Curse

ensoriki · Dec 12, 2007, 09:24 PM // 21:24

native indians are always pushed away.

At the grassy meadows reserve, there is methyl mercury in the water that makes tons of them then sick and any surviving member has buried at least one family member. Another problem is this stupid dumping of shit in water thats going around world wide.

Many countries industrialize and many are looking for places to dump crap.
Global Warming may be a problem, but water is getting more important.

Onarik Amrak · Dec 12, 2007, 09:30 PM // 21:30

Water shortage is pwning Australia.

There have been water restrictions in Eastern Australia for quite some time now.

It's not good...

Lucky Canada has so much fresh water.

Psyko · Dec 12, 2007, 09:36 PM // 21:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by OI-812

They're fools. But it's not like anyone can stop them. The fact that they haven't become industrialized until now tells me something about the worth of their land/its resources/its people. Bunch of squabbling tribals/religious zealots/anarchists/ethnicities in the middle of a blood feud in a country with little real worth in terms of harvestable, exportable and marketable resources and/or bearing the scars of mankind's ravages (even when there's barely anything to screw up, people will find a way to screw even that little bit up).

Survival of the fittest doesn't stop at the rest of the animal kingdom. Adapt or die. These countries have taken too long to adapt, for whatever reason. If we're cleaning our act up, then quite frankly they should be shut down. Let the ones who have busted their balls for centuries in the name of progress run the show. Migrate to a REAL country/annex yourself to a real country or get rid of the factories/machinery/whatever producing this great amount of pollution and rot in your mud huts and particle-board and corrugated tin ghettos. A lot of the time the only thing holding people back is THEMSELVES.

i believe you are forgetting the fact that the now industrialized countries did that to the lesser ones. Way back in that time when the big league countries were colonizing they exploited their colonies, using their recourses for their own use and thusly stunting the colonies' growth. Once the colony was freed it was behind, therefor it is the fault of the country that originally colonized it.

However i will agree with what you said, "global warming" is a myth. There is no solid evidence for it, and very strong evidence to the contrary. The fact is that its just a cycle and we are simply in a warmer period. I bet by now your asking "ok where is your evidence"... well quite frankly im not the one with it. But you show me your studies and solid numerical evidence that it IS happening and i will respond in kind.

as for the OP... well its the lead countries fault, we cant blame a lesser industrialized country for wanting what we have, and that is a better standard in just about everything.

wetsparks · Dec 12, 2007, 10:01 PM // 22:01

Actually we are in a strange time in the solar system, the sun is burning a bit hotter that normal, and the earth's orbit is elongated a bit that usually means cooler weather. guess the sun is winning out.

OI-812 · Dec 13, 2007, 12:05 AM // 00:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Psyko

i believe you are forgetting the fact that the now industrialized countries did that to the lesser ones. Way back in that time when the big league countries were colonizing they exploited their colonies, using their recourses for their own use and thusly stunting the colonies' growth. Once the colony was freed it was behind, therefor it is the fault of the country that originally colonized it.

So basically, it all adds up to what I've been telling people for so long...

If there's something wrong in the world right now, chances are good it's because of the damn Europeans. The British, the Spanish, the Dutch, the Portuguese, the French...

Blame the Euros. Really.

ensoriki · Dec 13, 2007, 12:57 AM // 00:57

Okay so we bomb up europe.
Now we have a nuclear holocaust. Isn't that pleasant?

Whats also problematic is that some countries are over-breeding a lot.
China and india both sitting at over 1 billion people, means a grand total of 2 billion people with just those 2 countries put together.
Its easy to take 3 countries and not have that amount of people.
More people means more pressure for resources, and even more reason for industrialization.

More laws need to be put on fertility in general. The fact that many countries have so much people is reason for problems.

Onarik Amrak · Dec 13, 2007, 03:22 AM // 03:22

China does have laws. Except they led to huge gender discrimination, and now they have a shortage of girls.

India on the other hand has no such thing, and their population is expected to eclipse China's in the next few decades.

wetsparks · Dec 13, 2007, 05:12 AM // 05:12

The abundance of males in China makes many people wonder if China may be more aggressive in the military front. All those men, not enough women, would cause civil unrest and one way of evening those numbers out is go to war with someone. And the coastal cities of India which are wealthier than the inland cities the population is stable, but in the poorer areas people have lots of kids to support them in the later part of their life hoping that some will survive and that leads to a large population increase, especially if lots of the children survive as all those people will go on to have lots of kids to support them.

OI-812 · Dec 13, 2007, 06:34 AM // 06:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by Onarik Amrak

India on the other hand has no such thing, and their population is expected to eclipse China's in the next few decades.

Having a baby girl in India is considered poor fortune in some areas, what with things like dowrys and family names and other medieval crap that the Hindus still haven't kicked to the curb.

Muspellsheimr · Dec 13, 2007, 06:39 AM // 06:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by OI-812

Possibly. Happening as we speak, if you subscribe to Al Gore's view of the situation.

To some extent global "warmings" and "coolings" or "dimmings" are part of a natural cycle. I've heard it said that we think far too highly of ourselves when we say that we could be causing significant damage to an ecosystem that has been functioning for billions of years, and has gone through plenty of change without our help. Personally, I think it's irresponsible to assume that there's no way we could really be doing any significant damage, but I also think it's patently absurd to assume that we're COMPLETELY responsible for the changes the planet is undergoing. This planet has been doing an ecological dance for some time now, and we only very recently in the scale of things cut in. We're fools if we think we can actually stop and/or reverse some of the stuff that's happening - that would be like trying to wrest control of a bus' steering wheel from a Olympic weightlifter. We can kind of "nudge" it subtly to make it take a slightly more favorable course, but nature's at the wheel, and she isn't going to ride shotgun with US at the wheel. It would be like putting a 8-month old in the driver's seat.

While it is true the earth has environmental cycles it goes through over the centuries, I believe it is reasonable to assume we are indeed by far the most significant cause of current global warming.

I don't have the actual chart at the moment, unfortunately, so the following is simply an example. However, it is accurate enough to get the point across. Over centuries/mellinium, the earth goes through a cycle of hot & cold climates, for this purpose we will say alternating between 1 (cold) and 2 (hot). Recently (starting at the beginning of major industrialization), there has been in increase in the hot cycle (aka global warming). Currently, we are somewhere around 5 or 6 on the chart, and increasing.

One of the major factors of America's pollution also comes from it's airlines. On the days following 9-11, while the aircraft where grounded, there was a significant decrease in the temperature over the continent.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ensoriki

native indians are always pushed away.

slightly confused here. Are you talking about Indians, or Native Americans? They are very different peoples, on entirely separate continents.

People referring to Native Americans as Indians has always annoyed me.

OI-812 · Dec 13, 2007, 07:15 AM // 07:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Muspellsheimr

People referring to Native Americans as Indians has always annoyed me.

Some Indians don't like being called Native Americans - the place THEY lived in wasn't called America, not until the Europeans came.

quickmonty · Dec 13, 2007, 11:53 AM // 11:53

Anyone remember the late 60's and early 70's when the scientific world was concerned with global cooling? There was even talk of dumping ashes on the polar caps to increase the amount of sunlight absorbed.

"The sky is falling!" ~Chicken Little

Jeremy Untouchable · Dec 13, 2007, 03:09 PM // 15:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by ensoriki

Okay so we bomb up europe.
Now we have a nuclear holocaust. Isn't that pleasant?

Whats also problematic is that some countries are over-breeding a lot.
China and india both sitting at over 1 billion people, means a grand total of 2 billion people with just those 2 countries put together.
Its easy to take 3 countries and not have that amount of people.
More people means more pressure for resources, and even more reason for industrialization.

More laws need to be put on fertility in general. The fact that many countries have so much people is reason for problems.

Are you saying stupid people shouldnt be allowed to breed?

lakatz · Dec 13, 2007, 03:21 PM // 15:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by ensoriki

...Some countries believe they can go through polluting, because they did not industrialize before. As these countries did not industrialize and make the mistake of polluting earlier, they believe they can do it now, when everyone is trying to patch the mistakes of the past...

First of all, not everyone in any given country have the same beliefs about the environment, so to say "countries believe" is a giant generalization and misstatement.

I'll use the US as an example. Our president did not go to United Nations climate conference this month in Bali and, according to several observers including Al Gore, his delegation is trying to block their solutions for climate change. Al Gore, however, went carrying petitions signed by many thousands of US cititzens stating that our president does not represent the views of all US citizens and we (I and the other people who signed the petitions) support their efforts. moveon.org and avaaz.org took petitions to Bali as well.

Second of all, it would be really helpful if you name the countries, cite examples, quote (not paraphrase) the statements to which you are referring and attribute them to the appropriate people.

Third of all, I don't understand why you would ask people to pass critical judgment about anything rather than provide solutions when namecalling doesn't serve any purpose other than devisiveness and is something we're supposed to grow out of.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22183032/
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/W...ow/2618653.cms
http://www.spiegel.de/international/...523027,00.html

ensoriki · Dec 13, 2007, 10:03 PM // 22:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeremy Untouchable

Are you saying stupid people shouldnt be allowed to breed?

Not in that paragraph I didn't
.....but maybe they shouldn't =P, I think I classify as stupid.

[card]
I'll use the US as an example. Our president did not go to United Nations climate conference this month in Bali and, according to several observers including Al Gore, his delegation is trying to block their solutions for climate change. Al Gore, however, went carrying petitions signed by many thousands of US cititzens stating that our president does not represent the views of all US citizens and we (I and the other people who signed the petitions) support their efforts. moveon.org and avaaz.org took petitions to Bali as well. [/card]
Even if Global warming IS a myth, it doesn't excuse pollution, which we know is a problem

Also part of the problem of the other countries industrializing.
They use cheap old methods, which are worse than modern (expensive) methods.

azzer20 · Dec 13, 2007, 11:17 PM // 23:17

I do not believe in the enviroment, it's so overpowered it need nerf!

no for real i don't care and couldn't care less, if some one wanna feel bad about the enviroment let them, they can do the dirty job mwuhahaha

ensoriki · Dec 14, 2007, 01:35 AM // 01:35

um okay.............then... azzer

Onarik Amrak · Dec 14, 2007, 02:15 AM // 02:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeremy Untouchable

Are you saying stupid people shouldnt be allowed to breed?

Eliminating stupid people would be good for humanity.

There's a difference between uneducated (not by choice) and idiocy.

Has anyone seen the movie Idiocracy with Luke Wilson?

lakatz · Dec 14, 2007, 02:25 AM // 02:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by Onarik Amrak

Eliminating stupid people would be good for humanity.

There's a difference between uneducated (not by choice) and idiocy.

Has anyone seen the movie Idiocracy with Luke Wilson?

Yup. And that's the first thing I thought of when I saw the question, "Are you saying stupid people shouldnt be allowed to breed?"

Accursed · Dec 14, 2007, 04:19 AM // 04:19

Once Bush (he's like.. like... something) gets out of office, I think the U.S. can pay the debts over time, clean up the country a bit, get the hell out of Iraq, and do some other major damage support.

As for the other countries with over-crowded populations... they should make a law (this may be bad, but in my opinion, IS NEEDED) where people can only have a certain amount of babies. Like 3 would be good, and people would understand is you accidently had sextuplets or something..