded and mean, but they understand....well, they understand nothing, and South? With the best will in the world, you don't half talk rubbish sometimes. There is no logic evident anywhere when listening to a hardline Republican waffle on about whatever it is they waffle on about, Liberals mostly. It's a pity there weren't more of these Liberal Conservationists (as if that phrase had direct relevance to any group that actually exists in the real world, as opposed to merely in a frightened Republican mindset) to scrub the river dolphins' water clean....but that would have been a dumb unthinkable waste of time, wouldn't it South? South? You should be ashamed of yourself, not for what you said, but for believing that it made sense.

Anyway, forest fires? I suppose they've been happening for millions of years. So I wouldn't think that they were the cause of warming, but right now they can't be helping matters. Interesting point. I think the main cause of all the shilly-shallying is that there isn't a quorum of opinion and we don't really know what we're doing. Should we have methane collectors on cows? Should we stop forest fire's burning? Maybe the regeneration more than takes care of the CO2 produce by the fires in the long run? Who knows? We haven't been tuned in to the problem for that long. Some people say there isn't a problem, and we shouldn't dismiss that view, but IMO it's quite likely that we are causing problems and doing nothing about it isn't the answer.
A couple corrections:

Conservatives are not perfect.

"Conservative" and "Republican" are not interchangeable.

Bush is a big gov't Republican. Conservatives are small gov't. Ergo, Bush loses his membership in the Conservative team.
 
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 10-16-2007, 08:32 PM
South's Avatar
South South is offline
v7n Mentor
 
Join Date: 10-13-03
Posts: 2,489
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rankenstein View Post
But he's unimportant. The latest news just in is that the Yangtze river dolphin is extinct. Killed by massive river pollution. But I guess that's just the harsh reality of polluters...some deem them cold blooded and mean, but they understand....well, they understand nothing, and South? With the best will in the world, you don't half talk rubbish sometimes. There is no logic evident anywhere when listening to a hardline Republican waffle on about whatever it is they waffle on about, Liberals mostly. It's a pity there weren't more of these Liberal Conservationists (as if that phrase had direct relevance to any group that actually exists in the real world, as opposed to merely in a frightened Republican mindset) to scrub the river dolphins' water clean....but that would have been a dumb unthinkable waste of time, wouldn't it South? South? You should be ashamed of yourself, not for what you said, but for believing that it made sense.
I've gotten pretty good at decoding liberal gibberish, but that rant is beyond me. I'm thinking you're saying George Bush made some dolphins extinct...or I did? Scrub water? What are you saying?
 
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 10-17-2007, 02:15 AM
Zap's Avatar
Zap Zap is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: 01-15-06
Posts: 13,770
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Hey Rank.

I think, from now on, if I'm having trouble understanding a point you've made, I'll just make fun of you and hope you go away.
 
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 10-17-2007, 03:08 AM
robert s.'s Avatar
robert s. robert s. is offline
Village Idiot
 
Join Date: 01-26-07
Location: spain
Posts: 553
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Quote:
Originally Posted by South View Post
I've gotten pretty good at decoding liberal gibberish, but that rant is beyond me. I'm thinking you're saying George Bush made some dolphins extinct...or I did? Scrub water? What are you saying?
strange - my english is mediocre at best, but i have no problem understanding what rank is saying..........
 
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 10-17-2007, 03:16 AM
John Scott's Avatar
John Scott John Scott is offline
Individualist
 
Join Date: 09-27-03
Location: Wherever I want.
Posts: 28,046
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Quote:
Originally Posted by robert s. View Post
strange - my english is mediocre at best, but i have no problem understanding what rank is saying..........
Mind giving a summary? Statement of position type thing?

He seems to think that Bush is a Conservative just because he is a Republican. Is this assumption correct?

He also seems to think that Republicans and Conservatives are pro-pollution. Is this assumption correct?

He also seems to think that forest fires are not a cause of global warming, even though they produce the bulk of greenhouse gases which do cause global warming. Is this assumption correct?
 
Reply With Quote
Go Back   Webmaster Forum > The Webmaster Forums > Forum Lobby > Controversial Social Issues

Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Global Warming is a Hoax cldnails Controversial Social Issues 261 11-05-2008 02:19 AM
Is Al Gore a Global Warming Hypocrite? SemperFidelis Controversial Social Issues 56 07-10-2007 07:33 AM
Global Warming - Can we save the planet? gigabyte Controversial Social Issues 2 03-25-2007 07:13 PM


V7N Network
Get exposure! V7N I Love Photography V7N SEO Blog V7N Directory


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:03 PM.
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright 2000-2014 Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.
Copyright © 2003 - 2018 VIX-WomensForum LLC