| Author |
Message |
    
kendalbill
Citizen
Username: Kendalbill
Post Number: 93
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Friday, February 17, 2006 - 9:52 am: | 
|
Interesting here, bookmarked here through Drudge of all places:
http://news.independent.co.uk/environment/article345926.ece
I think the facts are beginning to catch up with the spin. Is anyone still trying to convince us that its all just theory? |
Scrotis Lo Knows
Citizen
Username: Scrotisloknows
Post Number: 746
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Friday, February 17, 2006 - 10:19 am: |
|
kendall-
human induced GW is the debate....
Besides, not that we shouldn't do anything but what do you suggest we do about it?
-SLK |
themp
Supporter
Username: Themp
Post Number: 2562
Registered: 12-2001
| | Posted on Friday, February 17, 2006 - 10:48 am: |
|
You believe SCIENTISTS? They are just liberal shills, influenced by their funding sources to scare us. That's what John Stossel taught me.
Next you'll tell us you believe man walked on the moon!
|
tom
Citizen
Username: Tom
Post Number: 4371
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, February 17, 2006 - 10:54 am: |
|
what should we do? Well a lot of smart people think it has something to do with increased CO2 in the atmosphere. And a lot of those same people have noticed that burning fossil fuels releases CO2, and we do burn a lot of those.
How about we just TRY and cut back? Discourage use of gasoline, coal; encourage solar, hydro, geothermal -- even nuke.
Oh, and screw the free market on this one. "The market will solve everything" is a superstition, one that is always trumped by "the tragedy of the commons." |
kendalbill
Citizen
Username: Kendalbill
Post Number: 94
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Friday, February 17, 2006 - 11:07 am: |
|
Themp, we'll all be walking on the moon soon since my living room will be under water.
I've noticed that many conservatives are breaking ranks with the "business first" republicans on this issue. What's even more interesing is how some businesses are breaking with the so called business oriented parts of the republican party.
SLK, I have no idea what to do. I'm not a scientist, and I hope you weren't looking to me for the answser. The people that do are having trouble being heard.
One environmentalist line has been that as non reversable events continue to happen they will actually start happening faster and faster. I kinda sorta would like to delay that from happening. And, yes I do beleve there are a lot of factors that could be causing the problem, not only industrial or even human created factors-- but we need to have an honest and quick discussion about all of it. |
Scrotis Lo Knows
Citizen
Username: Scrotisloknows
Post Number: 750
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Friday, February 17, 2006 - 11:22 am: |
|
tom-
I recycle whenever possible, walk/use public transportation when I can and don't abuse my AC privileges during the warmer months.
My family car sits in the driveway 5 days a week and is used minimally otherwise...
I am NOT buying solar panels or a hybrid car at this point in time......sorry gotta draw the line somewhere....
I am doing my part, go bother other people...especially the lower classes that don't give two shats about the environment....
I apologize for appear hostile, but everyone keeps crying that the sky is falling and offer minimum solutions. Even though I am somewhat skeptical of this GW thing I am still doing what I can...now it is up to others to get a move on...
Peace mon! 
|
tjohn
Supporter
Username: Tjohn
Post Number: 4057
Registered: 12-2001
| | Posted on Friday, February 17, 2006 - 11:55 am: |
|
"I am doing my part, go bother other people...especially the lower classes that don't give two shats about the environment.... "
Damn all those poor people. So focused on just trying to survive and totally ignoring the concerns of the middle class. Selfish, I tell you. Inexcusably selfish.
Actually, the conservation equation is only partly about reducing personal consumption. Another critical component is the vast amount of energy required to maintain our standard of living - our air flown fruits and vegetables, our consumer goods, etc. On these counts, I would say middle-class consumption is well-above that of the poor. |
Duncan
Supporter
Username: Duncanrogers
Post Number: 5747
Registered: 12-2001
| | Posted on Friday, February 17, 2006 - 12:34 pm: |
|
Quote:I am doing my part, go bother other people...
this is where isolationism starts...at home. Go bother other people??
To quote Arnold Burns...
Quote:There is only one thing that really bothers you. Other People. It if wasn't for other people,everything would be fine, eh? I mean, you think everything is fine and then you go out on the street--and there they all are again, right? The other people; taking up space, bumping into you, asking for things, making lines to wait on, taking cabs away from ya--the ENEMY. Well, watch out, they're everywhere
|
Scrotis Lo Knows
Citizen
Username: Scrotisloknows
Post Number: 751
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Friday, February 17, 2006 - 12:46 pm: |
|
tjohn-
So much for treating everyone equal huh? And nice try with the guilt trip...
It is ok to hold the lower classes to the same standards as everyone else, including when it comes to the environment. It is equally selfish of them not to contribute. Just because they have less money than you and I does not exempt them from responsibilties other than themselves.
I am not saying all poor people don't care. But I have notice more often than not that they rather (and do) throw everything out than recycle and find the most impractical vehicles considering where they live. I've have seen lower class people drive one block to the store one too many times.
Small examples but they do add up. Besides, how else are they suppose to contribute other than conducting the basics? |
tjohn
Supporter
Username: Tjohn
Post Number: 4059
Registered: 12-2001
| | Posted on Friday, February 17, 2006 - 12:52 pm: |
|
No guilt trip about it. Just reality.
Poor people drive junky, polluting cars because they can't afford SUVs.
I would guess that a some poor welfare mother has a much lower impact on the environment than you or I do.
Our economy is greased by cheap oil. The energy to build our new cars - the energy to make the building materials to add on our home additions - the energy to take a vacation in Mexico.
While you are busy asking the poor to toe the line, understand the the middle class and higher are the major energy consumers. |
Scrotis Lo Knows
Citizen
Username: Scrotisloknows
Post Number: 753
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Friday, February 17, 2006 - 12:58 pm: |
|
tjohn-
Then why can't the poor just walk or take public transportation instead of driving polluted cars?
Everyone needs to step up to the plate, including the welfare moms. |
Elgato
Citizen
Username: Elgato
Post Number: 19
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Friday, February 17, 2006 - 1:06 pm: |
|
Another GW article from today's Independent:
http://news.independent.co.uk/environment/article345928.ece
Global warming '30 times quicker than it used to be' |
tjohn
Supporter
Username: Tjohn
Post Number: 4061
Registered: 12-2001
| | Posted on Friday, February 17, 2006 - 1:06 pm: |
|
They can, they should and, often, I suspect they have no choice in the matter.
My only point is that the big reductions in energy consumption come from higher on the hog than the welfare moms.
|
Innisowen
Citizen
Username: Innisowen
Post Number: 1544
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Friday, February 17, 2006 - 1:09 pm: |
|
Ah, Scrotey-otey:
Your indefatigable bristling at opposing points of view is sad.
What about the Maplewood mom or dad who drives the SUV (maybe it's the Escalade, the Expedition, or the Hummer) 3 blocks to get the pizza for the kids? Or the dad who runs it to grab a beer with the guys, five minutes from the house?
Your "lower classes" (I haven't heard that terminology since the middle of the last century) usually don't have the discretionary income to pick and choose either the behemoths we drive or even the Priuses. I guess that's why they wind up in your "lower class" category.
They drive whatever they can afford to buy off the lot, and, it seems, they usually end up with clinkers that we have finished with.
Candidly, I sense that your "lower class" remark were probably meant to give you that "tough, I don't really care" persona on MOL, but it still comes off as pretty crappy.
No offense meant and none taken, just candid observations. |
Scrotis Lo Knows
Citizen
Username: Scrotisloknows
Post Number: 754
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Friday, February 17, 2006 - 3:22 pm: |
|
Innis-
I see you have been soaking the California rays-maybe a bit too much.
And thank you for illustrating my point. If human action is indeed negatively affecting our dear mother nature then EVERYONE is responsible. Not making enough money isn't grounds for exemption nor is dishing out different levels of culpability obligation based on one's income. It is not being tough, it is being fair.
See Inny, even you can be useful sometimes!  |
tjohn
Supporter
Username: Tjohn
Post Number: 4062
Registered: 12-2001
| | Posted on Friday, February 17, 2006 - 3:34 pm: |
|
Ideally, responsibility for greenhouse gases would be directly linked to the volume of said gases for which an individual is responsible. I believe that there is a strong positive correlation between an individual's wealth and the quantity of greenhouse gases for which that individual is responsible for producing.
That's not being tough, it is being fair. |
dave23
Citizen
Username: Dave23
Post Number: 1355
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, February 17, 2006 - 3:36 pm: |
|
tjohn, that's a great idea. It's also impossible to measure. It's not just driving, but consumption and other activities. |
Scrotis Lo Knows
Citizen
Username: Scrotisloknows
Post Number: 756
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Friday, February 17, 2006 - 3:38 pm: |
|
so, the clunkers the lower classes drive do nothing to the environment...? |
dougw
Citizen
Username: Dougw
Post Number: 717
Registered: 3-2005
| | Posted on Friday, February 17, 2006 - 3:39 pm: |
|
There is a stong and positive link between personal consumption and GDP growth. |
Innisowen
Citizen
Username: Innisowen
Post Number: 1549
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Friday, February 17, 2006 - 4:16 pm: |
|
tjohn, your phrase:
"Ideally, responsibility for greenhouse gases would be directly linked to the volume of said gases for which an individual is responsible."
It's too bad we can't measure the gas content of all of our postings. I'm sure our collective debt responsibility would be enormous. |
tjohn
Supporter
Username: Tjohn
Post Number: 4064
Registered: 12-2001
| | Posted on Friday, February 17, 2006 - 4:27 pm: |
|
Scrotis,
I don't quite understand how you make the leap from "poor people contribute less to global warming" to "so, the clunkers the lower classes drive do nothing to the environment".
I fear you may have ingested some Bushcronium. |
dave23
Citizen
Username: Dave23
Post Number: 1356
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, February 17, 2006 - 4:33 pm: |
|
A strong link, doug? Our economy is built on consumption. |
Scrotis Lo Knows
Citizen
Username: Scrotisloknows
Post Number: 757
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Friday, February 17, 2006 - 5:15 pm: |
|
no tjohn, I am asking a questions with the latter...it appears that some beleieve the poor have no affect on the environment when I beg to differ... |
tom
Citizen
Username: Tom
Post Number: 4374
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, February 17, 2006 - 5:50 pm: |
|
It's not just what you drive or where you drive to, that's just the most visible piece. How much does it cost to heat and light a big house over a small apartment? How much electricity do all your appliances and home entertainment systems and computers take? How much "stuff" do you buy, all of which has to be manufactured somewhere.
But what you drive does matter, which is why public transportation needs more support. Instead of trying to kill off Amtrak so that everyone has to fly the shuttle, how about expanding high-speed service to other locales? |
Innisowen
Citizen
Username: Innisowen
Post Number: 1550
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Friday, February 17, 2006 - 5:59 pm: |
|
Scrotey-otey:
You win the Olympic event in "jumping to conclusions."
Who has said that the poor, with their clinkers/clunkers, have no effect on the environment. It sounds as though you have, so you are arguing with yourself. Thus you're probably matched with a peer.
I have said in response to your posting above ("I am not saying all poor people don't care. But I have notice more often than not that they rather (and do) throw everything out than recycle and find the most impractical vehicles considering where they live. I've have seen lower class people drive one block to the store one too many times.")that you can't blame what you like to call "the lower classes" for driving inferior cars because they, being poor, can't afford anything else.
You seem to criticize them more for being in your lower classes than you criticize the driver of the Hummer or Escalade for driving the beast downtown to buy a bagel and a doughnut.
I think it all goes back to what I perceive in you as a difficult time thinking about more than one idea at a time.
You've got to send away for that neocortex and get it attached to the old brain. They're having a sale on neocortex cells on Presidents' Day.
Get some. Attach them to the old brain. Jump the S-curve and come along with the rest of us.
|
Foj
Citizen
Username: Foger
Post Number: 965
Registered: 9-2004
| | Posted on Friday, February 17, 2006 - 6:09 pm: |
|
I see a lot of lower class folk taking NJ transit buses & trains-- every day. Might be-- they dont have a car.
Think of it like this-
Person/per pound of CO2/mile, traveled by a NJ transit bus.
VS
Person/per pound of CO2/mile, traveled by a soccer MOM
I would hazzard to guess that the lower classes that use public transportation are responsible for far less CO2, per mile.
Now- true- that would be a subset of SLK's lower class, but it fooks up his version of the world as posted in this thread, thats for damn sure.
And then consider that every NJT bus uses a particulate emissions package that reduces soot by up to 90%--- VS the School bus that drives kids to school-- kids breath the soot in and have more health problems. |
tulip
Citizen
Username: Braveheart
Post Number: 3211
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Friday, February 17, 2006 - 10:20 pm: |
|
Just deign to take Amtrak someday, scroti otey, and you'll see how many "lower class" people you have to sit with. Can you manage? |
kendalbill
Citizen
Username: Kendalbill
Post Number: 96
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Saturday, February 18, 2006 - 3:29 am: |
|
Just an observation: originally the story was the conservation was an issue of personal virtue (isn't that what Cheney said?). In that world, circa 2000-2001, global warming was an interesting theory but the jury was still out and why make all that expensive change if the scientist are dead wrong.
Then, the story changed to "gee some of this might be going on but we really can't identify the trends right now because we are in the middle of the curve. Kyoto is flawed even if we do agree that something (don't know what) is going on. But, instead of changing industry or dealing with gas mileage, recycling is a real good thing and so is moderation. Look how much can be done if we all work together?" --- solving a global problem through urging personal virtue. Quite the hippie concept.... Love is all you need....
Now,if I get this right, we have :
1) Somethings definitely is going on, but if you are NASA's top scientist on the issue we don't want you to mention it.
2) It's important so we really really really want corporations to decide for themselves how to handle this- here are the guidelines. Get back to us and tell us how its going.
3) Conservation is important, but until we can get the "lower class" to change their ways it won't matter.
I think this is the common point for all the hypocracy floating in the depleted ozone. If we don't strip ourselves of right-left thinking soon we will all be under water. And that goes both ways.
When you actually look at Kyoto, you realize it was a ridiculously flawed agreement. We were right to hesitate-- but we were not right to break away from the treaty process.
Industry seems to be spun out on their own-- there is very little govt leadership. Some industries, including mine (office furniture), are finding that market forces are making giant changes. But other industries seem to be well behind. Without govt intervention those industries will have to defer upgrades to remain competetive with others in their market. Thus, no one upgrades. Until they are given cover to make the changes and not lose market share,
profit or whatever, the changes will not get made.
Huge changes have been made to how we handle waste in our own lives. Remember littering when you were a kid? Never see it now. Recycling? Didn't know the meaning of the word growing up.
Conservation does a lot but not near enough. Cheney is right, it is a personal virtue but I think govt has a role in mandating it as a corporate virtue.
The problem is complex-- there is more than one answer.
|
Scrotis Lo Knows
Citizen
Username: Scrotisloknows
Post Number: 758
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, February 18, 2006 - 12:23 pm: |
|
Innisowen-read from the beginning...you only seems to be reading only what you want to read...no surprise there...
Tulip-oh, nevermind, trying to drill anything into your obtuse existence is becoming a bore... |
Andrew N de la Torre
Citizen
Username: Delatorre
Post Number: 448
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, February 18, 2006 - 12:35 pm: |
|
SLK's remarks on "class" differences is a classic case of bigotry by assuming not have a high income automatically implies being of a low class . The use of "class" implies more than income.
What class does SLK consider the construction company or Pizzaria owner with a 6th grade education who might live in a town like Randolph NJ?
How would he estimate their conservation efforts to minimize global warming or use of mass transit?
Indeed, those in the lower income range tend to use mass transit more frequently because even if they could commute to, say Manhattan, parking costs would be prohibitive.
The big problem we face is our government subsidizes roads for cars far more than infrastructure for mass transit. |
Scrotis Lo Knows
Citizen
Username: Scrotisloknows
Post Number: 762
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, February 18, 2006 - 2:56 pm: |
|
Andrew-
Bigotry huh? God, you got me pegged.
I grew up in a lower middle class blue collar household. My step-father, the father I never had, my best man in my wedding and one of my best friends on this melting globe (as you say it is) never finshed the 6th grade, had his own pizzeria and retired after working 30 years in a meat packing plant.
I am middle class and most likely will always be give and take. And you are right, class has nothing to do with income. I know many rich people that have no class.
I guess "class" is a no no word in the PC world....ummmm, would you preferred if I used "economically disadvantaged"?
Now Andrew (and you others that disagree with me)stop playing PC cop and listen to me, because I am only going to say this one more time.
My point is (and has been) we are ALL responsible for the state of the environment. How much money ones has is irrelevant. But some people on this board are automatically exempting, ummm, "economically disadvantaged" people only because they have no money, which is BS.
And oh, the last time I checked public buses burn fossil fuels too....
And don't worry Andrew, you can continue to sleep better at night knowing you are not one to pick on the po' people.... |
Innisowen
Citizen
Username: Innisowen
Post Number: 1556
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, February 18, 2006 - 4:52 pm: |
|
Scrotey-otey:
"My point is (and has been) we are ALL responsible for the state of the environment. How much money ones has is irrelevant. But some people on this board are automatically exempting, ummm, "economically disadvantaged" people only because they have no money, which is BS."
Congratulations for, at least once, writing a clear, unequivocal, well thought out sentence...
...Except for one phrase ("and has been"). You may mean it but you sure have a mysterious way of trying to say it.
Please, please, get those neocortex cells, even if you have to go on E-bay to do it because the problem is:
I read what you actually write, not what you intended to write but failed to write, and not what you thought you said but didn't say. |
Andrew N de la Torre
Citizen
Username: Delatorre
Post Number: 449
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, February 18, 2006 - 5:41 pm: |
|
SLK said
"I am doing my part, go bother other people...especially the lower classes that don't give two shats about the environment"
You make a huge assumption/generalization; however, no one here is excusing any income bracket from being responsible about resources use.
Face it if you can afford to live in Maplewood, your above middle income, you maybe of a lower class, but not middle income.
So what your point about buses burning fossil fuels? Mass transit is still more resource efficient than a single passenger in a car or in the case of too many, a SUV. |
tulip
Citizen
Username: Braveheart
Post Number: 3212
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, February 18, 2006 - 6:17 pm: |
|
SLK. What's really ironic about your class point is that it's the mine owners, factory owners, railroad builders of the pre-income tax days (filthy rich,of course); and the CEOs of multinationals and mills and other large scale polluters who are the "upper-class" major polluters of the past 100 years or so. The effect is cumulative. The poor have had to live in the miserable towns and villages and cities, acquiring asthma and cancer and other diseases from the toxins perpetrated on them by the rich business owners, who never tried to clean up their mess until the government forced them to.
Face it. Have you got it twisted!!!
|
Scrotis Lo Knows
Citizen
Username: Scrotisloknows
Post Number: 767
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, February 18, 2006 - 6:31 pm: |
|
Innisowen-
I see you found yet another nifty way of taking swipes at your opponent' intelligence level.
Socratically speaking I am the smartest SOB in the universe.
It is a shame you are not...
-SLK |
Scrotis Lo Knows
Citizen
Username: Scrotisloknows
Post Number: 768
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, February 18, 2006 - 6:44 pm: |
|
Tulip-see my previous post above re: you. ATt least you can do is join us in the 21st century.
Andrew-I agree I may be making generalizations but you may also be looking at it in only one way.
Even if the "ED" would like to participate in inititatives to preserve the environment alot of times those measures are out of their grasp economically speaking.
In other words they cannot afford it.
And since they are struggling their priorities are way different then yours and mine.
If they have the choice of either paying the PSEG bill or installing solar panels on their housing which do you think they are going to do?
These are choices you and I do not have to worry about.
It is great that you and your friends are willing to take the extra steps to do such things (solar panels, etc.) but you speak as if everyone can when the truth is the exact opposite.
The environment is a topic of "educated" individuals, another factor you cannot overlook.
All I know if I was struggling financially, the last thing I am going to worry about is the environment. Whether that is right or wrong is for us to judge...
The only reason I can afford Maplewood is because I live "over SA" and Brooklyn RE was good to my family, thank God! |
tulip
Citizen
Username: Braveheart
Post Number: 3213
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, February 18, 2006 - 7:20 pm: |
|
SLK: Don't tell me I'm antiquated when you can't even accept the human role in global warming. That's not just backward. It's neolithic.
Thanks,
Bye |
Innisowen
Citizen
Username: Innisowen
Post Number: 1559
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, February 18, 2006 - 7:32 pm: |
|
Scrotey-otey:
With all due respect, you wouldn't recognize Socrates if he walked up to you and p---ed all over your shoes.
And I'm confident that you'd recognize the Socratic method even less.
And my swipes, as you call them, are merely observations of your demonstrated lack of syntax, grammar, logic, and context. |
Scrotis Lo Knows
Citizen
Username: Scrotisloknows
Post Number: 770
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, February 18, 2006 - 8:19 pm: |
|
Innisowen the Sophist,
I am glad to see you a frazzled.
I owe my philosophy degree to Socrates and I am speaking about more than the socratic method.
Sorry it went over your jesuit head.
-SLK |
Scrotis Lo Knows
Citizen
Username: Scrotisloknows
Post Number: 771
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, February 18, 2006 - 8:36 pm: |
|
tulip-
I can accept the human role in GW. Can you remotely accept that it may vary?
Stop peeking at the Greenpeace websites and answer the last question on your own. What do YOU think?
I know one thing for sure; I won't accept anything a left wing hack like yourself states as though it is the final word on the subject.
-SLK |
Innisowen
Citizen
Username: Innisowen
Post Number: 1563
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, February 18, 2006 - 9:10 pm: |
|
Scrotey:
sorry, but I'm a stoic as far as "ancient" philosophy goes, and really more of a student of the works of Martin Heidegger.
Never yet been accused of sophistry, especially by one who is one, until your 8:19 PM posting.
Sorry that your philosophical and historical underpinnings are so frail. Makes me question, once again, your entire point of view. |
Madden 11
Citizen
Username: Madden_11
Post Number: 814
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, February 19, 2006 - 12:06 am: |
|
So one of MOL's resident right-wingers has at last allowed that global warming might be caused in part by human activity...but mostly by poor people?
GOP Man, is that you?
But I have notice more often than not that they rather (and do) throw everything out than recycle and find the most impractical vehicles considering where they live. I've have seen lower class people drive one block to the store one too many times.
I would like to hear the following:
1) Approximately how much time do you spend observing people throwing their trash out?
2) How much time do you spend tracking people's one-block trips to the store?
3) How do you determine the economic status of those people?
From the paragraph above, it sounds like you've made quite a serious study of this...please enlighten us as to your methodology (and source of funding, since it sounds like full-time work at least!)
|
notehead
Supporter
Username: Notehead
Post Number: 3054
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Sunday, February 19, 2006 - 11:14 am: |
|
SLK, I think you've painted yourself into a corner. Sure, everyone contributes to the production of greenhouse gas to some degree, but it's pretty clear that this is generally proportionate to the amount of money people have.
People with less money tend to use more public transportation.
People with less money tend buy fewer luxury items that have exponentially more "embedded energy" in them.
People with less money tend to live in smaller dwellings, with lower energy requirements.
People with less money tend to have fewer appliances, like air conditioners and dishwashers.
Et cetera.
In short, the amount of greenhouse gas production caused by the "haves" is FAR greater than that caused by the "have nots." |
Scrotis Lo Knows
Citizen
Username: Scrotisloknows
Post Number: 775
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, February 19, 2006 - 6:37 pm: |
|
Oh my god, this is getting bloody freaking ridiculous.
How can I say this more simply?
Regardless of how much, we ALL contribute to the dedegration of the environment.
Just because the EDs do it less, they should not be completely exonerated as a result.
Thus, we are ALL responsible to fix the problem.
Got that? It is ok to hold the EDs responsible for some things people.
Innisowen-Did extensive Graduate Studies of Heidegger's "Being & Time"....eh....
In my opinion, after many years of study, ALL philosophy begins and end with Socrates. Except for a few sporadic others throughout history (hegel, etc.), most philosophers, as Schopenhaur said, are a bunch of "windbags" |
tjohn
Supporter
Username: Tjohn
Post Number: 4065
Registered: 12-2001
| | Posted on Sunday, February 19, 2006 - 7:04 pm: |
|
Schopenhauer |
Scrotis Lo Knows
Citizen
Username: Scrotisloknows
Post Number: 778
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, February 19, 2006 - 7:22 pm: |
|
my goof... |
Innisowen
Citizen
Username: Innisowen
Post Number: 1569
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, February 19, 2006 - 9:39 pm: |
|
Scrotey:
You did? I really couldn't tell.
"Sein und Zeit" was complex, and my German always sucked. But I liked "Holzwege." Ever read it?
Per your posting above: "ALL philosophy begins and end with Socrates. Except for a few sporadic others throughout history (hegel, etc.)"
All philosophy may begin with Socrates, if that's what your course syllabus said.
I have some respect for the early Ionians: Thales, Anaximander, Anaximenes, and the Pythagoreans as well. They used whatever intellectual tools they had at their disposal before Socrates and Aristotle, wouldn't you say, Scrotey?
Hell, even Hegel had to admit that Indian philosophers probably predated the Greeks, even though he was convinced they mixed their philosophy and their religion.
What did your studies say about that?
|
Scrotis Lo Knows
Citizen
Username: Scrotisloknows
Post Number: 779
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, February 19, 2006 - 10:17 pm: |
|
Innis-
Oh leave me alone you jesuit goof...just got done watching "Cinderella Man" and I am all teary-eyed....what a great freaking flick....
-SLK |
Foj
Citizen
Username: Foger
Post Number: 969
Registered: 9-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, February 19, 2006 - 10:52 pm: |
|
YOU SLK-- sometimes you just go overboard. This time you have gone too far.
Heres just one example--
Take this ignorant brilliant bigoted dumbassed comment.
"And oh, the last time I checked public buses burn fossil fuels too...."
Lets compare 30 to 50 people riding a 500 horsepower Bus -- vs. a Soccer Mom driving a 280 horse SUV.
DO the BTU's your self. Or you could just shut up.
Stop behaving like an asswipe.
|
Innisowen
Citizen
Username: Innisowen
Post Number: 1571
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, February 19, 2006 - 11:08 pm: |
|
Scrotey:
Unfortunately, I have to agree with Foj.
There's all air and no substance in anything you post. Or as certain Texans might say it: "you're all hat and no cattle."
Too bad. You "coulda bin a contendah." But no dice. Charlie didn't stop you. You did. |
Foj
Citizen
Username: Foger
Post Number: 972
Registered: 9-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, February 19, 2006 - 11:21 pm: |
|
Innis-- sometimes SLK makes a cogent point-- sometimes he goes OFF THE DEEP end. And says shitt that a 7th grade science class would know better than SLK. But its like hes stuck in gear, and his foot cant press the clutch in to coast to a stop. I honestly think SLK doesnt know hes gone too far, until its too late. Like a certain thread
about warrantless wiretaps.
Sometimes the rational brain catch's up. Somtimes SLK makes an utter fool of himself- all by himself.
SLK-- put the tranny in neutral and chill bro-- just chill . . . . |
Scrotis Lo Knows
Citizen
Username: Scrotisloknows
Post Number: 780
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Monday, February 20, 2006 - 11:21 am: |
|
FOJ/Innis-
I am completely devastated you both feel this way, especially you Innis...sniffle...At least Foj allows some benefit of the doubt.
You know, my wife is right about this board. Why do I waste so much time debating issues with other opinionated individuals? I mean, that is the only type of people that show up on these type of boards, right? Overly opinionated individuals like myself that would never stray from their beliefs even if they are misguided.
All we have is the usual suspects taking the usual positions. Where is the challenge in that? Too bad this board isn't the lottery. I would be loaded.
I tried to raise the bar on the abortion debate before it got muddled in the same old same old pro-choice/anti-choice rut in a matter of minutes. I may overstepped myself on the warrantless wiretaps issues, but unlike most of you, I realize there is a bigger constitutional issue going on here then "Bush is right/wrong".
I have alot of respect for many of you posters but all I know is I am bored and need to take a hiatus for a while. Kudos and Adieu....
-SLK
PS. foj-I still stand by my bus comment no matter how "dumbass" or "bigoted" you think it is...how you came up with the latter I will never know. |
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page