Heartland

Now i never would've thought i find someone from women's movement to advertize but i must admit what she says seems rather interesting.

http://www.womensgroup.org/CAPITALIZING ... -GREEN.htm

It is 1984, my friends. And it's nothing compared to what 1985 will be.

If mainstream politics is going green, that's a good enough reason for me to go grey.

itnAklipse wrote:Now i never would've thought i find someone from women's movement to advertize but i must admit what she says seems rather interesting.

I'm firmly in support of women's movement

.

.

.

.

.

.

I hate it when they just lie there.

itnAklipse wrote:Now i never would've thought i find someone from women's movement to advertize but i must admit what she says seems rather interesting.

http://www.womensgroup.org/CAPITALIZING ... -GREEN.htm

It is 1984, my friends. And it's nothing compared to what 1985 will be.

If mainstream politics is going green, that's a good enough reason for me to go grey.

summarize - early in the morning - , too lazy to read and no pictures to look at

paint it black wrote: summarize - early in the morning - , too lazy to read and no pictures to look at

You posted that at 1.27pm Ez

smiscandlon wrote:

itnAklipse wrote:Now i never would've thought i find someone from women's movement to advertize but i must admit what she says seems rather interesting.

I'm firmly in support of women's movement

.

.

.

.

.

.

I hate it when they just lie there.

"Any woman who wants to chain herself to my railings and suffer a jet movement gets my vote."
Lord Flasheart.

PIB: The gist of the article is that we, or rather at least you brits, will soon pay for (y)our irresponsible wasting of natural resources by being alive.

Here where i live, summer cottages will already have to adapt to using expensive methods of disposing with entirely natural product, human waste, and they are driving ideas in Europe (at least in France, Sarkoszy rules!) that people's wells need to be metered, by the privately own water companies, and they shall have to pay for using water under their lots. And these are just small small examples of what i've heard.
i'd suggest that if there's a problem with the water underground, it might have something to do with the way they .. i don't know how to say it in english, they make those artificial ditches etc on countryside, and cities with asphalt and concrete hardly promote natural waterflow either. Maybe these things should've been thought of beforehand.

Also i'd say that before we go to extreme measure of punishing people for being alive, we might want to consider NOT turning thousands of hectares of nature into golf courses and football fields and shopping centres...after that's NOT done, then if there's still some problems with nature, let's see other solutions.
But, these things that really rape our Earth are all in the interest of making money so, ugh.

In the meantime, the few scientists who suggest that global warming might be a natural phenomena, whoever promised that earth's climate was steady? it never was!, an issue rather than a problem, are silenced and ridiculed, much in the same way Galileo was ridiculed in his time. (That essay doesn't go into all of these details but talks about the agenda and suggests that we are headed towards new feudalism).

All this talk about individuals wasting natural resources sounds to me like utter garbage when i walk into a grocery store and have to look at an entire wall full of different sorts of potato chips. That's where the waste is, in production. And whatever the consumers waste, it's been first fed to them by corporations. Like this craze with cellphones, most people i know of change their phones many times a year. Is it really useful to talk about someone grilling too much when this kind of idiotic behaviour is advertized and encouraged and deemed socially acceptable?

Uhh, what an incoherent rant this turned out to be.

Anyway, if Al Gore promotes something, i think it's pretty effin safe to say there might be a rotting fish buried somewhere close by.

And btw, the amount by which taxes or allowances will reduce any consumption is not going to be much...people will simply pay more and nothing of nature is saved. It's a no-starter as an idea. Which will not be acknowledged by politicians made fat by lobbyists from businessworld.

boudicca wrote:

paint it black wrote: summarize - early in the morning - , too lazy to read and no pictures to look at

You posted that at 1.27pm Ez

details you never answered my question, who is impotent?

itnAklipse wrote:PIB: The gist of the article is that we, or rather at least you brits, will soon pay for (y)our irresponsible wasting of natural resources by being alive.

Here where i live, summer cottages will already have to adapt to using expensive methods of disposing with entirely natural product, human waste, and they are driving ideas in Europe (at least in France, Sarkoszy rules!) that people's wells need to be metered, by the privately own water companies, and they shall have to pay for using water under their lots. And these are just small small examples of what i've heard.

In the meantime, the few scientists who suggest that global warming might be a natural phenomena, whoever promised that earth's climate was steady? it never was!, an issue rather than a problem, are silenced and ridiculed, much in the same way Galileo was ridiculed in his time. (That essay doesn't go into all of these details but talks about the agenda and suggests that we are headed towards new feudalism).

All this talk about individuals wasting natural resources sounds to me like utter garbage when i walk into a grocery store and have to look at an entire wall full of different sorts of potato chips. That's where the waste is, in production. And whatever the consumers waste, it's been first fed to them by corporations. Like this craze with cellphones, most people i know of change their phones many times a year. Is it really useful to talk about someone grilling too much when this kind of idiotic behaviour is advertized and encouraged and deemed socially acceptable?

Uhh, what an incoherent rant this turned out to be.

Anyway, if Al Gore promotes something, i think it's pretty effin safe to say there might be a rotting fish buried somewhere close by.

summarize further please - , too lazy to read and no pictures to look at, does it have anything to do with victoria beckham being a nazi

Dei: If you're trying to deny anthropogenic global warming, you're in very dodgy company. The only serious doubts are about how bad it's going to get (ranging from very bad to catastrophic); the only people still denying it's happening at all are shills of the oil companies.

While it's true that there are natural variations in the Earth's climate, the changes that have already happened because of CO2 generated by humans massively swamps any underlying natural variation. Without anthropogenic CO2 we would be heading back towards another ice age.

Edit to add: Anyone who defends an alternative to established scientific consensus with the "Galileo was persecuted too" motif earns 40 points on the crackpot index.

itnAklipse wrote:incoherent rant

Not really.

But to summarise further for PIB:

Humans ... f**king failure of a species.

smiscandlon wrote:Humans ... f**king failure of a species.

"I’m tired of this back-slapping ‘Isn’t humanity neat?’ s**t. We’re a virus with shoes, okay? That’s all we are."
Bill Hicks

smiscandlon wrote:

itnAklipse wrote:incoherent rant

Not really.

But to summarise further for PIB:

Humans ... f**king failure of a species.

....care to expand just a little bit further

Anyone for a pint?

aye

markfiend wrote:Edit to add: Anyone who defends an alternative to established scientific consensus with the "Galileo was persecuted too" motif earns 40 points on the crackpot index.

I would expect such a response from a hidebound reactionary like you.

I'm not convinced by the "we're to blame for everything" argument, we've had Hot & Cold periods since the Big Bang.

http://www.climatecrisis.net/

A father is in court to stop this film being shown in his kids school.

Should it be shown?

ah. so it's about global warming.

bring it on i say, i live on hill and London and East Anglia is gonna sink under the sea, so who cares...not i

itnAklipse wrote:Now i never would've thought i find someone from women's movement to advertize but i must admit what she says seems rather interesting.

http://www.womensgroup.org/CAPITALIZING ... -GREEN.htm

It is 1984, my friends. And it's nothing compared to what 1985 will be.

If mainstream politics is going green, that's a good enough reason for me to go grey.

i just read this, it's total bollox

people will be 'taxed' in certain areas of their lives to encourage them to be adopters to innovations developed in the 70s and now ready for market. global warming was predicted as a 'brand name' in the K-waves developed late 50's early 60's. simple as that.

if people wanted to cheaply save the planet [which i don't believe would be very good for any economy] they would simply encourage the growth of lower level organisms such as plankton which would remove Co2, but they don't chose to and so we're f**ked.......i blame the stinky farting cows myself

The thing about Scientists is they can & do get things wrong, at School ('81/'86) we were told that by 2010 Half the World population would be dead because the O Zone would so depleted that everyone would have skin Cancer, and that One Third of the population would have HIV/AIDS. Today, Scientists Totem is "The Climate", for every One that believes in artificial warming there seems to be another that doesn't, One says the Sea will rise by 30 Feet, another says it'll only be 1.5 Feet, each say the other is wrong.
Maybe I'm just a synical auld Sod but it was only few years ago Scientists told the Farming Community that it was perfectly safe to feed animal offal to Cattle...................Scientists said that.

As markfiend sort of said, for enough money you'll find a scientist to say whatever the hell you want.

...i blame the stinky farting cows myself[/quote]

In that case, let's get rid of them. More Hamburgers please!

Nixon wrote:More Hamburgers please!

Mmmmm. Dead cow on a bun...

Hmmm Keef when it comes to global warming, I think it's more the case that those who are denying it are a fairly small minority... just a particularly vocal and media-savvy minority. Far be it from me to say "crackpots"... oops I just did
Also take into account the vested interests involved - a lot of people stand to lose a hell of a lot of money if we did all go green... it's also a view that we'd all quite like to hear. "Go on living just as you are, the world was going to get hotter anyway". Who doesn't want to be let off the hook? I think this has a lot to do with the amount of airtime these guys are getting, nothing to do with them actually having the weight of scientific evidence behind them or anything silly like that...

boudicca wrote:Hmmm Keef when it comes to global warming, I think it's more the case that those who are denying it are a fairly small minority...

That's it...............who says I'm wrong & you're right, I can just as easily say the opposite.
I'm not convinced...............open minded, but unconvinced.

Oil companies make money saying it's not happening, media whores, Al Gore etc, make money and get the media attention they so desperately crave to farther their political/musical/acting careers by jumping on the current fashionable politically correct band wagon by quoting a "few highly vocal" Scientists who claim they are on the correct side of the argument, everybody is using this for their own agenda.