Norinco Luger

ithacaartist · 11-12-2011, 11:09 AM

Guys, I'd rather listen to scientists than politicians. Science is the best tool we have for exploring reality. How about the reality of finite resources? How about he reality of the global ecosystem? How about the reality of human nature? No, it is impossible to vote one reality out and another in; we're stuck with the one we have. All 7 billion of us cannot live even a "moderate European" lifestyle, bottom line. All the easy stuff has been mined, grown and harvested, and pretty much used up. The earth will likely yield no additional oil beyond what we can squeeze out of shale and sand. Perhaps for the best, as this will slow our headlong race to ecocide. The Easter Islanders did it to themselves, cutting down literally every tree, to die starving and in turmoil. The Anasazi did it, deforesting what was a wooded savanna to create a desert--simply to provide themselves with lodge poles.

I've often perceived humanity as being similar to a biological culture in a petri dish. Yeah, it will grow and thrive for a while in its closed system, but will inevitably run out of nutrients and drown in its own waste. I guess the upside of our using up the last sip of petroleum and the last lump of coal would be that we could no longer produce greenhouse gasses, thereby ending most of the progress of anthropomorphic global warming. The concept one might do well to keep in mind is that, as a species, we are not immune to the process of extinction.

The Platinum Rule says we should do nothing to others that we would not want done to ourselves. The essence of this is one of restraint, not personal, subjective judgment. It eliminates the loopholes left by the Golden Rule.

I would tend to avoid throwing out the baby with its bath water. Bureaucratic entities sometimes have their roots in science and reality. What do we do with those who can, and do, dump nasty crap into the air, soil, and water that does us ALL harm? How about those that imperil the lives and long term health of their workers, simply for the benefit of their own bottom line? Remember, the Chinese had to shut down their industry in order for those attending the games to be able to breathe, or even see the sun. I'm not particularly convinced that the Chinese have hit upon the most effective approach to economics, overall. And I'm not so sure that we Americans have lost much of anything. It's all in how one draws the line, if there really is one, between extremes. And this in itself is very, very subjective.

Education is the key to it all. (NY does not have free university education. SUNY charges tuition and fees, just like any other, albeit at a slightly reduced rate.) Earthlings are as smart now as we have ever been; education gives the tools to begin solving problems. While understanding more about the world around us increases every day, so do our chances of ensuring the survival of the whole deal--the Terrestrial Ecosystem. I should say, "survival as we know it," because after we've poisoned ourselves from the face of the planet, the planet will do just fine, continuing its processes and phenomena without us. The comedian Dane Cook did a short thing, an impression of what the Earth might be thinking: He vigorously brushed his arms and shoulders with opposite hands, saying, "Get this stuff off of me!"

OK, I'm with Jerry, enough for today. Deer season starts one week from today, here in the Southern Tier of NYS.

HisSoldier · 11-12-2011, 10:56 PM

Quote:

The earth will likely yield no additional oil beyond what we can squeeze out of shale and sand.

Some geologists believe oil is being produced every day, so the finite resources argument may not work for anything except frightening people into expensive energy that costs more environmental damage than oil does.

Science does not agree about global warming being man caused either, and it's very clear to me that it's being used like a new religion of fear to deprive us of growth.

My "religion" isn't based one what so called scientists say today, which is exactly the opposite of what they said 30 years ago.

Read "Willing Accomplices" by Kent Clizbe, he is a CIA analyst who argues that PC was invented around 1920-1921 in the Soviet Union specifically to destroy America, it includes preaching self loathing (Apologizing for American "arrogance", rewriting history so everything America did was destructive and no mention of all the good American industry and marketing did for the world.) rewriting our hero founders to make them seem evil, teaching socialism in schools and depressing the value of morals instruction. It all hit around 1980 and is in full flower now.

Now, back to Norinco, a true free market believer like me says that supply and demand are the only legitimate arbitrators of who buys what, if we make garbage we deserve to lose market share, and it teaches us to do better so we can compete. But we have to get government out of our way!

nukem556 · 11-14-2011, 09:52 PM

Don't place " scientists" on a pedestal.....40 years ago, the consensus was that a new Ice Age was immininent, and according the that old hack Paul Erlich, we should have all died of starvation sometime around 1990. In this country at least, we have reached the tipping point described by Aristotle that dooms popular democracy...the majority has finally figured out that they can vote themselves a living by taking from the productive. There are parasites in housing projects that are now in the 4th generation of bleeding working people dry...the solution is to take the vote away from those who live off the productive, and sterilizing the bloodsuckers.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

11-12-2011, 11:09 AM	#1
ithacaartist Twice a Lifer Lifetime Forum Patron Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: Atop the highest hill in Schuyler County NY Posts: 3,374 Thanks: 7,447 Thanked 2,613 Times in 1,380 Posts	Guys, I'd rather listen to scientists than politicians. Science is the best tool we have for exploring reality. How about the reality of finite resources? How about he reality of the global ecosystem? How about the reality of human nature? No, it is impossible to vote one reality out and another in; we're stuck with the one we have. All 7 billion of us cannot live even a "moderate European" lifestyle, bottom line. All the easy stuff has been mined, grown and harvested, and pretty much used up. The earth will likely yield no additional oil beyond what we can squeeze out of shale and sand. Perhaps for the best, as this will slow our headlong race to ecocide. The Easter Islanders did it to themselves, cutting down literally every tree, to die starving and in turmoil. The Anasazi did it, deforesting what was a wooded savanna to create a desert--simply to provide themselves with lodge poles. I've often perceived humanity as being similar to a biological culture in a petri dish. Yeah, it will grow and thrive for a while in its closed system, but will inevitably run out of nutrients and drown in its own waste. I guess the upside of our using up the last sip of petroleum and the last lump of coal would be that we could no longer produce greenhouse gasses, thereby ending most of the progress of anthropomorphic global warming. The concept one might do well to keep in mind is that, as a species, we are not immune to the process of extinction. The Platinum Rule says we should do nothing to others that we would not want done to ourselves. The essence of this is one of restraint, not personal, subjective judgment. It eliminates the loopholes left by the Golden Rule. I would tend to avoid throwing out the baby with its bath water. Bureaucratic entities sometimes have their roots in science and reality. What do we do with those who can, and do, dump nasty crap into the air, soil, and water that does us ALL harm? How about those that imperil the lives and long term health of their workers, simply for the benefit of their own bottom line? Remember, the Chinese had to shut down their industry in order for those attending the games to be able to breathe, or even see the sun. I'm not particularly convinced that the Chinese have hit upon the most effective approach to economics, overall. And I'm not so sure that we Americans have lost much of anything. It's all in how one draws the line, if there really is one, between extremes. And this in itself is very, very subjective. Education is the key to it all. (NY does not have free university education. SUNY charges tuition and fees, just like any other, albeit at a slightly reduced rate.) Earthlings are as smart now as we have ever been; education gives the tools to begin solving problems. While understanding more about the world around us increases every day, so do our chances of ensuring the survival of the whole deal--the Terrestrial Ecosystem. I should say, "survival as we know it," because after we've poisoned ourselves from the face of the planet, the planet will do just fine, continuing its processes and phenomena without us. The comedian Dane Cook did a short thing, an impression of what the Earth might be thinking: He vigorously brushed his arms and shoulders with opposite hands, saying, "Get this stuff off of me!" OK, I'm with Jerry, enough for today. Deer season starts one week from today, here in the Southern Tier of NYS.

11-14-2011, 09:52 PM	#3
nukem556 User Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Irmo, SC Posts: 625 Thanks: 35 Thanked 168 Times in 107 Posts	Don't place " scientists" on a pedestal.....40 years ago, the consensus was that a new Ice Age was immininent, and according the that old hack Paul Erlich, we should have all died of starvation sometime around 1990. In this country at least, we have reached the tipping point described by Aristotle that dooms popular democracy...the majority has finally figured out that they can vote themselves a living by taking from the productive. There are parasites in housing projects that are now in the 4th generation of bleeding working people dry...the solution is to take the vote away from those who live off the productive, and sterilizing the bloodsuckers.