Time to act to prevent worsening global environmental deterioration, say experts

Feb 29, 2012

(PhysOrg.com) -- Saving the environment requires more action in the form of a “social avalanche”, a group of world experts has demanded.

A world-leading expert in sustainable development at the University of St Andrews has called for a re-evaluation of values in society to prevent environmental problems such as global warming worsening further.

Dr Ioan Fazey, Senior Lecturer in Sustainable Development in the School of Geography and Geoscience at the University took part in a new international study.

The research paper indicates it is time to act on the existing knowledge rather than attempt to describe the process of environmental deterioration ever more precisely.

Dr Fazey said, “We now have enough knowledge that clearly tells us that the world as we know it is likely to change dramatically in the lifetime of many of the people alive today. We also know a lot about how we need to change. Action clearly needs to occur based on good research, but it is now time for implementing serious action about what we already know rather than continuously discussing the details.”

Major assessments have shown that global environmental deterioration is getting worse, not better.

The authors of the review are an unusual alliance of scholars from a wide range of academic disciplines, including sociology, ecology, public policy and philosophy from the UK, Germany, the USA and Australia.

Global sustainability, according to the study, demands far-reaching changes in human behaviour, including a re-evaluation of the core values that underpin our growth and consumption based society.

Dr Fazey added, “Put bluntly, we know what needs to happen to work toward a more sustainable future: we know that a social avalanche is needed. The challenge now is to get it started.”

The study has been published today in the journal Frontiers in Ecology & the Environment.

Explore further: Avoiding ecosystem collapse

More information: doi:10.1890/110079

Provided by University of St Andrews

4.2 /5 (15 votes)
add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

World survey suggests major technology changes

Aug 24, 2011

A new global survey by the United Nations Department for Economic and Social Affairs (UN-DESA) suggests that a technological overhaul of production processes worldwide is needed to end poverty and avert the likely impacts ...

Plants protect from climate impacts

Aug 02, 2011

Native vegetation must be restored to protect Australia’s unique ecosystems from the impacts of climate change, according to scientists from the Australian National University.

Youth not that environmentally engaged, study shows

May 06, 2011

(PhysOrg.com) -- They’re socially engaged and represent the next generation. But young people aren’t necessarily leading guardians of the environment, a University of Alberta study shows.

Food system 'heading for crisis'

Feb 16, 2012

Australians are eating themselves to death and our food choices are one of the nation’s leading causes of environmental damage, according to a new report released today by the Public Health Association of Australia (PHAA).

Recommended for you

Avoiding ecosystem collapse

1 hour ago

From coral reefs to prairie grasslands, some of the world's most iconic habitats are susceptible to sudden collapse due to seemingly minor events. A classic example: the decimation of kelp forests when a ...

Global warming cynics unmoved by extreme weather

2 hours ago

What will it take to convince skeptics of global warming that the phenomenon is real? Surely, many scientists believe, enough droughts, floods and heat waves will begin to change minds.

New tool displays West Coast ocean acidification data

2 hours ago

Increasing carbon dioxide in the air penetrates into the ocean and makes it more acidic, while robbing seawater of minerals that give shellfish their crunch. The West Coast is one of the first marine ecosystems ...

User comments : 287

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Noumenon
2.1 / 5 (38) Feb 29, 2012
Global sustainability, according to the study, demands far-reaching changes in human behaviour, including a re-evaluation of the core values that underpin our growth and consumption based society.


More resounding proof that liberal "progressives" wish to use AGW as a foot-in-the-door to advance their socialistic engineered society, which of course means government control of every aspect of your lives,... social engineering, controlling "human behaviour".

Your scam will never work.
Noumenon
2 / 5 (36) Feb 29, 2012
Threatening outright socialism is an incredible bonehead tactic in getting free-market based countries to accept that measures need to be taken to promote clean energy use. It's already difficult to accept the cataclysmic speculative predictions of AGW, but to also require to accept socialism or even borderline communism, is impossible. Morons.
ryggesogn2
1.8 / 5 (30) Feb 29, 2012
"There is an asteroid called 2011 AG5, and if it follows the orbit scientists have plotted for it so far, there is a small, small chance that it could hit Earth in February 2040. "
http://abcnews.go...LMIcgfTp
Here is a real, documented threat.
What are the AGWites planning to do about this?
Noumenon
2 / 5 (31) Feb 29, 2012
The problem is that having watched [the 415 foot asteroid!!!] for only about half an orbit around the Sun, the scientists cannot say for certain where it will be 28 years from now.


Yet, climate scientists "can tell us" that the average global temperature is increasing by a tenth of one degree in that same time period. Gravitational theories are simply so accurate, and verified, that there is no room for BS.
Modernmystic
2.2 / 5 (33) Feb 29, 2012
When my daughter came home from school in the 6th grade she was all upset about global warming. She said her "science" teacher told her all the taxes and regulations we were going to need to stop it.

When I asked her what global warming actually was and what caused it she couldn't even give me the basic mechanism. I had a long talk with said "science" teacher and the administrator....
rubberman
3.3 / 5 (26) Feb 29, 2012
The three musketeers of the flat earth society are nervous about the end of the world as they know it...(see above)
The recommendations the authors of this article are making are voluntary and attainable. From the article- -

"Global sustainability, according to the study, demands far-reaching changes in human behaviour, including a re-evaluation of the core values that underpin our growth and consumption based society."

If the human race keeps going down this path, everything you guys fear WILL come to fruition. They aren't just talking about climate change here guys, they are talking about a skyrocketing population consuming or killing everything it needs to live, and were picking up the pace as opposed to slowing it.

"The authors of the review are an unusual alliance of scholars from a wide range of academic disciplines, including sociology, ecology, public policy and philosophy from the UK, Germany, the USA and Australia"

The above group was chosen for a reason.

ryggesogn2
1.7 / 5 (27) Feb 29, 2012
Voluntary? Where?
'Put bluntly, we know what needs to happen to work toward a more sustainable future: we know that a social avalanche is needed. The challenge now is to get it started."
"Action clearly needs to occur based on good research, but it is now time for implementing serious action about what we already know rather than continuously discussing the details."
mosahlah
2 / 5 (24) Feb 29, 2012
There's a lot of talk about how terrible, inevitable, and imminent global warming is. Until I can see one simple piece of evidence in my everyday life, I find it hard to swallow all the doom and gloom.
Noumenon
2 / 5 (31) Feb 29, 2012
@rubberface

Utter non-sense and wild speculation. The problems that face humanity cannot be pre-engineered away, they must be handled gradually in time through the natural forces of economics and population growth that exist at the time.

Given that some 55 million people died in relatively recentl history (WW II) as a direct result of a small 'minority making decisions' for the masses, and that even now the UN is incapable of even preventing mass genecide and mass starvation, .. I doubt seriously that mankind has a chance in controlling the climate or population without absolute rule over the daily lives of the masses.

That is what the above group are seeking, socialism, social engineering,.. every aspect of your life will be regulated and controlled. I don't think you understand what that means.

Since such control is counter to human nature, there's more dignity in 'going down with the ship'. No one is going to submit to it.
rubberman
2.8 / 5 (26) Feb 29, 2012
There's a lot of talk about how terrible, inevitable, and imminent global warming is. Until I can see one simple piece of evidence in my everyday life, I find it hard to swallow all the doom and gloom.


Move to Alaska.

@Nou - The above group is vying for the continued survival of the human race as a whole (long after you are gone) and trying to help those who will be most affected by the issues confronting us. The fact that your lifestyle will be diminished doesn't concern anyone who has less than you (which is the majority)...all they are saying is that we can voluntarily try to change for the better or circumstances will force us to, and at that point it won't be for the better....I'm inclined to believe the latter.
Odd you would use the Nazis as an example, they also thought their world was sustainable.....ooops.
Noumenon
1.9 / 5 (28) Feb 29, 2012
I said 55 million died, not all caused by the Nazis (whom I never mentioned).

all they are saying is that we can voluntarily try to change for the better or circumstances will force us to


As already pointed out to you, this is false representation of what the above states. They are NOT speaking in voluntary terms. They are advocating social engineering,.. socialism, control of capitalism, a fundamental change in the form of government for the west.

The idea that we're all doomed and "they" are going to save the human race is preposterous, unfounded wild speculation, and anti-capitalist political bias. This is why they continue to demand something to be done NOW. There are no alternative energy sources in existence NOW, so of course this must mean control of use, which in turn favours their political leanings.

The existent system is capitalism, and free-market, which ultimately will be the arbtrar of alternatives, not forced solutions.
Modernmystic
1.6 / 5 (25) Feb 29, 2012
There are plenty of non political purely scientific solutions to global warming...if such a thing even exists and whether it's man made or it isn't. The problem is none of those solutions are palatable to people who hold environmentalism or the state as their religion.
rubberman
3 / 5 (24) Feb 29, 2012
"I said 55 million died, not all caused by the Nazis (whom I never mentioned)."

Well, since you didn't mention them, who did you mean?

"As already pointed out to you, this is false representation of what the above states. They are NOT speaking in voluntary terms. They are advocating social engineering,.. socialism, control of capitalism, a fundamental change in the form of government for the west."

No they aren't. They are correctly pointing out that western lifestyle and the infrastructure on which it is based is unsustainable, especially for a global demographic. They are saying that intelligent decisions regarding alternatives made today will be far better than scrambling for alternatives in the future. Deal with it. This isn't about politics, it's about resource allocation, something the US doesn't have alot of but consume more than everybody. When countries decide to keep resources for their own populace...are you going to start looking for weapons of mass destruction?
Noumenon
1.7 / 5 (27) Feb 29, 2012
It is absolutely about politics, since obviously, the proposed solutions are redistribution of wealth and social engineering. Politics.

The USA has more oil (in shale) than Sadia Arabia, not to mention the vast oil sands of Canada. In fact oil is a major export of the USA right now.

The western standard of living is not a problem. Population and energy use is self regulating. When oil price goes up, use goes down, and alternatives will be able to compete. Nothing is sustainable indefinitely, but markets will adapt of their own accord to alternatives when the time is naturally appropriate. Right now, the market cannot accept alternatives because oil is still relativily cheap. You can't force alternatives into existence, nor can you artificially cause oil prices to increase without devestating effects to the economy.
Callippo
1.5 / 5 (16) Feb 29, 2012
I can't take seriously anybody, who calls for saving of life environment and for the fight with global warming, while he doesn't mention the cold fusion.
Population and energy use is self regulating. When oil price goes up, use goes down, and alternatives will be able to compete.
It actually never happened, the consumption of coal and oil grows steadily. The only thing, which can reduce the consumption of civilization is the global nuclear war, or the finding of another, cheaper source.
kaasinees
3.2 / 5 (20) Feb 29, 2012
The amount of cranks is too damn high.
Callippo
2.3 / 5 (9) Feb 29, 2012
This is how social phase transition usually appears. Claudius Nero probably mentioned the very same about first Christians, Holy Church about Illuminati, etc....
Modernmystic
1.7 / 5 (27) Feb 29, 2012
The amount of cranks is too damn high.


If by cranks you mean people who believe everyone will magically start buying hybrids/electric cars, go without lights, destroy their infrastructure, live in abject poverty, and DIE without jackboots pointing guns at their backs I agree.

Go nuclear, that would almost solve the problem....but "we" don't want to talk about THAT...do "we"...
CardacianNeverid
3.7 / 5 (25) Mar 01, 2012
There's a lot of talk about how terrible, inevitable, and imminent global warming is. Until I can see one simple piece of evidence in my everyday life, I find it hard to swallow all the doom and gloom -mosahlahTard

A lobster said the same thing as it bathed in a pot of water whose temperature was being slowly raised 1 degree at a time...
SteveMerrick
3.9 / 5 (16) Mar 01, 2012
Mosalah said "Until I can see one simple piece of evidence in my everyday life, I find it hard to swallow all the doom and gloom."

Have you not noticed how extreme weather events are now commonplace? Has the weather in your area stayed roughly the same as it was when you were a child? In my area, the weather has changed quite a lot, and we get a lot more storms and high winds than we used to.

Action on global warming is like Pascal's Wager: if we act and global warming is real, we will have saved ourselves a lot of grief; if there is no global warming, we will be much less reliant on dwindling resources of gas, oil and coal. Either way we win. No more excuse to doubt. Act now!
antialias_physorg
4.3 / 5 (17) Mar 01, 2012
It is absolutely about politics, since obviously, the proposed solutions are redistribution of wealth and social engineering. Politics.

At some point we have to get our collective heads out of the gutter and realize that ther is a physical universe out there that doesn't care diddly-squat about politics (and that is what the article is about).

If we want to survive as a species then we should realize that politics is a luxury issue - only to be indulged in once we live on a planet that is stable/safe enough for us to survive on.

But currently politicians (and a lot of the public) are so puffed up about their delusion of self-importance that they'd rather die than admit that the universe hasn't given us a guarantee on survival.
ryggesogn2
1.7 / 5 (27) Mar 01, 2012

Action on global warming is like Pascal's Wager: if we act and global warming is real, we will have saved ourselves a lot of grief; if there is no global warming, we will be much less reliant on dwindling resources of gas, oil and coal. Either way we win. No more excuse to doubt. Act now!

Depends upon the action.
Why do AGWites insist upon ONE action, more govt control of the world economy?
RitchieGuy
1.3 / 5 (25) Mar 01, 2012
rubberman says:

If the human race keeps going down this path, everything you guys fear WILL come to fruition. They aren't just talking about climate change here guys, they are talking about a skyrocketing population consuming or killing everything it needs to live, and were picking up the pace as opposed to slowing it.

[/

Common sense tells us AGW denialists that it's time to get off reliance on fossil fuels and most of us agree with that. BUT, the AGWites STILL haven't come up with viable and reliable alternative fuels and biofuels that we can all use for our cars, electricity and home heating. These 3 things are very important in a civilization. They're part of the very infrastructure that makes a civilization. I'm not asking for further proof of AGW. I'm an "agnostic" as far as believing in the religion of AGW.
So where are the alternatives to AGW? All you AGWites have to offer is fearmongering amongst children and the ignorant while pushing Socialistic agenda on rich
RitchieGuy
1.6 / 5 (26) Mar 01, 2012
(edited) Common sense tells us AGW denialists that it's time to get off reliance on fossil fuels and most of us agree with that. BUT, the AGWites STILL haven't come up with viable and reliable alternative fuels and biofuels that we can all use for our cars, electricity and home heating. These 3 things are very important in a civilization. They're part of the very infrastructure that makes a civilization. I'm not asking for further proof of AGW. I'm an "agnostic" as far as believing in the religion of AGW.
So where are the alternatives to AGW? All you AGWites have to offer is fearmongering amongst children and the ignorant while pushing a Socialistic agenda on rich countries and continuous funding of your AGW research. On the one hand, you claim that people are going to die. . .millions and billions. . death by CO2 and pollution. . .then on the other hand, you insist on abortion and live-birth murder of human babies to prevent overpopulation. The hypocrisy of AGWites is amazing.
ryggesogn2
1.7 / 5 (25) Mar 01, 2012
Sums it up quite well:
"Browns answer, according to Hofmeister: This is not logic, its California. This is simply not going to happen here."
http://www.thedai...ans.html
RitchieGuy
1.6 / 5 (24) Mar 01, 2012
Which is more important to AGWites? Is it the death of the living to diminish overpopulation, or is it the death of the unborn and newborn? Or do you want both? Would you offer up the lives of your loved ones to keep them from consuming food, inhaling Oxygen and exhaling CO2, in keeping with your worrisome overpopulation? But the main thing is: where are your alternative fuels already? Will they magically pop into existence, or do you people have a plan that doesn't consist of extortion?
Deathclock
3 / 5 (20) Mar 01, 2012
Human nature.

We are concerned with the here and now, and less concerned with the distant future. If I was politician and I could make myself an easy $100,000 by passing policy that might contribute a tiny fraction to the problem of global warming I would probably do it. Not because I am evil, but because I determine the cost/benefit ratio in personal terms, not in terms of the "human race". This is all subconscious, I am not saying I would think "yeah, fuck the environment, I don't care if the Earth is uninhabitable in 10,000 years I want MONEY"... I just wouldn't think about it period in the face of the opportunity to quickly and easily earn 100,000 dollars. The prospect of the one would cause me to not even think about the other... and even if I did I would probably rationalize it by realizing that my detrimental impact is negligible compared to the total.

This is just human nature folks, to think you would act any differently is an illusion. In fact, you do this every day...
Deathclock
2.8 / 5 (20) Mar 01, 2012
cont'd.

Unless you do everything you can to save energy at the expense of your convenience and comfort you have no business downrating that post... because it is the same thing. If you ever drive when you could walk or bike or if you ever use a dishwasher rather than washing your dishes by hand or if you ever leave your lights on when you aren't in the room then you are as guilty as the politician who takes personal gain over the environment... the only difference is the scale, not the intent or the liability.

It's easy to demonize others, it's far more difficult to take a critical look at yourself. The personal energy usage habits of john and jane doe make a far more significant effect than the evil politicians and profit motivated corporations. In fact, you buy from those corporations, enabling them to stay in business and rape the environment... you vote for those politicians and fail to remove them from office... it is YOUR fault, as much as anybody elsse's (with few exceptions)
Deathclock
2.3 / 5 (18) Mar 01, 2012
cont'd

...and there is nothing wrong with that, because it is, say it with me, HUMAN NATURE.

What we need to do is to each look at our selves and make a small change to reduce our personal energy usage... don't try to minimize it, because that is unreasonable and you won't keep it up, just make one small change. If all 6 billion or whatever of us did that it would be a far more significant effect than all of the bad government policies and evil empires combined.
Deathclock
2.8 / 5 (20) Mar 01, 2012
Which is more important to AGWites? Is it the death of the living to diminish overpopulation, or is it the death of the unborn and newborn?


Death of the unborn?

You'll have to explain that one...

(I'm kidding, you don't have to try to explain that, it is the nonsensical result of you not thinking before you speak)
RitchieGuy
1.6 / 5 (25) Mar 01, 2012
AGWite Environmentalists and bleeding hearts complain that the Black populations of Africa are dying of starvation and thirst and diseases. But isn't that what you really want. . .in order to cut back on human pollution so that you can have a planet free of excessive atmospheric CO2 for yourselves and your progeny? Perhaps you feel that too many people will limit your lifestyles to which you are accustomed. They are cramping your style and need to put an end to that. If so, then let those poor people in Africa and their children die. All over the world people are dying of hunger and thirst and disease. They breathe in and out and they consume and have more children. You can't save them and still diminish the CO2 and pollution. It's time to make a decision to let them die. It's not an easy decision, but if you're going to prevent collapse that you are predicting, then you have to let them die.
Deathclock
2.5 / 5 (18) Mar 01, 2012
The disease of partisan politics, ladies and gentlemen. It's primary symptom is the conversion from a reasonable and intelligent person into a blithering idiot with an insatiable appetite to spout propaganda at random and under inappropriate circumstances.
RitchieGuy
1.5 / 5 (22) Mar 01, 2012
Deathclock. . .there are many who would deny that the unborn are not just living tissue. The point is that the unborn ARE alive, though not conscious or aware of it. Even YOU were once a piece of living tissue and look at you now. If your mother had decided to abort you on a whim rather than a life threatening expediency, you would have been thrown in the hospital toilet and forgotten. Aren't you glad your mama wanted you enough to keep you?
Deathclock
3.1 / 5 (21) Mar 01, 2012
Deathclock. . .there are many who would deny that the unborn are not just living tissue.


Prior to consciousness a fetus is just living tissue. I am not sure when consciousness develops, but I am sure it is sometime between conception and birth.

The point is that the unborn ARE alive


Potatoes are alive. Your skin cells are alive...

though not conscious or aware of it.


Just like potatoes and your skin cells.

Even YOU were once a piece of living tissue and look at you now. If your mother had decided to abort you on a whim rather than a life threatening expediency, you would have been thrown in the hospital toilet and forgotten. Aren't you glad your mama wanted you enough to keep you?


If that alternative had occurred it wouldn't have mattered at all to ME, because I wouldn't have ever gained consciousness in order to consider it. You should ask my mother (I think she would say she is glad to have had me, but who knows rofl).
RitchieGuy
1.8 / 5 (26) Mar 01, 2012
What I've said is not in the realm of partisan politics. IF AGW exists, we will all succumb to it evenly. I just don't like the hypocrisy and the lies and the extortion that comes with it. I have offered a suggestion in another thread for an alternative biofuel and it was met with insults from certain people who couldn't seem to comprehend much of what I said. I knew it would happen because those people are not serious about finding a viable solution. They just like to complain.
RitchieGuy
1.5 / 5 (23) Mar 01, 2012
Makes me wonder now if the AGWites have made their case to the Muslim world as to overpopulation and AGW. It would be interesting to hear their answer. . .LOL Especially the radical Muslims.
Deathclock
2.9 / 5 (20) Mar 01, 2012
What I've said is not in the realm of partisan politics.


If that's true then I apologize, it sounded like it, though I may have been influenced by a recent discussion I was participating in and allowed that to cross into this one.

IF AGW exists, we will all succumb to it evenly. I just don't like the hypocrisy and the lies and the extortion that comes with it. I have offered a suggestion in another thread for an alternative biofuel and it was met with insults from certain people who couldn't seem to comprehend much of what I said.


If you have an idea for an alternative bio-fuel that you think will significantly impact the environment then the physorg article comments section is not the place to tell people about it... You should be patenting it and trying to secure investment capital.

P.S.

I'll give you a 5 to counteract the 1, since I may have been wrong in my interpretation of that post. (though it was pretty nutty and heavy with satire).
RitchieGuy
2 / 5 (21) Mar 01, 2012
"Potatoes are alive. Your skin cells are alive..."

Well, the next time I see a potato with arms and legs, peeing and pooping, I'll think of what you said.
ROFLOL LMAO

Thanks for the 5, Deathclock. . .you're a good egg. :)
RitchieGuy
1.9 / 5 (22) Mar 01, 2012
noooo. . .I'm not interested in capitalizing on that biofuel. It exists already. . .sweet sorghum. . .please look it up. What I said in the other thread that garnered insults from the lesser knowledgeable, was that sweet sorghum can be grown in the U.S. in semi-arid deserts away from human development and that has a source of water underground or from snow-capped mountain runoff. It was met with mocking and derision by the usual gang.
also the use of drip irrigation as is done on Israeli Negev desert farming kibbutzim.
Deathclock
2.9 / 5 (21) Mar 01, 2012
"Potatoes are alive. Your skin cells are alive..."

Well, the next time I see a potato with arms and legs, peeing and pooping, I'll think of what you said.
ROFLOL LMAO


Point being, alive is a poor metric. Conscious is a much better one. You will agree that a blastocyst is not conscious, and you will probably agree that a baby at birth is conscious... therefore consciousness occurs somewhere in the middle. I'd love it if we knew exactly where that was, but I don't think we do. Neurologists have a rough idea (I am good friends with a PhD neuroscientist) and this is what we currently use to formulate laws concerning abortion, it is how we currently define "late term". I know many disagree, but it is my opinion that terminating a pregnancy prior to the development of consciousness is as benign as trimming your nails, if only we were 100% sure when that was.

If I ever saw a potato with arms and legs I'd call the local news!
RitchieGuy
1.9 / 5 (22) Mar 01, 2012
Sweet sorghum is grown for ethanol, animal food (silage) and food for human consumption (grain) in African countries It grows fast and needs less water and there's no waste. . .everything is used.
2 crops a year on average. Deathclock. . .American deserts (not the sand dune type) have aquifers, water runoff that can be piped in to underground reservoirs, some rainfall in season, etc. etc. I would work. Teenagers could be hired to grow the stuff while on vacation and be paid from the Treasury.
RitchieGuy
1.6 / 5 (22) Mar 01, 2012
I've seen pictures of foetuses as early as 5 months gestation sucking on their fingers. . .a reflex action for future use obviously. But I don't know either when consciousness occurs in utero. . .but I do know that the longer the child evolves in utero, the more viable it gets to prepare for life outside the womb. And yet, live birth babies are murdered as they emerge from their mother with a scissors to their head and their brain sucked out. Animals have more of a conscience for their own young than humans do, in many cases. Sometimes, I think that the more "civilized" we become in that situation, the more barbaric and inhumane we become also.
Deathclock
2.8 / 5 (20) Mar 01, 2012
Sweet sorghum is grown for ethanol, animal food (silage) and food for human consumption (grain) in African countries It grows fast and needs less water and there's no waste. . .everything is used.
2 crops a year on average. Deathclock. . .American deserts (not the sand dune type) have aquifers, water runoff that can be piped in to underground reservoirs, some rainfall in season, etc. etc. I would work. Teenagers could be hired to grow the stuff while on vacation and be paid from the Treasury.


Would it be profitable? I don't want another "green" solution that the government subsidizes with my tax dollars...

Teenagers could be hired to grow the stuff while on vacation and be paid from the Treasury.


Whoops, too late...

Convince me why I should pay for this (as a tax payer).
Deathclock
2.9 / 5 (21) Mar 01, 2012
And yet, live birth babies are murdered as they emerge from their mother with a scissors to their head and their brain sucked out.


You're talking about partial birth abortions and I am completely against them.

FYI, my girlfriend is about 6 months pregnant with our second child right now, going on monday to find out if it's a boy or girl. We got pregnant when we were 18 and had an abortion because we were both planning on going to college and get a degree and were in no position to raise a child. We had our son when we were 25 and he is the best thing I have ever done, he is the single greatest source of happiness in my life. I do not regret the decision to have the first pregnancy terminated, we had it done after less than 1 month.

(no, we are not married, and don't plan on getting married, we don't consider it important, we are approaching our 10 year "anniversary" of being with each other, far better than most of our friends who got married...)
ryggesogn2
1.7 / 5 (22) Mar 01, 2012
"Killing babies no different from abortion, experts say
Parents should be allowed to have their newborn babies killed because they are morally irrelevant and ending their lives is no different to abortion, a group of medical ethicists linked to Oxford University has argued. "
http://www.telegr...say.html
RitchieGuy
1.8 / 5 (21) Mar 01, 2012
congratulations on your happy relationship. It's good to have a family, in any case. Keeps your nose clean to some degree.

Sweet sorghum is a very profitable crop. In the southern states it's grown for sweet syrup as well as ethanol production and the remains of the plant becomes silage. If you've noticed, a lot of gasoline pumps will say that the gas contains a certain percentage of ethanol. That ethanol could be from corn and other grains. But corn, wheat, etc. should be for human consumption. . .but sweet sorghum isn't a popular grain in the U.S., thus making it perfect for ethanol production. Oil industry could switch to growing it if they wanted to on semi-arid land that has no competition for water. Usually semi-arid desert land is owned by the government, I think. The Dept. of the Interior would prob. have the data on that. So the oil industry could become farmers and reap the what they sow. :) and allow the regular farmers to just grow their corn to sell to eat and export.
RitchieGuy
1.7 / 5 (22) Mar 01, 2012
"Killing babies no different from abortion, experts say
Parents should be allowed to have their newborn babies killed because they are morally irrelevant and ending their lives is no different to abortion, a group of medical ethicists linked to Oxford University has argued. "
http://www.telegr...say.html


Those medical ethicists are unethical, in my opine. I have no respect for such remarkably inhuman nutcases, irregardless of how many Phd's and other degrees they may have. A murder being committed is still a murder no matter how they look upon it. It makes me sick to my stomach realizing that perfectly good, beautiful newborns are murdered every day by a sicko "doctor" who is funded by a Margaret Sanger-type genocidal clinic. If I could, I would have liked to adopt those babies and raise them as my own. But there are millions of babies killed in this way and it sincerely breaks my heart.
Deathclock
2.7 / 5 (21) Mar 01, 2012
I think a good rule of thumb is "if it feels pain, it is wrong".

Please don't attempt to invert this and claim that I think it's okay to kill paralyzed people...
RitchieGuy
1.6 / 5 (20) Mar 01, 2012
Aborting a foetus within the first 2 months of gestation is not the same as a foetus with a heartbeat and can move about in the womb and suck its thumb. Who do these alleged "ethicists" think they are anyway? They are playing "God" in advising parents to off their child if they have a serious medical problem. So when are they going to have Stephen Hawking murdered also because he cannot move and someone has to take care of him? If Hawking's parents had known he was going to develop a disease, should they have murdered him at birth also? And yet, the bleeding hearts cry over Black African babies dying in the villages either after they're born or sometime later. There seems to be a double standard on human life, if I"m not mistaken. Will someone please help me on this.
kochevnik
2.6 / 5 (16) Mar 01, 2012
@RitchieGuy Aren't you glad your mama wanted you enough to keep you?
Wow, talk about begging the question
RitchieGuy
1.6 / 5 (21) Mar 01, 2012
Deathclock, it has nothing to do with what you've said. . .my commenting on Stephen Hawking. But he is a good case in point. . .he being a famous and productive physicist and yet being paralyzed makes a good argument against infanticide.
RitchieGuy
1.5 / 5 (23) Mar 01, 2012
KommunistKomradeKochevnik says:
@RitchieGuy Aren't you glad your mama wanted you enough to keep you?
Wow, talk about begging the question


KKK. . .you claim to be a Russian and, I suppose, an intellectual. There is nothing intellectual about your post. It just exposes you as a fraud and a follower of GhostofGirlyman, FrankHerbert and his sockpuppets, VendiTard, deepsand and excalibutthead. . . .all pseudo intellectuals too.
I am surprised that you are attempting to be popular with the gang of 5, probably to avoid getting rated 1's. You do yourself a disservice by dumbing down. Try something else niftier and I will give you a 5.
ryggesogn2
1.7 / 5 (23) Mar 01, 2012
From a natural selection POV, murdering babies for any reason threatens the evolution of humans.
Are the 'liberals' threatened by more genetically advanced humans, or do they believe they should be the ones to do the engineering like they tried 100 years ago?
Calenur
3.9 / 5 (11) Mar 01, 2012
From a natural selection POV, murdering babies for any reason threatens the evolution of humans.
Are the 'liberals' threatened by more genetically advanced humans, or do they believe they should be the ones to do the engineering like they tried 100 years ago?


Listen...this is a goddamn science website and has nothing to do with your twisted fucking political leanings. What a sad and frightening world you must live in to perpetuate your completely fantastical ideas of how others think. This story has nothing to do with eugenics, and the fact that you're bringing it up shows you have ABSOLUTELY NO grasp on reality, and lack the ability to reason your way through an argument without seeing the absolute worst (and often unrelated) possibility.

The dogmatic bullshit that I've heard come from you and your brethren makes me think I can't find a single place on the internet where I can go to learn and discuss, without being harassed by uninformed doomsayers.
Deathclock
2.3 / 5 (16) Mar 01, 2012
From a natural selection POV, murdering babies for any reason threatens the evolution of humans.
Are the 'liberals' threatened by more genetically advanced humans, or do they believe they should be the ones to do the engineering like they tried 100 years ago?


Listen...this is a goddamn science website and has nothing to do with your twisted fucking political leanings. What a sad and frightening world you must live in to perpetuate your completely fantastical ideas of how others think. This story has nothing to do with eugenics, and the fact that you're bringing it up shows you have ABSOLUTELY NO grasp on reality, and lack the ability to reason your way through an argument without seeing the absolute worst (and often unrelated) possibility.

The dogmatic bullshit that I've heard come from you and your brethren makes me think I can't find a single place on the internet where I can go to learn and discuss, without being harassed by uninformed doomsayers.


5 x1,000,000
RitchieGuy
1.8 / 5 (22) Mar 01, 2012
Well, I still think that live-birth infanticide is murder.

But in case, back to topic:

I found these:
http://www.arizon...lds-fuel
"Sweet Sorghun into Ethanol" University of Arizona

Enjoy
RitchieGuy
2 / 5 (22) Mar 01, 2012
ooops. . .these .sorry about that:
http://www.arizon...lds-fuel

Sweet sorghum growing in the Sonoran Desert

http://ag.arizona...le10.pdf

"Sweet Sorghun into Ethanol" University of Arizona
ryggesogn2
1.5 / 5 (22) Mar 01, 2012
This story has nothing to do with eugenics, and the fact that you're bringing it up shows you have ABSOLUTELY NO grasp on reality, and lack the ability to reason your way through an argument without seeing the absolute worst (and often unrelated) possibility.

Seeing the worst is exactly what the AGWites are doing. That is exactly what this story is about.
Eugenics was the same as the AGW fad 100 years ago. Look where that led.

The AGWites promote population controls, abortion, etc. but how will that affect human evolution?

A great STNG episode had a civilization rounding up and executing the deviants, the next step in their evolution.
Deathclock
2.8 / 5 (18) Mar 01, 2012
Whenever one person refers to another group of people with terms like "AGWites", "Evolutionists", "libtards", "conservatards", etc... they immediately lose a great deal of credibility in my eyes. It just makes you sound like a biased asshole who will do nothing but spout propaganda and shout down everything you say in rebuttal. That loudmouth faggot on fox news comes to mind, O'Reilly, he has literally shouted over his own guests and callers when they were making very good points, unfortunately my coworkers listen to that shit (and rush limbaugh) all day...
CardacianNeverid
3.7 / 5 (18) Mar 02, 2012
Whenever one person refers to another group of people with terms like "AGWites"... etc... they immediately lose a great deal of credibility in my eyes. -Death

I agree and I don't even know what an EggWhite is!
RitchieGuy
1.5 / 5 (19) Mar 02, 2012
@Deathclock
The term AGWites shortens the additional terms that we would like to call them, but for the sake of propriety, we label them only as AGWites which is the most innocuous term at this time. We also have a term for the sockpuppet FrankHerbert and his crew, but we don't use it out of respect for honest, gentle and learned Physorg members like yourself. TheGhostofOtto1923 has falsely accused me of sucking up to antialias and others by agreeing with most of their opinions. There is absolutely NO reason for sucking up to anyone on Physorg since there is no material exchange such as money or favors. . .it only proves that TheGhostofOtto1923 and all his sockpuppets are bat$hit crazy for such accusations.
CardacianNeverid is agreeing with Deathclock. The question now is will Ghost come rushing in to accuse Cardacian also of "sucking up" to Deathclock?? Very little chance for that. . .LOL

BTW. . .CARDACIANNEVERID IS AN ANAGRAM FOR VENDICAR_DECARIAN, minus the underscore, of course.
antialias_physorg
4.1 / 5 (9) Mar 02, 2012
BTW. . .CARDACIANNEVERID IS AN ANAGRAM FOR VENDICAR_DECARIAN,


Aaaaand...the last horse crosses the finish line.
RitchieGuy
1.5 / 5 (19) Mar 02, 2012
@Deathclock. . . .I believe that the links below will vindicate what i have been posting on this and another thread regarding Canada's oil sands.

http://www.arizon...lds-fuel

Sweet sorghum growing in the Sonoran Desert

http://ag.arizona...le10.pdf

"Sweet Sorghun into Ethanol" from University of Arizona

The sweet sorghum is the BEST plant to grow in the Southeastern and Southwestern states. It grows well in semi-arid soil and needs only a little water. THIS is what has been met with derision and insults by the fools on Physorg who are apparently not really interested in finding an alternative to fossil fuels. Sweet sorghum can replace corn as a biofuel source easily. Corn requires a lot of water and fertilizer. Growing corn for biofuel removes it from a food source and raises the price of a bushel of corn because the corn becomes scarce by that much, whereas sweet sorghum grown on semi-arid soil that is not being used otherwise makes a lot of sense.
RitchieGuy
1.6 / 5 (20) Mar 02, 2012
BTW. . .CARDACIANNEVERID IS AN ANAGRAM FOR VENDICAR_DECARIAN,


Aaaaand...the last horse crosses the finish line.


LOL. . .I'm only mentioning it now for those who haven't figured it out yet. It was evident to me the first time I saw the name.
Deathclock
2.8 / 5 (18) Mar 02, 2012
@Deathclock
The term AGWites shortens the additional terms that we would like to call them, but for the sake of propriety, we label them only as AGWites which is the most innocuous term at this time. We also have a term for the sockpuppet FrankHerbert and his crew, but we don't use it out of respect for honest, gentle and learned Physorg members like yourself. TheGhostofOtto1923 has falsely accused me of sucking up to antialias and others by agreeing with most of their opinions. There is absolutely NO reason for sucking up to anyone on Physorg since there is no material exchange such as money or favors. . .it only proves that TheGhostofOtto1923 and all his sockpuppets are bat$hit crazy for such accusations.
CardacianNeverid is agreeing with Deathclock. The question now is will Ghost come rushing in to accuse Cardacian also of "sucking up" to Deathclock?? Very little chance for that. . .LOL


Wow, count me out of these games and all the drama...
RitchieGuy
1.4 / 5 (19) Mar 02, 2012
The Physorg nonsensical games aren't important. It's the links I provided above to a study of sweet sorghum as a biofuel to replace corn and, ultimately, replace oil and possibly gas and coal that is of great importance. I am EXTREMELY enthusiastic about the potentiality of growing the plant on unpopulated areas of the country as well. It would render us eventually free from mideast and Venezuelan oil and the KXL won't have to be run through U.S. soil. Environmentalists will be happy and no more oil spills to clean up.
Deathclock
2.6 / 5 (17) Mar 02, 2012
The Physorg nonsensical games aren't important. It's the links I provided above to a study of sweet sorghum as a biofuel to replace corn and, ultimately, replace oil and possibly gas and coal that is of great importance. I am EXTREMELY enthusiastic about the potentiality of growing the plant on unpopulated areas of the country as well. It would render us eventually free from mideast and Venezuelan oil and the KXL won't have to be run through U.S. soil. Environmentalists will be happy and no more oil spills to clean up.


If it's profitable then get on it, are you adverse to making money? If I had a profitable idea that I was as enthusiastic about as you appear to be about this then I would be trying to secure investment capital. Talking about it is one thing, but for anything to change someone has to do it, why not you?
rubberman
2.7 / 5 (12) Mar 02, 2012
Eggwhites and horse races...these are the reasons i come back to this site! You both get 5 's in a post since actually clicking on the stars just kicks me back to the main page now....neat glitch!
RitchieGuy
1.4 / 5 (18) Mar 02, 2012
@Deathclock. . .it's already being done as we speak. Please read the links and here's some more information:

http://uanews.org/node/43245

and:

http://www.physor...als.html

http://www.e2.org...lsV5.pdf

The link from Physorg has only 1 comment. . .but that was about sweet sorghum as animal food.
RitchieGuy
1.5 / 5 (19) Mar 02, 2012
I intend to reserve 40 acres of my land to grow sweet sorghum next month. After harvest, the crop will be taken to a mill to extract the sugars. I will have the sugars fermented to turn into ethanol and run my tractor on it. I can only do that with my tractor and not my pickup truck because of the lack of gas stations that offer that type of ethanol. . . .and I don't like using ethanol from corn.
As I've said earlier, teenagers could be hired for summer vacation employment to help grow the sweet sorghum. It would provide them with money and a clearer understanding of crop management. They would be educated in things that they might not ordinarily learn about in school.
Sugarcane needs a lot of water, whereas sweet sorghum does not.
ryggesogn2
1.6 / 5 (20) Mar 02, 2012
Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) has been replaced by 'global climate change', and the believers of AGW are referred to has AGWites.
Seems like an accurate description.
RitchieGuy
1.4 / 5 (20) Mar 02, 2012
AGW is now a religion for which I am "agnostic". Their gods are the climatologists who have come to warn and wail and worry humans to death that the end is near. Strange thing though, I still haven't heard anything from these "gods" as to solutions other than extortion, infanticide, and tons of new regulations. oh, and more funding from taxpayer money, pleeeeze. Seems like climatologists are afraid to offer solutions other than the above. Their funding might be cut off if atmospheric CO2 goes away and the problem is solved.
Deathclock
2.8 / 5 (18) Mar 02, 2012
Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) has been replaced by 'global climate change', and the believers of AGW are referred to has AGWites.
Seems like an accurate description.


You don't seem to understand the nature of my objection... it has nothing to do with the aptness of the term but of the mindset one must have to classify (and stereotype) a diverse group of people who only necessarily share one belief. Kind of like how stereotyping Atheists is stupid because the ONLY thing that any two atheists must have in common is that they don't believe in God... an absence of a single belief is not sufficient similarity to form a stereotype...
ryggesogn2
1.4 / 5 (20) Mar 02, 2012
an absence of a single belief is not sufficient similarity to form a stereotype...

But AGWites also advocate socialism as the 'solution'.
AGWism is much more than a single belief.
RitchieGuy
1.4 / 5 (20) Mar 02, 2012
In any case, whether they call it AGW or Global Warming or man-caused Foofer...it is still turning into a religion and the climatologists have a need to control humanity for the goodness of the almighty dollar, or ruble, rupee or peso. It's not just a few brainwashed individuals. You can fill up Times Square with socialist AGWites and they'll still keep coming. You mayTHINK that they have only the best interests of the planet and living things at heart, but if you ask them to do the research for free and they'll look at you like you're crazy. . .you'd better to be ready to run.
They had to change it from Global Warming because their predictions don't cooperate and it snows and people can freeze to death. They were yelling about the polar bears all drowning and it turns out that polar bears are excellent swimmers and still raising their young on the ice. That was part of their liturgy that made me and others laugh. Scare tactics, that's what it is.
RitchieGuy
1.4 / 5 (20) Mar 02, 2012
Deathclock says:


You don't seem to understand the nature of my objection... it has nothing to do with the aptness of the term but of the mindset one must have to classify (and stereotype) a diverse group of people who only necessarily share one belief. Kind of like how stereotyping Atheists is stupid because the ONLY thing that any two atheists must have in common is that they don't believe in God... an absence of a single belief is not sufficient similarity to form a stereotype...


Funny that you mention atheists. . .Atheists are not stereotyped by believers or Agnostics. They are free to choose whatever they wish to believe or not believe. However, they have also chosen to organize into national organizations such as the New Atheists. They have stereotyped themselves and each other and one of their "calling cards" is their mindset that it is the religionists aka creationists who are their enemy and who must be eliminated.
Deathclock
2.4 / 5 (17) Mar 02, 2012
Funny that you mention atheists. . .Atheists are not stereotyped by believers or Agnostics. They are free to choose whatever they wish to believe or not believe. However, they have also chosen to organize into national organizations such as the New Atheists. They have stereotyped themselves and each other and one of their "calling cards" is their mindset that it is the religionists aka creationists who are their enemy and who must be eliminated.


Good example... of my point.

I am an Atheist and none of that describes me. The only thing I necessarily have in common with any other Atheist is a lack of belief in God. Just like the only thing a "agwite" or whatever you called them has in common with another "agwite" is the belief in anthropogenic global warming...
kochevnik
2.5 / 5 (12) Mar 02, 2012
The article has rather ominous wording. As a person who attempts to not form beliefs, observing that is central to much human suffering, it is very difficult to extrapolate less than a century of measurement to millenia of climate change. It is then exponentially harder to support global taxation for today's "chemical scapegoat", particularly when it is central to life.
RitchieGuy
1.4 / 5 (19) Mar 02, 2012
This mindset seems to be universal for them and they SEEM to think as one. The only thing I object to from Atheists is their rabid anti-Creationist view of "either change or die" and "you're stupid" kind of thing. I, as an Agnostic have a "live and let live" mindset but I'm also willing to help someone in need no matter what they prefer to believe. It just isn't important enough to me to be concerned if someone believes in the bible or koran. But Atheists show a great deal of bitterness and anger and, I think, resentment. On a global scale, Atheists and Agnostics are completely irrelevant to most of the world's population. In fact, in certain countries Atheists would be beheaded by others who are also rabid in their mindset of "either change or die". Hitler had his stereo-typical Jew; every group has been stereotyped at one time or another; Neanderthalensis were heavily stereotyped even though nobody has ever seen one.
RitchieGuy
1.5 / 5 (17) Mar 02, 2012
The article has rather ominous wording. As a person who attempts to not form beliefs, observing that is central to much human suffering, it is very difficult to extrapolate less than a century of measurement to millenia of climate change. It is then exponentially harder to support global taxation for today's "chemical scapegoat", particularly when it is central to life.


Nice to hear from you, Kommunist Komrade Kochevnik. . .I see your eyes are wide open and that you are aware what is really going on. It's been said many times that there will always be climate change. You could almost say that the Earth is "alive" to some degree and needs to cleanse herself and that she and everything on her are still evolving. There's an old saying that, "this too shall pass". We "deniers" are not really denying that there might be an excess amount of CO2 in the air. It can be fixed with the proper use of biofuels such as sweet sorghum and sugar cane converted into ethanol.
ryggesogn2
1.4 / 5 (19) Mar 02, 2012
Maybe the govt could subsidize an electric car and everyone would want one.
Oops.

"GM temporarily halts production of Volt"
http://thehill.co...evy-volt
RitchieGuy
1.4 / 5 (18) Mar 02, 2012
I can't speak for all of us, but I myself object vociferously to the conversion of a free country like the U.S. into a bastion of Socialistic ideals for the sake of those whose aim it is is to control the people with propaganda such as the AGWites are pushing on the populace here and elsewhere. Rather than telling Americans something like, "Hey people. . .listen up. . .the air is getting lousy with too much CO2 and the oceans are getting a tad bit too acidy, and we have to do something about these things before they get worse. We are going to join with the people who grow biofuels in the South and help them to grow as much ethanol as possible so that we can get off of fossil fuels. You will soon be driving your cars on ethanol exclusively as soon as the car companies convert their car engines". Wouldn't that be so much better than the ominous warnings that they're giving us now, but without logical solutions?
lologagalitho
1 / 5 (10) Mar 02, 2012
a friend's sister-in-law makes $65 hourly on the laptop. She has been laid off for 6 months but last month her pay was $19426 just working on the laptop for a few hours. Go to this web site and read more NuttyRich . com
RitchieGuy
1.5 / 5 (18) Mar 02, 2012
Electric cars have batteries that still depend mostly on the grid, Rygg2. . .we need cars and trucks that without those batteries and are modified to burn good ethanol. . .and then we need gas stations to sell only ethanol and kick the oil companies out unless they also start growing biomass plants for ethanol. Sugar is in, Rygg2. . .oil is out.
But our politicians have to know that these are things that they should be fighting for . .since they have the influence and power. Oh, and yes, the money we pay into taxes. lol
Heck, the Chinese can have Canada's air polluting oil. We won't be needing it once we get with the program.
ryggesogn2
1.6 / 5 (20) Mar 02, 2012
Electric cars have batteries that still depend mostly on the grid, Rygg2. . .we need cars and trucks that without those batteries and are modified to burn good ethanol. . .and then we need gas stations to sell only ethanol and kick the oil companies out unless they also start growing biomass plants for ethanol. Sugar is in, Rygg2. . .oil is out.
But our politicians have to know that these are things that they should be fighting for . .since they have the influence and power. Oh, and yes, the money we pay into taxes. lol
Heck, the Chinese can have Canada's air polluting oil. We won't be needing it once we get with the program.
Are no different than the AGWites? You want to use govt power to implement YOUR favorite solution.
Why not demand the govt fund solar power satellites and power the world?
RitchieGuy
1.7 / 5 (18) Mar 02, 2012
No, I am far from thinking like the AGWites. But you forget that the money in the U.S. Treasury is OUR money and it is WE who control the politicians through our votes. THEY OWE us, but they don't OWN us. WE own THEM. That is why we are working toward limited government and limited controls over we, the people. And even though the car companies are mostly a private industry. . .if they want to sell their vehicles to American customers, they have to listen to us and provide the kind of cars that WE want. . .and need. I'm not saying that the politicians need to force car companies to modify their engines, but it is their influence that will get us to where we won't have to depend on middle east and venezuelan oil anymore, not to mention all the wars that go with it.
Rygg. . .it only makes sense to do something to get off oil. Look what happened in the Gulf. That is OUR Gulf and BP messed it up. I used to enjoy fishing in the Gulf on a party boat, but now I'm scared to eat the fish.
RitchieGuy
1.5 / 5 (18) Mar 02, 2012
We have a government to do the work for us which we cannot do ourselves. The bureaucrats are the pack mules and the politicians are there to do as we say. Do you expect the politicians to just sit around and not have to deal with their constituents? WE ARE their constituents, so if I call my Congressman and tell him that I don't want the KXL pipeline and for them to send those pipeline workers to work on sweet sorghum farms in certain deserts instead, do you think that he will say that he can't do it because it will offend the oil industry? I don't think so. As long as I make my case well, there shouldn't be any doubt on his part.
Did you read the links, Rygg? It's happening already whether we like it or not. Things are evolving as they should, Rygg. We can't stand still and wait for all the wells in the world to dry out. The oilers will have to come on line for biofuels, that's all.
RitchieGuy
1.5 / 5 (19) Mar 02, 2012
Even if the AGWites are wrong and the whole thing is a fraud, it's STILL a good idea to clean up the emissions and particles in the air from the industries. You're not being disloyal if you demand that smoke and particle filters are installed in those smokestacks. Think of the children who have to live near those places and have to breathe that air.
Not only that, Rygg, but it would satisfy the AGWites and environmentalists and they can all go home and stop their whining. If every country in the world were to grow sweet sorghum for biofuel, we would all be better off and possibly lung diseases and cancers
would be diminished.
This biofuel has nothing to do with Liberalism/Socialism/Communism because it is apolitical and nothing to do with an ideology. It just makes common sense. It is purely logical, the next step toward even more freedom. I don't really want Canada to declare the right to eminent domain on U.S. soil. Don't you remember why the Founding Fathers fought the British?
deepsand
3.1 / 5 (19) Mar 02, 2012
if I call my Congressman and tell him that I don't want the KXL pipeline and for them to send those pipeline workers to work on sweet sorghum farms in certain deserts instead, do you think that he will say that he can't do it because it will offend the oil industry? I don't think so. As long as I make my case well, there shouldn't be any doubt on his part.

Are you really so naive as to believe that?

For reality, look at fracking in PA, where the Koch Bros.'s Republican puppets in Harrisburg are giving away gas for a pittance, knowing that it's destined for foreign markets, turning a blind eye to the fouling and land and stream while freeing the frackers from the costs of environmental cleanup; and, for good measure, granting them immunity from any local government environmental standards.

They told the citizens of PA to pound it up their collective ass.

That's your sacred capitalism at work.
RitchieGuy
1.4 / 5 (18) Mar 02, 2012
You read what Bill Clinton said about the Canadian pipeline, right? It means that Clinton knows that if Obama is reelected that he will do a major 180 after his inauguration and ok the pipeline anyway. That will mean that if TransCanada doesn't take Clinton's advice to reroute and declares eminent domain, Obama will not stop TC from taking over private lands for the KXL. To a certain extent, the British will be in control again.
deepsand
2.8 / 5 (18) Mar 02, 2012
Last year, Gov. Corbett slashed funding to PA's Land Grant universities by 30%, while giving nice handouts to big business, and has proposed another 30% cut this year.

His suggestion as to how those schools could makeup the shortfall? Frack on campus.

It's all about $$$$$$ for the new Robber Barons.
deepsand
2.8 / 5 (18) Mar 02, 2012
What has Clinton and Keystone XL to do with your notion that your politician is going to do any more than say "Thank you for your input; I'll keep your thoughts in mind" and then go right on helping to line the pockets of his corporate masters?
RitchieGuy
1.4 / 5 (18) Mar 02, 2012
Capitalism works, deep, and it has nothing to do with who is a Republican and who is a Democrat. Your view on Capitalism is faulty. There are many Conservative Democrats in Congress and not all politicians are as corrupt as your whatsisname. . .governor of Pa. You choose to condemn a system that works very well, but for the few dishonest people who take advantage of other people through that system. These are not true Capitalists, they are the frauds and liars who are aided by dishonest politicians like your governor. True Capitalism promotes responsibility and accountability, which is not the case in Pa. Floridians got rid of a U.S. Congressman who was a RINO and we replaced him with a Conservative, who is doing a fine job and is honest because we keep close watch on him even though he doesn't need it. If your governor is corrupt, then vote him the hell out even if you have to campaign for someone better and more honest.
RitchieGuy
1.5 / 5 (19) Mar 02, 2012
You've got stupid people who have no business voting for politicians unless it's the office of dogcatcher. People who are ignorant of the issues are most likely to vote for someone like your Gov just because they can. He appealed to their sensibilities for whatever reason and now you are whining about Capitalism when it's your politician and his mess that you should be whining about. Apparently, your governor would've made a fine dogcatcher but is missing some scruples, that is, if he ever had any.
deepsand
3 / 5 (18) Mar 02, 2012
The notion that "True Capitalism promotes responsibility and accountability" is a fantasy. Capitalists are no more free of greed than are others, and are much more well equipped to satisfy such.

The fact is that the capitalism at work as being played out at this very moment in PA with very ugly results is "true capitalism" in its purest form. You do not get to define it based on whether or not its behavior well comports with your desired conclusions.
RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (17) Mar 02, 2012
deep, you're too much into corporate this and corporate that. Corporations are still providing jobs for Americans and without corporations, with or without greed, everyone would be unemployed except for McDonald's and that wouldn't last very long either. In case you weren't aware, the flow of money from person to businesses for groceries, gas and bills starts with a JOB. Corporations offer that JOB to those without one and with that JOB comes a salary. Take away the corporations and guess what. No salary and no JOB, therefore, no money for groceries, gas and bills. So don't knock something that we all depend on just because it's fashionable and your friends all do it. Knocking Capitalism and corporations is the most naive thing you can do, since life without the 2 means something similar to living in a little village in a hut with a dirt floor with little food and very little drinking water somewhere in Africa. OR living in a ghetto somewhere in Philly with roaches and gangbangers.
RitchieGuy
1.4 / 5 (18) Mar 02, 2012
Where the hell do you get the idea that Capitalism has to be free of greed? When you get out of bed to get ready to go to work, that is a result of your greed for the necessities of your life, whatever they may be. And you can't get those necessities unless you show up at your Capitalistic JOB and work for as many hours it takes to greedily earn your paycheck. If you have no greed, then you should give your paycheck to your favorite charity. Oh, that's right, your favorite charity is YOU. LOL
What's happening in Pa. is not the result of Capitalism or true Capitalism. Simply put, it is the result of all those voters voting a corrupt elitist into the Guv's mansion and now they're paying for their foolishness. If Corbett is destroying your state with fracking which might cause earthquakes, I might add, then get him impeached. Don't just sit there. . .get off your ass and talk to reporters, talk show hosts, etc. anybody who will listen to you. Get signatures. . .lots of them. . l
RitchieGuy
1.5 / 5 (17) Mar 02, 2012
Get the ball rolling and get rid of that bum as soon as you can before he tries to sell the state to China.
ryggesogn2
1.6 / 5 (21) Mar 02, 2012
Capitalists are not greedy.
It is the looters, the plunderers that pass laws redistributing the wealth the capitalists earned who are greedy.

The real robber barons are those that cozy up the govt for favors, like Solyndra, GM, GE, Warren Buffet, Lightsquared, Enron, ....

Capitalists must be trusted if they are to earn your business. It is the crony socialists that join with the 'progressives' to restrict competition.
RitchieGuy
1.4 / 5 (18) Mar 02, 2012
LOL. . .I see that someone gave a 1 rating to a bot named lologaga. The bot is also in 1 or 2 other threads with the same message. hmmm. . .let's see who it was that gave that 1 to a bot.
Deathclock
2.5 / 5 (16) Mar 02, 2012
LOL. . .I see that someone gave a 1 rating to a bot named lologaga. The bot is also in 1 or 2 other threads with the same message. hmmm. . .let's see who it was that gave that 1 to a bot.


what? why? I think I gave one of the two 1 ratings, so what? I know it's a bot, I also hit the report button, big deal
RitchieGuy
1.4 / 5 (22) Mar 02, 2012
oooooooohhhh. . .LMAO. . .Rygg2, deesand and excalibur both gave a 1 rating to a bot.
a HAW HAW HAW HAW
RitchieGuy
1.4 / 5 (21) Mar 03, 2012
Capitalists are not greedy.
It is the looters, the plunderers that pass laws redistributing the wealth the capitalists earned who are greedy.

The real robber barons are those that cozy up the govt for favors, like Solyndra, GM, GE, Warren Buffet, Lightsquared, Enron, ....

Capitalists must be trusted if they are to earn your business. It is the crony socialists that join with the 'progressives' to restrict competition.


Rygg. . .I don't think that deepsand is really from Penn. I think he's really Australian. He doesn't talk like an American, unless he's a transplant.
ryggesogn2
1.4 / 5 (21) Mar 03, 2012
"You'd never know the avuncular Buffett, lionized by so many commentators for his support of higher taxes on the rich, may actually be the most deft political operator of all and that he was, in the words of a Sacramento Bee investigation three years ago, "one of the top beneficiaries of the banking bailout" even as he promoted it to Congress and the public as an undeniable necessity.

As the Bee noted in a now neglected report, Berkshire's holdings in companies bailed out by the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) constituted "30 percent of its publicly disclosed stock portfolio, and that proportion reflects at least twice as much dependence on bailed-out banks as any other large investor."

Read more: Carroll: Buffett's folksy mask - The Denver Post http://www.denver...o1je4lPI
"
Now Buffet is a robber baron aided and abetted by American kings.
RitchieGuy
1.4 / 5 (22) Mar 03, 2012
Deathclock. . .is deepsand or excalibur your sockpuppet? They're the only 2 names there.
RitchieGuy
1.4 / 5 (21) Mar 03, 2012
Rygg2. . .interesting article about Warren Muffet. Do you think that religion can devise a special hell for that sort of person? Maybe I'll write him a nice letter and ask him to fund the sweet sorghum desert farming program with a few billion. Let him make nice and redeem himself for a worthy cause.
ah. ..I'm turning in. . .tired now. . .night
Vendicar_Decarian
1 / 5 (45) Mar 03, 2012
Poor Libertarian Tard, Buffet has more money than you so and so under your own sad Libertarian Ideology he is superior than you.

You sad, jealous Tard.

"Now Buffet is a robber baron aided and abetted by American kings." - RyggTard
Vendicar_Decarian
1 / 5 (45) Mar 03, 2012
Correct.

"creationists who are their enemy and who must be eliminated." - RitchieTard
Vendicar_Decarian
1 / 5 (46) Mar 03, 2012
It is doubtful that everyone would want one. There are throw backs like yourself who do everything in your power to keep vast sums of money flowing to the Corporate Oil Interests.

Filth.

"Maybe the govt could subsidize an electric car and everyone would want one." - RyggTard
Modernmystic
1.5 / 5 (17) Mar 03, 2012
So China and India will shortly be spewing more CO2 into the atmosphere than America ever dreamed of. If you HONESTLY believe people are going to die because of this why aren't you advocating a war on those countries TOMORROW to stave off the extinction of the human race?
Vendicar_Decarian
0.9 / 5 (44) Mar 03, 2012
It's been said that there will always be death. So you won't mind if murder is legalized.

"It's been said many times that there will always be climate change." - RichieTard
Modernmystic
1.3 / 5 (15) Mar 03, 2012
Hey, I'm just trying to find some consistency here...

It seems a war with China, India, or both dwarfs the catastrophe that believers are positing. To initiate immediate hostilities, in light of all the evidence that the climate is not only deteriorating, but deteriorating far more rapidly with every published study and article is not only reasonable, but an IMPERATIVE.

If I actually believed all this bullshit I wouldn't be posting on a micky mouse internet forum, but I'd be out advocating a first strike on the enemies of the planet....
Vendicar_Decarian
1 / 5 (45) Mar 03, 2012
Are you suggesting that I should run out and start murdering Denialists?

Patience... Patience.. The time is not yet right for that.

Unless of course you are Andrew Bartbreit.

"If I actually believed all this bullshit I wouldn't be posting on a micky mouse internet forum, but I'd be out advocating a first strike on the enemies of the planet" - Modern
Modernmystic
1.5 / 5 (17) Mar 03, 2012
Are you suggesting that I should run out and start murdering Denialists?

Patience... Patience.. The time is not yet right for that.


Can you read? I was suggesting that anyone who believes this stuff to be self consistent would probably advocate immediate war against China, and India. When is the time for that? When it's too late? When will you start lining up your fellow citizens against walls and blowing their brains out for the planet? When the tipping point is already reached?

You, unlike me seem to believe this will kill millions, billions, or all of humanity...or am I missing something?

Cave_Man
2.7 / 5 (13) Mar 03, 2012
The hypocrisy of AGWites is amazing.


Your don't deserve any response but i'm generous.

You're argument is similar to that of a person abusing an addictive substance:

"I can stop anytime I want, I just don't want to."

And

"I'll stop when you come up with a cure for my own ineptitude"
Cave_Man
2.8 / 5 (14) Mar 03, 2012
So China and India will shortly be spewing more CO2 into the atmosphere than America ever dreamed of. If you HONESTLY believe people are going to die because of this why aren't you advocating a war on those countries TOMORROW to stave off the extinction of the human race?


You are a retard, get a lobotomy and live in a home, it's your only chance at a life that doesn't cause the rest of us any problems.

"Yeah lets save the human race by declaring war on 2/5ths of the population of the human race."

"And instead of foregoing procreation to reduce the population lets just murder all the babies that exist right now."

Wake up modern you are living in the 1900's.
Howhot
4 / 5 (7) Mar 03, 2012
I believe the UN's IPCC has developed a carbon tax that China and India could accept. Obama is currently working on a plan to help mitigate the damages caused by all of the hot air. An then there are the UN troops that could be directed against violating polluters. Some of the bigger oil and coal companies could be forced to close by UN forces.

Yeah, we could have a war, but not on China and India, but the polluting companies. A CO2 tax is much more desirable.

Vendicar_Decarian
0.7 / 5 (42) Mar 03, 2012
Americans are very fond of war.

"Can you read? I was suggesting that anyone who believes this stuff to be self consistent would probably advocate immediate war against China, and India." - Modern
ryggesogn2
1.4 / 5 (20) Mar 03, 2012
Socialists are very fond of war.
It keeps the state in power.
Why to the AGWites advocate violence against those who disagree?
Vendicar_Decarian
0.8 / 5 (43) Mar 03, 2012
Capitalists love war, because it keeps the factories running and money flowing into their pocket.

Has there been a time in the last 30 years when Capitalist America has not been at war, murdering some brown people? And for decades before that, yellow people.

The socialist states on the other hand generally avoid war, and where they do get involved it is usually because they foolishly allow themselves to be dragged into American wars.

"Socialists are very fond of war." - RyggTard

ryggesogn2
1.4 / 5 (19) Mar 03, 2012
War destroys wealth, just as socialist looters do.
No capitalist wants war. Look up the broken window fallacy.
The destruction capitalists support is the creative kind like 'destroying' the market for printed books with a Kindle.

The US has not been capitalist for over 100 years. That was when the 'progressives' came to power starting the Spanish American war, getting the US into WWI, WWII, ....
Vendicar_Decarian
0.9 / 5 (46) Mar 03, 2012
Tell that to...

Lockheed Martin
BAE systems
Boeing
Northrop Grumman
General Dynamics
Raytheon
EADS
Finmeccanica
L-3 Communications
United Technologies
Thales Group
SAIC
Computer Sciences Corp
Honewell
KBR
Safran
ITT Corp
General Electric
Rolls Royce
Am General

Etc. Etc.. Etc...

"War destroys wealth, just as socialist looters do." - RyggTard
Excalibur
2.9 / 5 (17) Mar 03, 2012
"Deathclock. . .is deepsand or excalibur your sockpuppet?"
This from a known puppeteer?
Excalibur
2.9 / 5 (17) Mar 03, 2012
MM, blaming China is more than a little bit hypocritical.

That China is now a major producer of CO2 and pollutants owes to the fact that Europe, in particular Germany, and the US expatriated their smokestack industries to China in pursuit of lower labor costs. In fact, some factories were literally disassembled, down to the last nut and bolt, and reassembled in China.

Good old capitalism at work. Cheaper production costs and bragging rights re. how they cleaned up their act.

Were the US to repatriate such production, its CO2 outputs would be a good 30% higher than they are today.

If war is the solution, then it should properly be the rest of the world declaring war on the US and Germany.
kochevnik
2.9 / 5 (15) Mar 03, 2012
War destroys wealth, just as socialist looters do.
War concentrates wealth, just as capitalist looters do.
ryggesogn2
1.5 / 5 (19) Mar 04, 2012
War destroys wealth, just as socialist looters do.
War concentrates wealth, just as capitalist looters do.

Impossible.
Unless you mean like the unemployment rate drops not because more jobs are created but because more jobs are destroyed?
ryggesogn2
1.5 / 5 (19) Mar 04, 2012
Germany, and the US expatriated their smokestack industries to China

....because of higher regulatory costs.
This occurs in the US when businesses move to states with lower costs to to business: taxes, regulations, right to work,...etc. All such costs are imposed by govts.
ryggesogn2
1.4 / 5 (19) Mar 04, 2012
How long will it take for physorg to publish a 'study' blaming the recent tornadoes on AGW?
Modernmystic
1.6 / 5 (14) Mar 04, 2012
You are a retard, get a lobotomy and live in a home, it's your only chance at a life that doesn't cause the rest of us any problems.

"Yeah lets save the human race by declaring war on 2/5ths of the population of the human race."

"And instead of foregoing procreation to reduce the population lets just murder all the babies that exist right now."

Wake up modern you are living in the 1900's.


I wasn't advocating such. I don't BELIEVE all this bullshit. If you do then why don't you advocate declaring war on 2/5ths of the worlds population? Aren't they going to kill us all with their carbon emissions? Isn't that the crap you and your ilk believe?

If you don't believe it then say it, otherwise kindly quit humping my leg....
deepsand
2.9 / 5 (19) Mar 04, 2012
We are the reason for their carbon emissions.

Why do you and Marjon continue to ignore that fact?
Excalibur
2.5 / 5 (16) Mar 04, 2012
....because of higher regulatory costs.
This occurs in the US when businesses move to states with lower costs to to business: taxes, regulations, right to work,...etc. All such costs are imposed by govts

Marjon, yours is a pathetic excuse for a brain.

Always looking for something other than your precious capitalism and property rights to blame for all the world's ills.

YOU AND YOUR ILK, THE ME FIRSTERS, ARE THE PROBLEM.
kaasinees
2.3 / 5 (15) Mar 04, 2012
The capitalist grip is growing stronger and stronger, even in Russia. But very strongly in Europe at the moment, everything the socialists have build up in welfare, health care, transportation etc. are being abolished as we speak...

Sad day.
Vendicar_Decarian
0.7 / 5 (42) Mar 04, 2012
"everything the socialists have build up in welfare, health care, transportation etc. are being abolished as we speak..." - kaas

If you are going to play the Capitalists game then prepare to live by the capitalist's rules.
Vendicar_Decarian
0.7 / 5 (42) Mar 04, 2012
There certainly do seem to be a lot of really powerful and destructive tornado's in the U.S. these days.

Odd isn't it?

"How long will it take for physorg to publish a 'study' blaming the recent tornadoes on AGW?" - RyggTard
deepsand
2.6 / 5 (20) Mar 04, 2012
How long will it take for physorg to publish a 'study' blaming the recent tornadoes on AGW?

What an idiot you are.

Such increased volatility was already and often predicted, as a natural and expected consequence of increased thermal energy.
Excalibur
2.4 / 5 (14) Mar 04, 2012
No doubt NP is from a universe where, when you turn up the heat under a pan of water, it freezes.
kochevnik
2.3 / 5 (15) Mar 04, 2012
War destroys wealth, just as socialist looters do.
War concentrates wealth, just as capitalist looters do.

Impossible.
Unless you mean like the unemployment rate drops not because more jobs are created but because more jobs are destroyed?
We obviously don't travel in the same circles.
Excalibur
2.4 / 5 (14) Mar 04, 2012
Pirouette said Where the hell do you get the idea that Capitalism has to be free of greed?"

Clearly he is wanting for reading comprehension and logical thinking skills.

The statement that his non seuquitur riposte was directed at said that capitalists are better able to indulge their greed.
Excalibur
2.9 / 5 (17) Mar 04, 2012
Marjon said "Capitalists are not greedy."

Clearly he either knows nothing of human nature or he deliberately lies. Then again, it may be both.
kaasinees
1.4 / 5 (9) Mar 04, 2012
Is it just me but i believe my nature is to be humble instead of greedy. Or is it a learned trait?
deepsand
2.4 / 5 (14) Mar 04, 2012
Probably a mix of nurture and nature.

Whatever the case, though, it is most certainly not a trait that is wholly absent from capitalists, as some here would like us to believe.
StarGazer2011
1 / 5 (10) Mar 04, 2012
blah blah Agenda 21 blah blah
ryggesogn2
1.4 / 5 (19) Mar 04, 2012
Always looking for something other than your precious capitalism and property rights to blame for all the world's ills.

History shows that socialism, which attacks capitalism and individual property rights, DO cause the worlds ills.
It is the socialists that look to blame others for their failures.
kaasinees
2.1 / 5 (14) Mar 04, 2012
Always looking for something other than your precious capitalism and property rights to blame for all the world's ills.

History shows that socialism, which attacks capitalism and individual property rights, DO cause the worlds ills.
It is the socialists that look to blame others for their failures.

And what makes you believe a Human can own a piece of land? Mother nature certainly will take it from you if she wants to.
If you dont respect mother nature and keep driving cars that keep farting in her face, eventually she will become angry enough and take that precious land of yours one way or another.

Plus what makes you think you actually own land when it belongs to the gov or bank even if you fully paid for it by yourself? Its not yours, you just have the rights to it as you said. It doesn't matter if your gov is socialist or capitalist, its not yours.
Benni
1.7 / 5 (18) Mar 04, 2012
Capitalists love war, because it keeps the factories running and money flowing into their pocket.

Has there been a time in the last 30 years when Capitalist America has not been at war, murdering some brown people? And for decades before that, yellow people.

The socialist states on the other hand generally avoid war, and where they do get involved it is usually because they foolishly allow themselves to be dragged into American wars.

"Socialists are very fond of war."


World War 2 started by acts of aggression of two socialist states, Germany & Russia. A war the United States (Capitalists) was desparately trying to stay out of. The death toll created by those two socialist entities before the U.S. (capitalists) entered was already in the millions as you add up what Germany was doing to Jews & what Russia was doing to Ukraines.

The U.S. Capitalist entrance to the war stopped the slaughter, those are just some facts of history, argue them however you wish...
ryggesogn2
1.4 / 5 (18) Mar 04, 2012
It doesn't matter if your gov is socialist or capitalist, its not yours.

Then why should anyone care if the land is conserved and productive?
No one owns the oceans so everyone tries to catch all the fish they can before the greedy Chinese socialists destroy the fisheries.
Read up on the tragedy of the commons.
"endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, "
Property is acquired and defended with violence either by the individual or the state. A state created by the consent of the governed should be designed to protect the individual's rights to land ownership as the individual has the most incentives to conserve its productivity.
BTW, in Scotland fishing rights are private. http://www.scotla...519/8903
ryggesogn2
1.4 / 5 (19) Mar 04, 2012
Benni, the Japanese were also socialist, the govt controlled their society.
RitchieGuy
1.4 / 5 (19) Mar 04, 2012
deepsand says:
We are the reason for their carbon emissions.

Why do you and Marjon continue to ignore that fact?


First of all, war is not the answer to the CO2 emissions problem. When is the last time that you people decided to forego buying oil to heat your home or buying gasoline to run your car? If and when you decide that you will never again use oil, gas or coal, then you must also convince everyone else who is alive today to also stop using these fossil fuels. That also includes people in China and who live in colder climates. How are you going to convince all of the Earth's population to STOP THEIR USAGE NOW? Have any of you made a decision on this? Or do you just talk up a blue streak and do nothing?
Where is the action? I don't see it in the daily news, only the usual AGW rhetoric.
You can lambast me, Rygg2, Nou, ModernM, and everyone else who is not an AGWite, but talk is cheap on Physorg.
RitchieGuy
1.4 / 5 (18) Mar 04, 2012
If you were TRULY SINCERE about your AGW concerns, then don't use oil, gas or coal ever again. That is the only way to help downsize the fossil fuel industries and they will have to go toward farming for biomass such as sweet sorghum and sugar cane to make ethanol. You cannot put sunshine, windpower or hydropower in a car engine. Even a hybrid car still depends on electricity from the grid which is powered by fossil fuels to charge the batteries.
So give up your heated house or apartments. Tell your landlord to stop heating your apartment with energy from these companies. PUT YOUR MONEY WHERE YOUR MOUTH IS, in other words.
I KNOW you will all forget what I've said in this post, only because none of you are truly sincere about saving the planet and lives. You just want to argue and resort to nastiness to try to prove your point which is really nonexistent.
So I say, GET OFF THE GRID AT ONCE AND DON'T BUY GASOLINE. Use your legs or ride a bicycle and keep your home cold in winter.
RitchieGuy
1.4 / 5 (18) Mar 04, 2012
kaasinees says:
The capitalist grip is growing stronger and stronger, even in Russia. But very strongly in Europe at the moment, everything the socialists have build up in welfare, health care, transportation etc. are being abolished as we speak...

Sad day.


Are you against Capitalism and corporations because they promote JOBS and wealth to those who are fortunate enough to have either one or the other or both? That is a very unreasonable attitude and it only serves to reveal your jealousy and hatred of those who are better off than you.
Your wish for a Socialist/Communist system all over the world is a strangely extremist ideology and THAT reveals your hatred of individualism and your love for the enslavement and total control of mankind and the eventual elimination of individual property rights under Socialism/Communism.
Do you tearfully wish for a world where more than half of what you own will have to be GIVEN to total strangers instead of your loved ones, and if you. . .
RitchieGuy
1.4 / 5 (18) Mar 04, 2012
don't comply with their law, you will see yourself in jail and/or fined a nice chunk of money? Haven't you learned YET that Socialism EXPLOITS the producers of goods aka workers, and producers of wealth equally, and also promotes the desires of the lazy "bloodsuckers" who harbor a hatred of successful people and yet have a strong desire for their money transferred to the bloodsuckers through laws enacted by a Socialist/Communist government?
RitchieGuy
1.4 / 5 (18) Mar 04, 2012
cont'd from page 6
kaasinees says:
The capitalist grip is growing stronger and stronger, even in Russia. But very strongly in Europe at the moment, everything the socialists have build up in welfare, health care, transportation etc. are being abolished as we speak...

Sad day.


If EVERYONE who is alive now and in the future decided that they PREFERRED to sit around and wait for their monthly welfare checks because they feel that they're entitled to it without working for a living, there would be riots in the streets and burning of buildings and cars such as happened in Greece where the lazy bums who felt entitled to the money of workers who produced goods and services rebelled against the Socialist Greek government for not continuing the theft FROM the producers TO the welfare queens and kings. . . .and who had instituted an austerity program.

Make no mistake: those who don't want to work for a living and be responsible and accountable for their own lives and actions. .
RitchieGuy
1.4 / 5 (18) Mar 04, 2012
will always be in the majority. It is in their nature to be so. They don't care about the environment and they will continue to use up resources because they can. Socialism promotes it and it will always be. That's the kind of world you want. . . .and you will probably get it. Obama and other Socialist pols will see to it.
RitchieGuy
1.4 / 5 (18) Mar 04, 2012
ModernMystc says:
So China and India will shortly be spewing more CO2 into the atmosphere than America ever dreamed of. If you HONESTLY believe people are going to die because of this why aren't you advocating a war on those countries TOMORROW to stave off the extinction of the human race?


I might be in error, but I understand ModM's quote to mean the type of war such as "the War on Poverty", which was popular with a certain Liberal/Socialist-American president several decades ago. That "war" did nothing to reduce or end poverty and only encouraged even MORE Americans and illegal immigrants to get on welfare as it was considered their right to an entitlement and live off the taxpayers' money. I always thought it was a stroke of displaced genius to declare it a "war", as that served to rally the populace around that particular flag in the hopes that it would alleviate all the ghetto crime, looting and pilfering of Korean and Jewish owned stores, and all the rioting, burning and
kochevnik
2.1 / 5 (14) Mar 04, 2012
yet have a strong desire for their money transferred to the bloodsuckers through laws enacted by a Socialist/Communist government?
This didn't happen in the CCCP, as wealth (or lack thereof) was somewhat distributed evenly. What you describe occurred when CAPITALISM took root. In fact the people you despise are also the very people whom you admire.
ryggesogn2
1.5 / 5 (17) Mar 04, 2012
as wealth (or lack thereof) was somewhat distributed evenly

Equal distribution of misery is better than unequal distribution of blessings?
RitchieGuy
1.5 / 5 (17) Mar 04, 2012
smashing of windows and cars, not to mention the beating up of innocent men, women and children by the thugs whose role in life was to take from the wealth of the nation and never have to work. Except, of course, for the hard work of pushing and dealing illegal drugs and getting pawn shops and others to buy that which they stole from somebody.
Oh yes, I remember the glory days of Socialism in America that was supposed to bring tears to everyone's eyes to see all the poor and oppressed of the nation finally college educated with the necessary tools to clean up their neighborhoods and step into any corporation's top management level.
Well. . .understandably, it never happened as LBJ and the Libs/Socialists wanted, mainly because tigers don't change their stripes, and that's the way of humanity.
Vendicar_Decarian
0.6 / 5 (40) Mar 04, 2012
Wrong.

"If you were TRULY SINCERE about your AGW concerns, then don't use oil, gas or coal ever again." - RichieTard

Carbon based fuel consumption need not be reduced to zero. It needs to be reduced by 80 to 90 percent. of 1990 levels.

I consume 46 gallons of gasoline as fuel per year.

What is your yearly rate of consumption?

RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (18) Mar 04, 2012
kommunist komrade kochevnik says:
yet have a strong desire for their money transferred to the bloodsuckers through laws enacted by a Socialist/Communist government?
This didn't happen in the CCCP, as wealth (or lack thereof) was somewhat distributed evenly. What you describe occurred when CAPITALISM took root. In fact the people you despise are also the very people whom you admire.


"The main vice of capitalism is the uneven distribution of prosperity. The main vice of socialism is the even distribution of misery." Churchill

KKK. . .the Russian people had never experienced Capitalism, not even under the Tsars. After the dissolution of the USSR, they had no idea what Capitalism was or what to do with it. They were NOT practicing Capitalism until they learned more about it and were taught how to deal with it. The black market was still going on until Capitalism started filling grocery shelves full of food and other necessities.
Vendicar_Decarian
0.6 / 5 (40) Mar 04, 2012
That's capitalism baby.

Suck it up. It's your own capitalist vomit.

"Except, of course, for the hard work of pushing and dealing illegal drugs and getting pawn shops and others to buy that which they stole from somebody. " - RichieTard
RitchieGuy
1.5 / 5 (17) Mar 04, 2012
And you know very well about the long queus (sp?) to get into the stores and the empty shelves when you got there and everything was sold already. Even for toilet paper you had to stand in a long line around the block in the freezing weather. Americans have never had to experience such things because we're always had Capitalism. . .and we never had to be scared of suddenly getting arrested for nothing but an opinion that was counter to government policies.
ryggesogn2
1.5 / 5 (17) Mar 04, 2012
USSR knew enough about capitalism to have shops selling western products: cigarettes, liquor, etc. but they could only accept western currency.
Which may be one reason the unofficial rate was ~100 rubles/ dollar compared with the 1.5USD/ruble as the official rate in 1983.
Soviets had plenty of rubles, but nothing to buy.
RitchieGuy
1.5 / 5 (17) Mar 04, 2012
Vendi, you are a joke. . .I think even KKK sees right through you and your pitiful attempt at praising the system that his country was tired of and glad to be rid of it.
RitchieGuy
1.4 / 5 (18) Mar 04, 2012
KKK. . .I KNOW you are intelligent enough to understand that the previous system of Communism/Socialism that your people had to suffer through until Glasnost and Perestroika, was destroying your people, and everything they had to endure because of that system was holding them back, both economically and culturally. As long as they can recognize corruption and eliminate it when it shows up anywhere, they will do fine. Give the Capitalist system a chance. It's far better than what they had prior to it.
RitchieGuy
1.5 / 5 (17) Mar 04, 2012
That's right, rygg2. . . .that was the Black Market where almost anything Western could be bought if you brought a truck full of rubles with you to buy these goods. There was Gumm's department store in Moskow where well-off Russians could go, also with lots of rubles, to buy Western goods.
The major portion of the populace had to resort to buying from black marketeers, who would travel to Sweden, Finland and other free countries to buy goods, then sell them back in Moskow and soak the Russians for all they had.
RitchieGuy
1.5 / 5 (17) Mar 04, 2012
Proletariats could not afford Gumm's. . .only the well paid government bureaucracy and major officials went there. Some Westerners also bought from that store because they had Western currency. But the Proletariat Russians for whom Socialism/Communism was supposed to enrich their lives financially, culturally and socially, had no money to spend as the high and mighty Politburo workers did. These things caused most Russians to turn to bottles of cheap vodka. . .becoming a nation of drunkards to escape their problems and sadness.
RitchieGuy
1.5 / 5 (17) Mar 04, 2012
@kkk. . . .speaking of Russian capitalists. . .

http://www.foodan...-Germany

http://bamarket.i...199.html
Vendicar_Decarian
0.7 / 5 (41) Mar 04, 2012
What the hell are you yammering about Tard Boy. I've said about Communist Russia.

But I have said that the the sale of illicit drugs and the theft of property and it's sale to fences - legal or otherwise, is all part of Capitalism.

So suck it up. It is your own Vomit.

"I think even KKK sees right through you and your pitiful attempt at praising the system that his country was tired of and glad to be rid of it." - RitchieTard
Vendicar_Decarian
0.7 / 5 (41) Mar 04, 2012
The exchange of money (rubles) for goods or services is Capitalism Tard Boy.

You are right. Soviet Russia had a Capitalist economic system.
That is what the Ruble was for. Dumb Ass

"That's right, rygg2. . . .that was the Black Market where almost anything Western could be bought if you brought a truck full of rubles with you to buy these goods." - RichieTard

RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (18) Mar 04, 2012
VendTardo says:
What the hell are you yammering about Tard Boy. I've said about Communist Russia.

But I have said that the the sale of illicit drugs and the theft of property and it's sale to fences - legal or otherwise, is all part of Capitalism.

So suck it up. It is your own Vomit.

"I think even KKK sees right through you and your pitiful attempt at praising the system that his country was tired of and glad to be rid of it." - RitchieTard


You praise Socialism/Communism all the time, and now you're denying it? HAH. . .Vendi, you are a joke. . .I think even KKK sees right through you and your pitiful attempt at praising the system that his country was tired of and glad to be rid of it.
Drug pushers and drug dealers have nothing to do with Capitalism, fool. They make their money on the degradation and deaths of their customers and they don't giving a phlying phuck of who lives and who dies. . .and they don't have to pay income taxes, social security and other fees on
RitchieGuy
1.4 / 5 (18) Mar 04, 2012
their ill-gotten gains. YOU, as usual, prefer to equate corruption with something that is and should be, the best and most decent economic system the world has ever known, which is Capitalism.
I doubt that you even comprehend what true Capitalism consists of, and how it is supposed to work. You just react to the word mindlessly in order to convince the ignorant and stupid that you're right.
ryggesogn2
1.5 / 5 (17) Mar 04, 2012
I hear the people in Cuba, DPRK, Venezuela, ... exchange money for goods and services. They must be capitalists.
Howhot
4 / 5 (8) Mar 04, 2012
You know, R2 and Itchieguy probably listen to Rush Limbaugh (pathetic clown of an ENTERTAINER he is ;) everyday like a religion and have developed all of the kooky ideas on what it means to be American based on that blunder head. For one thing, they probably believe they can hold an aspirin between their knees. Oh I'm sorry that is getting a little off subject.

So what did you think of the article suggesting that now is the time pressure congress into action on global warming since now everyone knows AGW to be a fact that is going to lead to extinction levels of temperature rise.

You know that disco oil bussing will create a throbbing naugahide pipeline running straight to the tropics from the rug producing regions and devalue the dollar!
Vendicar_Decarian
0.6 / 5 (40) Mar 04, 2012
If they use capital to facilitate the exchange of goods and services, by definition they are Capitalists if they do so.

Capitalist: a person who has capital especially invested in business


"I hear the people in Cuba, DPRK, Venezuela, ... exchange money for goods and services. They must be capitalists." - RyggTard

Don't you even know the definition of what you advocate for? Moron.
Vendicar_Decarian
0.6 / 5 (40) Mar 04, 2012
I doubt that you even comprehend what true Socialism consists of, and how it is supposed to work.

"I doubt that you even comprehend what true Capitalism consists of, and how it is supposed to work." - RichieTard

Vendicar_Decarian
0.7 / 5 (41) Mar 04, 2012
Only fools equate Socialism with Communism as you have just done.

"You praise Socialism/Communism all the time" - RichieTard

ryggesogn2
1.5 / 5 (17) Mar 04, 2012
How socialism is supposed to work.
The excuse socialists make when it fails is that the 'right' people were not in charge or...some other excuse.
Socialism as a system is not robust because it fails to recognize individuals. Everything must be perfect, at all times, or the system collapses. This is impossible when millions of people making billions of decisions are involved.
Capitalism is robust because it does recognize every individual is unique. Capitalism must persuade and cannot coerce. Capitalists must satisfy the needs and wants of their customers or they will fail, and be replaced by competitors. It is a self correcting system.
Socialism requires 100% volunteers, at all times. When one individual decides not to play anymore, the system collapses.
Vendicar_Decarian
0.7 / 5 (41) Mar 04, 2012
"Socialism requires 100% volunteers, at all times." - RyggTard

Capitalism requires 90% of the population be enslaved to the other 10%, performing worthless labor to keep money flowing to their Capitalist slave master, as is currently the case in the failed American State.

Vendicar_Decarian
0.7 / 5 (41) Mar 04, 2012
Read about the new Libertarian/Republican plan to Remake America here.

http://www.washin...ory.html
Howhot
4 / 5 (8) Mar 04, 2012
Don't worry Vendi, R2 and Itchieguy both think LBJ's "War on Poverty" really meant "war on the 99%". They are the reason there is an Occupy movement in just about every city. Crony Capitalism=Neo Fascism, and R2 and his underling Itchieguy are the authorities on that means of governance. It's obvious that neither has ever had an American Civics class.

RitchieGuy
1.5 / 5 (17) Mar 04, 2012
It's true that Capitalism depends on honesty and cooperation of all its components, i.e., the workers performing an honest day's work; the employers being fair and supportive of their good workers and providing a good, safe and healthy environmental infrastructure in which to work; and both sides working in conjunction with each other and outside forces to make a success of the industry. . .and last but not least, an atmosphere of cooperation with regard to excellent customer service so that the industry continues its success and continues to provide work for its employees. Honesty and decency are paramount ingredients in Capitalism. Socialism only works to relieve the workers of a great majority of their pay to provide non-workers with entitlements. Communism, on the other hand, depends on coercion, force and punishment meted out to the workers to make them produce goods and services without giving back and rewarding good workers for a job well done. . .except for the bureaucracy.
RitchieGuy
1.4 / 5 (18) Mar 04, 2012
howhot says:
Don't worry Vendi, R2 and Itchieguy both think LBJ's "War on Poverty" really meant "war on the 99%". They are the reason there is an Occupy movement in just about every city. Crony Capitalism=Neo Fascism, and R2 and his underling Itchieguy are the authorities on that means of governance. It's obvious that neither has ever had an American Civics class.



LOL. . .howhot likes to twist history into a knot. Kind of like GhostofGirlyman insisting that I own a still even though I've never said that. And I've never said that LBJ's war on poverty was a war on the 99%. Stop telling lies, howhot. It does nothing for your credibility except with VendiTard since he likes to lie also. LBJ was a Dixiecrat from Texas who was angling for the Presidency after JFK's term(s). But JFK died and LBJ inherited the VietNam war that JFK got us into, and LBJ escalated the war soon after. Agent Orange was used in VN and the veterans of that war are still feeling the effects of it.
Vendicar_Decarian
0.8 / 5 (42) Mar 04, 2012
And yet Capitalists spend vast sums of money lying to their customers in the form of advertising, and the production and sale of shoddy goods that are designed to fail and designed to be unserviceable.

If RichieTard had any brains at all, he would notice that the near collapse of the U.S. banking industry was a result of banks lying to each other with regard to the risk associated with the products they were selling each other.

Capitalists always seek to maximize profits through dishonesty.

"It's true that Capitalism depends on honesty and cooperation of all its components" - RichieTard
RitchieGuy
1.5 / 5 (18) Mar 05, 2012
What you call "crony Capitalism" is really the result of dishonest men getting together and deciding on how to fleece the public in whichever way they can. A good example is Obamalama's Health Care bill, you know the one that Nancy Pelosi insisted that the bill be passed by both Houses before it gets read by Congressmen. That Health Care program is almost impossible for employers in private industry to adapt to as a part of their worker's benefits because it's so regulated. That's why Pelosi who was House Speaker at the time didn't want anyone reading it. Obfuscation and retardation amongst the Liberal Democrats who pushed that bill. THAT is Crony Capitalism, which is not real Capitalism at all. . .since CC also stands for Corrupted Capitalism.
RitchieGuy
1.5 / 5 (17) Mar 05, 2012
@VendiTardo. . . .that is false when you say that Capitalists always seek to maximize profits through dishonesty. Dishonesty is NOT a component of true Capitalism. The customer is always right IS a component. A dishonest company or corporation such as Solyndra will be found out and its customers will stop buying its goods and services very soon after they realize the dishonesty is prevalent.. Success of advertising is also dependent in large part to honest delivery of goods and services, otherwise the company or corporation goes out of business. And, as in all other areas of business, the old saying, "let the customer beware" always rings true.
If you don't have true and honest Capitalism, then you must resort to Socialism/Altruism and that is bad for business since Altruism does not seek a profit to pay taxes and pay its workers, but gives everything away and leaves not much for anyone to live on
Howhot
4 / 5 (8) Mar 05, 2012
Itchieguy; You just don't get the Healthcare bill do you. That is a really good example of your beloved "crony Capitalism" at work. Every sort of lobbyist was on the floor on that bill. You a moron though if you didn't think the health care system needed fixing. It was broken to where an INFECTED TOE-NAIL could BANKRUPT you. If you want the old system, you should sign up for it!

Oh, I didn't mean to be rude, they won't allow you to with your precondition will they?

Vendicar_Decarian
0.7 / 5 (41) Mar 05, 2012
Ya, in America, they are called hero's of the free market.

"What you call "crony Capitalism" is really the result of dishonest men getting together and deciding on how to fleece the public in whichever way they can." - RichieTard
Vendicar_Decarian
0.7 / 5 (41) Mar 05, 2012
Then a true capitalist has never existed.

"Dishonesty is NOT a component of true Capitalism." - RichieTard
CardacianNeverid
3.2 / 5 (13) Mar 05, 2012
Honesty and decency are paramount ingredients in Capitalism -PoorTard

Yes, that's why we didn't have the GFC, and why it's still not reverberating across much of the world. Poor Richie tard lives on planet fantasy.
Humpty
1 / 5 (9) Mar 05, 2012
I am moving into Uranus with Jesus, gay king of the eternal entombment.
RitchieGuy
1.4 / 5 (18) Mar 05, 2012
howhot says:
Itchieguy; You just don't get the Healthcare bill do you. That is a really good example of your beloved "crony Capitalism" at work. Every sort of lobbyist was on the floor on that bill. You a moron though if you didn't think the health care system needed fixing. It was broken to where an INFECTED TOE-NAIL could BANKRUPT you. If you want the old system, you should sign up for it!

Oh, I didn't mean to be rude, they won't allow you to with your precondition will they?



howhot, thanks for your concern about my choice of health care. I do have an excellent plan which is not very costly and it has nothing to do with Obamalama's Socialistic Health Care abomination. I guess you aren't aware or forgot that sick people have been going into hospital emergency rooms for those infected toenails, among other things. . .for free, courtesy of American taxpayers. That continues to this day. You might recall that we have had this type of discussion many times before on
Howhot
3.9 / 5 (7) Mar 05, 2012
Vendi, I couldn't agree with you more. I thought you and others might find this article interesting. It's related to the topic;
It will be the 99% movement that brings change.

http://www.common.../02/29-4

RitchieGuy
1.4 / 5 (18) Mar 05, 2012
Health care, so we shouldn't beat a dead horse anymore, if you don't mind.
RitchieGuy
1.4 / 5 (18) Mar 05, 2012
howhot, very eloquently says:
Vendi, I couldn't agree with you more. I thought you and others might find this article interesting. It's related to the topic;
It will be the 99% movement that brings change.

http://www.common.../02/29-4



Well, of course it will be the 99% who will bring the Socialist changes to America. They are the ones who are dissatisfied with their lives to the point of wishing for the destruction of Capitalism and the death of the wealthy. They don't give a damn about AGW either, in case you're not aware of that. Oh, they might give it lip service, but in the long run, they just want to get paid for not working.
When the "99%" take over and all the corporations flee, everything stops to a standstill. It will be like the mentally ill taking over as administrators of a prison or mental institution. The 99% will lead the rest of the world in their endeavour to remove all of the productive elements and replace them all with the
Howhot
4.4 / 5 (7) Mar 05, 2012
Yeah Itchieguy, it's good that you got your own health-care and like it. Until Obama-Care people sometimes had to decide whether to pay the rent or buy the prescription for the toe-nail infection. It could have been a flesh-eating bacterial infection for all I know. For you I'm sure that was all fine; "I've got mine, screw everyone else" attitude that you show so well here.

It's to bad that everyone you meet doesn't have the same attitude as you do Itchie... If they did, you might just see how very annoying it is even discuss AGW climate change with you.

America is so so Pro-Obama this year I think you will see a sea change in congress from his long coat tails.

RitchieGuy
1.4 / 5 (18) Mar 05, 2012
people whose role in life is to not work at all and be put on a pedestal as a hero of the nonworking class. These heroes and their followers will want to tax any rich who are left behind and make them a part of the 99%. The 1% will, of course, has left the country or have been killed by riotous unwashed Leftists who have been enraged ever since they saw some rich guy driving a hummer. The new splendor of the Utopia in America will be emulated by those who are similarly minded in all other countries. Doctors and nurses, scientists, etc. will work for free and not require funding. They will be required to open up the pharmacies to distribute Oxytonin and all other drugs to the 99% who want it. All commerce that depends on Capitalism will stop and everything will be free of charge since no banks will be open anymore.
Howhot
3.7 / 5 (6) Mar 05, 2012
It ironic that Ritchieguy even cares about the 99%. You know a tsunami is coming that will fundamentally alter the playing fields of the world with the over-throw of the ultra-privileged class. And you are completely wrong about the 99% caring about AGW. The 99% will ram that down your guys throats as a tack-on point.

"99%" take over and all the corporations flee, everything stops to a standstill.


The 1% has already managed to do that. Just substitute 1% for you 99% and that was your 2009 "W" crash.
Howhot
3.9 / 5 (7) Mar 05, 2012
people whose role in life is to not work at all and be put on a pedestal as a hero of the nonworking class.


You are so condescending Richieguy, is there a reason for your madness? Your just a robot paid by the word and it's an honor to waste the money they spend on you. If not that, I love wasting your time.

The 99%, If you thought the tea party was loud, wait until these guy get the address of the Heartland institute and drop a few thousand on those bozos. Yeah fear the 99%.

RitchieGuy
1.7 / 5 (18) Mar 05, 2012
lol...you're wrong about me, howhot. . .I'm not being condescending at all. I'm just describing a future scenario of what I feel may come to pass if that 99% are allowed to take over the country, and perhaps, the world. There's something you tend to forget, though. Not everyone in the world thinks the way you and VendiTard do. I assure you that Vladimir Putin and Medvedev will not take kindly to your, let's say, nonsense. You can be all for relieving the AGW in the USA, but you will not be able to dictate to bona fide dictators what they have to do to please you. KKK is aware of these things, so you may want to ask him what are the chances that Putin will agree to all of your AGW concerns.
RitchieGuy
1.4 / 5 (18) Mar 05, 2012
If and when Putin gets reelected again and serves a second term as President. He will not leave that position ever again. That is the kind of man he is. He will also look upon you and other AGWites as dangerous anarchists because you support the Occupy filthy rabble. . .and Putin hates anarchists among his own people. . .and will not receive AGW threats with pleasure. Not saying you, in particular since you are just a small fish in the sea. But those who come to him with such ideas will have to understand that Putin and all the other dictators have their own agenda just as you have yours
euconsultants
1.8 / 5 (10) Mar 05, 2012
The complete discussion on climate change is not leading anywhere. It is only about job creation for participants and getting funding for research, whatever is the political belief of the participant. Extinction of species has been happening throughout history and in the worst case one of the following species will be mankind. The solution will for sure not come from governments making real decisions because they are only able to make rules and laws to repair damages afterwards. The world is not going to end because of global warming but only people who are able to adapt to the new climate will survive and build a new community which will survive with smaller numbers at a sustainable level.
kochevnik
3 / 5 (16) Mar 05, 2012
But those who come to him with such ideas will have to understand that Putin and all the other dictators have their own agenda just as you have yours
Putin won. Putin says he will be among the first to actually serve out just his term.

I wonder about Gennady Zyuganov. He has very hot secretaries.
kaasinees
2.3 / 5 (16) Mar 05, 2012
can we ban these payed trolls already?
ryggesogn2
1.9 / 5 (19) Mar 05, 2012
can we ban these payed trolls already?

But you claim to support a 'free' internet.
Free for only your opinions?
RitchieGuy
1.4 / 5 (19) Mar 05, 2012
KKK says:
But those who come to him with such ideas will have to understand that Putin and all the other dictators have their own agenda just as you have yours
Putin won. Putin says he will be among the first to actually serve out just his term.

I wonder about Gennady Zyuganov. He has very hot secretaries.


LOL. . .I'm married now, so Gennady's hot secretary's are not in my future. But congrats on your new boss/dictator, KKK. I doubt that he will tolerate any AGW nonsense and demands in his own empire. He will hear it out, but ultimately he has to handle his country's resources and power of the people very carefully. I think Russia through Putin will become tyrannical again and do everything in its power to rein in the outlying former Soviet bloc countries - first Ukraine and Belarus most of all. Putin needs Capital for all his programs to come. He will use Capitalism in its most corrupt forms to fulfill his agenda. That man is dangerous, but his people have tasted
RitchieGuy
1.4 / 5 (19) Mar 05, 2012
freedom and the genie is out of the bottle. KKK. . .you need to support the freedom of the Russian people and not go back to stagnation of the Communist system. The Russians are good people for the most part, but they won't be fooled again. Putin, if he's smart, will not push that old Socialism and Communism that never worked. He would be better off to introduce and maintain a free market system and weed out any present or potential corruption at any level of Russian society, including government. He may be steeped in KGB policy from the old days, but even he can change and be a good leader who cares about his people.
It's odd that the U.S. may be heading toward a Socialist political and social system, while Europe and Eastern Europe are all for free market and Capitalism these days. It's proven that Socialism doesn't work in Europe, but the American useful idiots want Socialism desperately. These people are too ignorant to notice the obvious faults that are endemic in Socialism.
RitchieGuy
1.4 / 5 (20) Mar 05, 2012
Famous saying in Soviet Russia, "We pretend to work and they pretend to pay us."

"The main vice of capitalism is the uneven distribution of prosperity. The main vice of socialism is the even distribution of misery." Churchill
Unfortunately, Churchill was to the manor born and never understood that hard work brings prosperity both to employed and employer.

"The Communist philosophy entails: collective ownership of all property and means of production by the government, and rule by a dictatorship of the proletariat".

"History has the unfortunate habit of repeating itself" author unknown

""AGWites in no way have any intention of greatly reducing their own fossil fuel footprint, but will coerce, threaten and injure those who stand in their way if these others do not comply with present and future regulations for lessening their CO2 footprint." RitchieGuy

kaasinees
2.6 / 5 (18) Mar 05, 2012
can we ban these payed trolls already?

But you claim to support a 'free' internet.
Free for only your opinions?

Free as in the admin is free to ban trolls of his website and stop bothering us.

If you want your silly opinions out in the public go make a website.
RitchieGuy
1.4 / 5 (20) Mar 05, 2012
kaasinees. . . the same could be said about YOUR posts and opinion. Paid trolls in this thread are a figment of your imagination. Perhaps you are suffering from the Dunning-Kruger effect and need to be full of humility. There is very little censorship on Physorg, except for spam and objectionable material. Insults are said in each thread which should bother you but apparently does not. I have never seen you complain in any thread about the suffix -tard being used on commenters, but now you want to censor what you think is trollish comments? Why does it annoy you so much?
ryggesogn2
1.6 / 5 (19) Mar 05, 2012
can we ban these payed trolls already?

But you claim to support a 'free' internet.
Free for only your opinions?

Free as in the admin is free to ban trolls of his website and stop bothering us.

If you want your silly opinions out in the public go make a website.

Science is supposed encourage the free exchange of ideas, not reinforce standard dogma. That's what Kuhn talked about is it not, entrenched 'science'?
Howhot
3.5 / 5 (8) Mar 05, 2012
You know, I really like the AGW deniers. I like the way ONLY their mouths move.. They look like DYING OYSTERS! Its so sad dying oysters are caused by ocean acidification but deniers don't know that. I say screw these deniers and lets get on with the issue of fixing Anthropogenic Global Warming!
ryggesogn2
1.7 / 5 (18) Mar 05, 2012
You know, I really like the AGW deniers. I like the way ONLY their mouths move.. They look like DYING OYSTERS! Its so sad dying oysters are caused by ocean acidification but deniers don't know that. I say screw these deniers and lets get on with the issue of fixing Anthropogenic Global Warming!

All AGWites can do is insult and commit fraud as they have no science to support their faith.

"If the theory of man-made global warming were such a self-obvious truth, the result of scientific consensus, then why do advocates for this idea keep committing frauds to advance it? "
http://reason.com...t-a-time
Vendicar_Decarian
0.7 / 5 (40) Mar 06, 2012
So in the view of Libertarin/Randite Retards like RyggTard, the tens of thousands of science journal articles documenting various aspects of the warming globe do not represent science.

What a Moron.

"All AGWites can do is insult and commit fraud as they have no science to support their faith." - RyggTard
RitchieGuy
1.3 / 5 (16) Mar 06, 2012
Well, for one thing, where is the proof that CO2 pollution of the atmosphere is UNIFORM all over the Earth. There isn't any proof of that. If you can provide the proof, we would like to see it.
That doesn't include pockets here and there of CO2 in heavy proportions. The whole Earth needs to be blanketed with clouds of CO2. Where is it?
RitchieGuy
1.3 / 5 (16) Mar 06, 2012
http://www.physor...ars.html

This article says that there are drought areas in Spain. I explained that in Southern Spain, specifically in Malaga, the drought is caused not by CO2, but by weather. Malaga is directly across the Mediterranean from north Africa. Those countries in north Africa have deserts and those deserts did not just recently happen with man-caused AGW. The drought in Malaga, Spain is caused by W_E_A_T_H_E_R and not CO2. Perhaps prevailing hot winds that blow rainclouds away, unrelenting sunshine, and overpopulation drying up aquifers are the main reasons for the drought.
Vendicar_Decarian
0.5 / 5 (39) Mar 06, 2012
That is a nice evasion, but the fact is, drought in Spain is growing more prolonged and severe as the globe warms.

Are you still standing by your claim that Spain is close to the equator?

Ahahahahaha... Oh man that was stupid.

"I explained that in Southern Spain, specifically in Malaga, the drought is caused not by CO2, but by weather." - RichieTard

Vendicar_Decarian
0.5 / 5 (39) Mar 06, 2012
I see, so in your "view" of the world, CO2 enhanced warming can't cause drought, but flushing your toilet can.

Ahahahahahah... What a moron.

What is causing the drought that is overtaking the U.S. mid-west?
It can't be all them non-existent flush toilets. So is it insufficient banjo picking? Too many people prepping road kill pies?

"Perhaps prevailing hot winds that blow rainclouds away, unrelenting sunshine, and overpopulation drying up aquifers are the main reasons for the drought." - RichieTard
Vendicar_Decarian
0.5 / 5 (39) Mar 06, 2012
There are CO2 monitoring stations at more than a half dozen sites in both the Northern and Southern hemispheres.

No significant variance in atmospheric CO2 concentration is seen.

If you didn't know that Tard Boy then you aren't smart enough to even begin to formulate an opinion on CO2 enhanced Global Warming.

So why not get lost until you have something to say that is above the whining of a grade 5 student who is struggling in science.

"Well, for one thing, where is the proof that CO2 pollution of the atmosphere is UNIFORM all over the Earth." - RichieTard
Vendicar_Decarian
0.5 / 5 (39) Mar 06, 2012
You forget that CO2 is heavier than air, and sinks to the bottom of mines as a result. You know... just like CFC's and conservative farts do.

"That doesn't include pockets here and there of CO2 in heavy proportions." - RichieTard
Vendicar_Decarian
0.5 / 5 (39) Mar 06, 2012
Scientists are supposed to keep an open mind, but not so open that their brains fall out - as yours has.

"Science is supposed encourage the free exchange of ideas, not reinforce standard dogma." - RyggTard

You have repeatedly proven that you know (NOTHING) about science, and damn near nothing about anything else.

Vendicar_Decarian
0.5 / 5 (39) Mar 06, 2012
Well said wage slave.

"freedom and the genie is out of the bottle." - RichieTard

It's late. You had better get to bed. You have to work tomorrow.
Howhot
4.3 / 5 (6) Mar 06, 2012
ItchieGuy says
freedom and the genie is out of the bottle

Yeah, a bottle of Jack Daniels! Lol. That that is a good one. Good find VD.
RitchieGuy
1.3 / 5 (15) Mar 07, 2012
howhot seems to know a lot about Jack Daniels. . .maybe that's why she misspells and repeats words so often like her comment above.
Tch tch. . .naughty stuff, howhot. . .you shouldn't type stuff unless you're completely sober. :)
euconsultants
1.8 / 5 (5) Mar 07, 2012
@ Richie Guy and Vendicar

I see that both of you are giving comments from far away of the area. At this moment all oasis in the Sahara are expanding and it seems that this is caused by global warming, but because we are still in the research phase how this can be explained we are quiet about it. If the speed of increase continues the Sahara can be green again in 300-400 years. So, if the problem in Spain, which was already semi-desert, was caused by the proximity to Africa the problem should be decreasing. In reality Spain has built a huge system for water transport whereby water is flowing from areas where we had good rains during winter before to dry areas with soils which are high in nutrients, so water is not drained slowly into the soil anymore but flows away. The water consumption in Spain is so high that boreholes will dry up in the next 20 years, whatever rains they will get. Forget Spain as a food exporting country in the nearby future.
RitchieGuy
1.3 / 5 (15) Mar 07, 2012
http://www.newton...9408.htm

From the above link:
"Here are some papers that contradict each other in their conclusions, but provide a view of how scientists measure past levels of CO2.

1) This paper refers to data from air trapped in air bubbles in glaciers, 19th Century measurements from Scientists in the 1800s, and evidence from Stromatalytes.

http://www.friend...0CO2.pdf

Stomatas are pores in plant leaves...please see

http://en.wikiped...ki/Stoma

This paper concludes that: The pre-industrial CO2 level was not significantly lower than current levels. Neither they nor the present readings are high relatively to the geologic record. The entire output of computer climate models begins with the assumption that preindustrial levels were measurably lower. Elimination of this assumption further undermines the claim that the warming in the industrial era period was due to human addition of
RitchieGuy
1.3 / 5 (15) Mar 07, 2012
CO2 to the atmosphere. Combined with their assumption that CO2 causes temperature increase when all records show the opposite then it is not surprising that IPCC predictions of temperature increase are consistently wrong. "
RitchieGuy
1.3 / 5 (15) Mar 07, 2012
repeating: http://www.newton...9408.htm

From the above link:
"Here are some papers that contradict each other in their conclusions, but provide a view of how scientists measure past levels of CO2.

1) This paper refers to data from air trapped in air bubbles in glaciers, 19th Century measurements from Scientists in the 1800s, and evidence from Stromatalytes.

http://www.friend...0CO2.pdf

Stomatas are pores in plant leaves...please see

http://en.wikiped...ki/Stoma

This paper concludes that: The pre-industrial CO2 level was not significantly lower than current levels. Neither they nor the present readings are high relatively to the geologic record. The entire output of computer climate models begins with the assumption that preindustrial levels were measurably lower.
RitchieGuy
1.3 / 5 (15) Mar 07, 2012
cont'd
Elimination of this assumption further undermines the claim that the warming in the industrial era period was due to human addition of CO2 to the atmosphere. Combined with their assumption that CO2 causes temperature increase when all records show the opposite then it is not surprising that IPCC predictions of temperature increase are consistently wrong. "
Vendicar_Decarian
0.8 / 5 (41) Mar 07, 2012
Denialist Richard Lindzen caught lying yet again.

http://www.realcl...lindzen/

I have never encountered a Libertarian who wasn't a congenital and perpetual liar. Lindzen is no exception to that rule.
RitchieGuy
1.3 / 5 (15) Mar 07, 2012
euconsultants says: "At this moment all oasis in the Sahara are expanding and it seems that this is caused by global warming, but because we are still in the research phase how this can be explained we are quiet about it. If the speed of increase continues the Sahara can be green again in 300-400 years. So, if the problem in Spain, which was already semi-desert, was caused by the proximity to Africa the problem should be decreasing. In reality Spain has built a huge system for water transport whereby water is flowing from areas where we had good rains during winter before to dry areas with soils which are high in nutrients, so water is not drained slowly into the soil anymore but flows away. The water consumption in Spain is so high that boreholes will dry up in the next 20 years, whatever rains they will get."
Thanks for that info, eucon. . .the greening of the Sahara is a desirable thing, one would think. It may sequester CO2 eventually, if that's the case. Spain, being a Catholic
Vendicar_Decarian
0.7 / 5 (40) Mar 07, 2012
This is not a scientific paper and has never been published in a peer review journal. Neither has it been peer reviewed.

It is however been written by Tim Ball, a well known warming denialist and who for years has been in the employ of Libertarian propaganda groups like the Heritage Foundation and the Frasier Institute.

Ball has had a disreputable history of false accusations and failed lawsuits against his critics.

http://www.source...Tim_Ball

"This paper refers to data from air trapped in air bubbles in glaciers," - RichieTard
Vendicar_Decarian
0.7 / 5 (40) Mar 07, 2012
Your "paper" which is actually a blog entry was written by a well known fraud.

"This paper concludes that: The pre-industrial CO2 level was not significantly lower than current levels." - RichieTard

Poor RichieTard. He thinks that if he finds someone telling the same lie that he is, his lie must be the truth.

Sorry Tard Boy. But reason doesn't work that way.
Vendicar_Decarian
0.7 / 5 (40) Mar 07, 2012
Euconsultants Tard tells a whopper...

"At this moment all oasis in the Sahara are expanding and it seems that this is caused by global warming, but because we are still in the research phase how this can be explained we are quiet about it." - Eucon

In reality there is no increase as stated above, but there has been a minor change in the amount of rain falling in the Sahel.

According to the scientific journal Biogeosciences, images taken from 1982 to 2002 reveal a growing vegetation in Sahel, the southern border of Sahara

How this small region gets converted to the lie that all of the Oasis in the Sahara are expanding is something for criminal psychologists to ponder.
RitchieGuy
1.3 / 5 (15) Mar 07, 2012
country, they probably are discouraged from using birth control, and their population increases. Plus the influx of legal and illegal immigration via north Africa continues to deplete their water supply. I believe that the drought will end when the weather conditions change. Malaga, e.g., in southern Spain is by the Mediterranean and may get enough moisture in the air to relieve the drought somewhat.
If the farmers in Spain are enlightened, they would implement "drip irrigation" to conserve water and to prevent washing away of nutrients. Apparently, there are too many housing developments and residents in southern Spain to sustain the water table and the farmers are growing crops that demand heavy watering like lettuce. The same thing happens in south Florida where the Everglades were being drained of water to pipe into coastal cities like Miami and Fort Lauderdale. Too many people make heavy demands on the systems. Something's got to give with 7 billion people.
Vendicar_Decarian
0.9 / 5 (41) Mar 07, 2012
I can't disagree with that.

"I believe that the drought will end when the weather conditions change." - RichieTard

But I can laugh.

Ahahahahahahahahahaah.......
Vendicar_Decarian
0.8 / 5 (40) Mar 07, 2012
Denialist Richard Lindzen caught lying yet again.

http://www.realcl...lindzen/

Lindzen receives funding from the Libertarian propaganda organization calling itself the CATO Institute. CATO operates in an analogous manner to the Heritage Foundation and has many of the same despicable corporate funders.

I have never encountered a Libertarian who wasn't a congenital and perpetual liar. Lindzen is no exception to that rule.
RitchieGuy
1.3 / 5 (16) Mar 07, 2012
You alarmist AGWites are deniers of the truth. . .that your AGW is a fallacy brought on by the need for revenue to third world countries and continued funding for your climatologists. It's a known fact that your AGW scientists fudge the numbers to suit their cockamamie fearmongering that the whole Earth will drown and all humans and animals will choke to death for lack of oxygen.
BUT, even if your lies about AGW were true, none of you are willing to give up driving your cars and flying in airplanes to wherever; and you certainly aren't planning to live in a cold house or apartment.
No, you just want everyone else to give up the conveniences and warmth and stop using fossil fuels.
You're all hypocrites. . .attempting to deride my suggestion of growing biomass to make ethanol just because you may never have heard of it and think it's a stupid idea.
You offer nothing but whining and bitching. You bring up statistics, and yet, your "scientists" have been exposed for FRAUD, LIES and
RitchieGuy
1.3 / 5 (16) Mar 07, 2012
SLANDER of those scientists who are aware that AGW is a money grab scheme.
Give up the money angle and maybe someone might believe your side of the story. But only after you stop using fossil fuels yourselves to show your sincerity.
RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (17) Mar 07, 2012
The AGWite mantra = "Do as I say, don't do as I do". Look at all the extra wealth that AlGore has accumulated from his phony baloney AGW speaking engagements, pseudo literature and blockbuster movie. Otherwise, he doesn't work for a living, coming from a long line of politicians. And howhot admires that. . . .LMAO
Vendicar_Decarian
0.8 / 5 (40) Mar 07, 2012
Without CO2 in the atmosphere, the earth would be a frozen ball of ice. This was first realized by Lord Kelvin back in the late 1800's. The more CO2 you put into the atmosphere, the warmer the surface of the earth becomes.

The results of his calculations haven't changed much since then.

"You alarmist AGWites are deniers of the truth. . .that your AGW is a fallacy brought on by the need for revenue to third world countries and continued funding for your climatologists." - RichieTard

Yes. American Conservatives have long regarded spectroscopy and science in general to be a Conspiracy against their political ideology.

Reality has a strong Liberal Bias.

Vendicar_Decarian
0.8 / 5 (40) Mar 07, 2012
"Do as I say, don't do as I do". Look at all the extra wealth that AlGore has accumulated from his phony baloney AGW speaking engagements" - RichieTard

And again. I burned 47 gallons of gasoline last year Richie Tard. Partly as a result of Al Gore's Genius.

How much gasoline did you burn?
Vendicar_Decarian
0.8 / 5 (40) Mar 07, 2012
Since you have proven that you are incapable of rational behaviour
you will now be compelled to act rationally though tax policies that compel you to act as if you were rational.

You have only yourself to blame.

"Give up the money angle and maybe someone might believe your side of the story/" - RichieTard

Vendicar_Decarian
0.8 / 5 (40) Mar 07, 2012
"SLANDER of those scientists" - RyggTard

The truth is never slander.

Denialist Richard Lindzen caught lying yet again.

Paid by the Libertarian CATO Institute and Caught read handed committing scientific Fraud.

http://www.realcl...lindzen/

Lindzen receives funding from the Libertarian propaganda organization calling itself the CATO Institute. CATO operates in an analogous manner to the Heritage Foundation and has many of the same despicable corporate funders.

I have never encountered a Libertarian who wasn't a congenital and perpetual liar. Lindzen is no exception to that rule.
RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (18) Mar 07, 2012
VendiTard says:
Since you have proven that you are incapable of rational behaviour
you will now be compelled to act rationally though tax policies that compel you to act as if you were rational.

You have only yourself to blame.

"Give up the money angle and maybe someone might believe your side of the story/" - RichieTard


LOL. . ., There you go, , ,you have proven my point, thank you. You believe in the necessity of coercion, threats, theft of individual wealth and property through exorbitant and unfair taxation, possible incarceration and/or reeducation and mind control of the individuals whom you AGWites believe to be in noncompliance of rules and regulations made up by governments who are sucked in to false and unproven global climate issues.
No, you don't have to mention all the above other than taxation. That, in itself, is excessive to those who have been taxed enough already. But I'm sure that if you AGWite phoneys have you way, all the rest will come with foreign help
RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (18) Mar 07, 2012
RitchieGuy said:
SLANDER of those scientists who are aware that AGW is a money grab scheme.
Give up the money angle and maybe someone might believe your side of the story. But only after you stop using fossil fuels yourselves to show your sincerity.


For some strange reason, VendiTard attributes the above quote to Ryggesogn2 when I am the one who said it. VendiTardo needs to hone his reading comprehension skills instead of blaming an innocent person for something that was said by me. I OWN my words, so don't accuse someone else of saying them.
There are many climatologists who are very skeptical of your AGW. They would have no reason to deny AGW if it were true. But your righteous indignation of skeptical scientists who are questioning the validity of your AGW claims only serves to prove that it is the MONEY that you people are after, and you still cannot comprehend that there are con artists even amongst those in the scientific community and in governments and the media
RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (18) Mar 07, 2012
cont'd
regarding belief in AGW aka Global Warming.
You also forget that funding goes both ways. . .funding to the Warmists, and funding to those scientists whose job it is is to prove or disprove a full-blown or potential global warming scenario through experiments and tests that are equal to those that are performed by AGW scientists. However, skeptical scientists have no reason to fudge the numbers to lower or higher levels, whereas, AGW climatologists have much more to gain through more funding, books and scientific papers, AlGore type movies and speaking engagements, employment in government agencies and University faculty and department chairmanships, and so much more.
Skeptical scientists don't have all those goodies to benefit themselves. . .so they seek the truth and offer their findings to the public. And, for the most part, the public cannot be fooled.

The oil industry understands also that their oil is needed by the public since there is no major alternative for it now.
Vendicar_Decarian
0.6 / 5 (39) Mar 07, 2012
"LOL. . ., There you go" - RichieTard

Should you continue to act irrationally, you will be fined.

Should you refuse to pay the fines, you will be jailed.

Should you refuse to be jailed you will be compelled by force.

Should you resist this force, you will be injured.

Should you resist by means of violence, that violence will be met with violence to the point of execution in the street if needed.

How much damage you do to yourself is up to you.

But you will be made to act rationally, one way or the other.

RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (17) Mar 07, 2012
"Do as I say, don't do as I do". Look at all the extra wealth that AlGore has accumulated from his phony baloney AGW speaking engagements" - RichieTard

VendiTardboy says: "And again. I burned 47 gallons of gasoline last year Richie Tard. Partly as a result of Al Gore's Genius.

How much gasoline did you burn?


Oh, I would say that for the year, I estimate that between my pickup and my tractor and other gas-powered implements, I used approx. 200 - 250 U.S. gallons of regular. At this time, the Shell station is charging $3.85US but the station near WalMart is charging about 10 cents less per gallon. I also fill up about 5 - 5 gallon plastic containers with gasoline and bring them home to run my tractor, etc. I only go to town about 2x a month for food, etc. and I stock up on everything we could possibly need from the stores. I pay all my bills online and I grow my own veggies and have 1 milk cow, chickens for slaughter and egg layers.
RitchieGuy
1.3 / 5 (15) Mar 07, 2012
After harvesting, we can the veggies and store them in a cool room below ground level. My cattle get green grass all year round because I grow 2 types of grass instead of relying solely on bales of hay for the winter. My wife is an entrepreneur who works mostly from home and stays in touch with her employees mainly through phone and an internet meeting program. We both pay our taxes and she provides her employees with health care and certain benefits like a good employer should. We go fishing to supplement our meat diet and we're healthy and fit.
How about YOU? :)
RitchieGuy
1.3 / 5 (15) Mar 07, 2012
OH, and did I mention the solar panels on my roof that are useless under cloud cover? I still have to use the grid for TV. fridge and electric stove. We cook outdoors a lot in good weather with a great barbecue using propane. Very effective.
RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (17) Mar 07, 2012
Our electric company buys energy from a coal fired system. While we don't like it, not having electricity at all is not an option.
As I've said before, I will be planting sweet sorghum soon, and the resulting sugars will be fermented into ethanol. Whatever I grow will be used for my tractor and other farm implements. Some of my neighbors may also grow sweet sorghum and we MIGHT form a cooperative to store the ethanol locally and each one take out only as much as was put in. It would work very well, and there will be a meter to ensure no cheating will happen and records will be kept.

And YOU? What exactly are you doing to avert your AGW?
ryggesogn2
1.3 / 5 (16) Mar 07, 2012
Natural gas AC, power and hot water:
http://www.gasair...ages.htm
RitchieGuy
1 / 5 (12) Mar 07, 2012
"LOL. . ., There you go" - RichieTard

VendiTardo says: Should you continue to act irrationally, you will be fined.

Should you refuse to pay the fines, you will be jailed.

Should you refuse to be jailed you will be compelled by force.

Should you resist this force, you will be injured.

Should you resist by means of violence, that violence will be met with violence to the point of execution in the street if needed.

How much damage you do to yourself is up to you.

But you will be made to act rationally, one way or the other.



SIEG HEIL! LMAO
Vendicar_Decarian
0.6 / 5 (39) Mar 07, 2012
Sounds like you are preparing for a Republican presidential victory.

"SIEG HEIL!" - RichieTard

Republican Extremism is why your side is already losing the election.
Vendicar_Decarian
0.8 / 5 (40) Mar 07, 2012
"What exactly are you doing to avert your AGW?" - RichieTard

So far I am 80% Kyoto compliant.

How about you Tard Boy?
Tausch
1 / 5 (7) Mar 07, 2012
This is how social phase transition usually appears. - Calli


But currently politicians (and a lot of the public) are so puffed up about their delusion of self-importance that they'd rather die than admit that the universe hasn't given us a guarantee on survival. - AP


Dr Ioan Fazey is in super ego mode.

The correct response was given by AP - responding in ego mode - when dealing with reasoning fatally tainted with super ego.

The rest of the responses to Dr Ioan Fazey's super ego tainted and painted words are in id mode. Belligerent, indignant, rebellious - to be expected when the 'tone' sounds commandeering.

Howhot
5 / 5 (4) Mar 07, 2012
Sounds like you are preparing for a Republican presidential victory.
Haha, yeah, right. If it doesn't land in the hands of the SCOTUS I think we will be OK.
Howhot
5 / 5 (4) Mar 07, 2012
Itchieguy says "SIEG HEIL!" A great saying for a Pathetic looser!
Looser!
RitchieGuy
1 / 5 (12) Mar 08, 2012
VendiTardo says:
Sounds like you are preparing for a Republican presidential victory.

"SIEG HEIL!" - RichieTard

Republican Extremism is why your side is already losing the election.


Nope. . .that was directed at YOU, VendiKardashian. . .LOL
Those directives you put forth on page 10 say a lot about you. I couldn't decide if it was from the Communist Manifesto or Mein Kampf. .could've been also from Chairman Mao.
It was very impressive. . .but you STILL refuse to say what exactly it is that you're doing to alleviate your AGW and your own CO2 feetprint.
RitchieGuy
1 / 5 (12) Mar 08, 2012
come now. . .don't be shy. . .do you still use electricity from coal, oil or gas burning electric turbines? how about solar? wind? we would all like to know
or is it that you just like to talk about it just for the sake of a discussion?
RitchieGuy
1 / 5 (12) Mar 08, 2012
ohhhh. . .could be that you only use, as you say, 47 gallons of gasoline a year because you take public transportation round trip to work and rarely use your car.
yep. . .that would explain it. And you might even bike to work on your tricycle with your little plastic horn tooting to warn people you'll knock them over if they don't move out of the way. . LOL oh shiiiit
RitchieGuy
1 / 5 (13) Mar 08, 2012
80% kyoto compliant don't mean $hit, Vendikardashiankim. . .what exactly do you do to avert your AGW?
RitchieGuy
1 / 5 (13) Mar 08, 2012
btw Venditardo. . .since you're so hot on AGW. . .do you and your buttbuddy Ghost intend to picket the G8 meeting in Washington DC next month and the NATO meeting in Chicago, also next month? All these bigshots flying around the world in their LearJets and helicopter rides and using up all that jet fuel, polluting the air and killing little children in Africa. What are you and howhot and your buttbuddy Ghost going to do about it?
Vendicar_Decarian
0.6 / 5 (39) Mar 08, 2012
I don't blame you for looking for new leadership. Your Republican hopefuls are un-electable losers.

"Nope. . .that was directed at YOU, VendiKardashian." - RichieTard

"Those directives you put forth on page 10 say a lot about you." - RichieTard

They do indeed. I intend to hold your kind responsible for your actions. One by one if needed.
Vendicar_Decarian
0.6 / 5 (39) Mar 08, 2012
"do you still use electricity from coal" - RichieTard

In my case, it is mostly nuclear.

I consume $17 worth of electricity per month.

How about you?
Vendicar_Decarian
0.6 / 5 (39) Mar 08, 2012
"what exactly do you do to avert your AGW?" - RichieTard

I live efficiently, while living well.

I burned 47 gallons of gasoline last year RichieTard.

How much did you consume?

What excuse do you have for your moral and intellectual failure?
Vendicar_Decarian
0.7 / 5 (40) Mar 08, 2012
"All these bigshots flying around the world in their LearJets and helicopter rides and using up all that jet fuel." - RichieTard

You gotta spend money to make money. Tard Boy.

And when you are stuck in a land full of dung eaters like yourself, you have to spend fuel to save fuel.

And I anticipate that you consume several times more fuel than one of those jet flights do.

Now why are you so unwilling to tell us how much gasoline you consume per year? You have been asked several times and always avoid the answer.
Vendicar_Decarian
0.6 / 5 (39) Mar 08, 2012
I have a 16 mile round trip to my place of work. A bit far for a bicycle. But within the range of an E-Bike.

They are becoming quite popular around here.

Unfortunately they don't have the hill climbing capability and speed that I need.

"And you might even bike to work on your tricycle with your little plastic horn tooting to warn people you'll knock them over if they don't move out of the way." - RichieTard
Vendicar_Decarian
0.6 / 5 (39) Mar 08, 2012
"how about solar? wind? we would all like to know" - RichieTard

Feed in supplements are expanding wind power around where I live. However average wind speeds at my home location are not sufficient for practical use of a wind turbine.

Improving consumptive efficiency is always the first step toward converting to alternate sources of energy. Electrical consumption for me is now pretty much at a minimum with the exception of one step. The conversion of the hot water system to passive solar.

Unfortunately the way my house is constructed makes the retrofit problematic.

Once fitted it should reduce my electrical power consumption from 7 KWh per day to 6 KWh per day.

What is your daily electric power consumption, Tard Boy?
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.8 / 5 (13) Mar 08, 2012
Little Ritchie burns much gasoline growing sorghum which has yet failed to turn itself into ethanol. It just sits and rots like Ritchie does.

Hey Ritchie I notice you made a skulltch sockpuppet to pretend someone here is actually uprating you? That is also extremely sad. Just how empty ARE you?
RitchieGuy
1 / 5 (12) Mar 08, 2012
VendiKardashian. . .you know already how much fuel I use. I gave you that info back in page 9 and 10 so I suggest you go and read it. I'm not typing it over again.
RitchieGuy
1 / 5 (12) Mar 08, 2012
I don't blame you for looking for new leadership. Your Republican hopefuls are un-electable losers.

"Nope. . .that was directed at YOU, VendiKardashian." - RichieTard

"Those directives you put forth on page 10 say a lot about you." - RichieTard

They do indeed. I intend to hold your kind responsible for your actions. One by one if needed.


LOL. . .in that case, you will also have to hold politicians like Harry Reid, Mr. and Mrs. Barack Obama and the AlGores, John Kerrys, Barney Frank, Sen. Dodd, and every Democrat on the Hill and in each state gov't. responsible and accountable for AGW. There are also the Republicans whose use of airplane and helicopter rides probably equal those of the Demorats and my previous reference to G8 and NATO bigshots who consume jet fuel to visit each others' country in conferences and social calls.
RitchieGuy
1.1 / 5 (14) Mar 08, 2012
Then you can go on to California and do your stuff with all those Zionist Hollywood producers, directors, actors, comedians, etc. who drive gas guzzlers and use millions of kWH collectively. You might also want to curtail night time football, baseball and the NBA games who use a lot of kWH lighting up the fields and the court. You will piss off sports fans and they will come for you and howhot with a rope to hang you from lampposts, but that's only a minor drawback since you can call for NATO or UN backup to use your bullets that you've referred to before.
How about all those gasoline and diesel consuming snow throwers and vehicles that clear highways and neighborhoods of snow to keep traffic flowing. They're not needed, right?
VendiTard. . .you will need an army to do what you want to do. . .and we have our own. We're better organized too than you and your friends will ever be.
:))
Howhot
5 / 5 (4) Mar 09, 2012
You will piss off sports fans and they will come for you and howhot with a rope to hang you from lampposts, but that's only a minor drawback since you can call for NATO or UN backup to use your bullets that you've referred to before.


UN IPPC Bullets are the best! Ichieguy. All your horse turds don't mean anything compared to the issues before us. Before us is the debate; "Time to act to prevent worsening global environmental deterioration"!!!

Itchieguy likes to distract from the focus of this article. That is there is major environmental disaster facing earth from the elephant in the closet; ANTHROPOGENIC GLOBAL WARMING!

Wake up people! To avert a man made global 2200 extinction, A SOCIAL AVALANCHE IS NEEDED! A social avalanche that condemns carbon and utilizes carbon free energy.

Excalibur
2.5 / 5 (13) Mar 11, 2012
You know, R2 and Itchieguy probably listen to Rush Limbaugh (pathetic clown of an ENTERTAINER he is

Sums up the value of Marjon and PottyMouth as well.
Excalibur
2.5 / 5 (13) Mar 11, 2012
... do you and your buttbuddy

Has anyone else noticed PottyMouth's fascination with anal sex?

ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (13) Mar 11, 2012
... do you and your buttbuddy

Has anyone else noticed PottyMouth's fascination with anal sex?


Only the 'progressives' have free reign to insult?
Excalibur
2.5 / 5 (13) Mar 11, 2012
Name another with said fascination.
Howhot
3.7 / 5 (6) Mar 11, 2012
I've noticed it. Itchieguy has a fixation.

Basically he is just here to waste space like a robot. The more he posts the more off-topic the subject becomes. So there is not a person behind his words. He's an IT. If it has any kids, they are probably ugly, stupid, and poor.

He's been babeling incoherently on about CO2 coming from deep ocean Hydrothermal vents? What a fool.
Howhot
3.7 / 5 (6) Mar 11, 2012
Rightwing deniers are just here to make your future life miserable while they suck-up to their Koch and Rush overlords.
Excalibur
2.7 / 5 (14) Mar 11, 2012
Well, the latter would certainly explain said fixation.

Wonder if it's with or without lubrication and/or condom.
ryggesogn2
1.1 / 5 (14) Mar 12, 2012
Rightwing deniers are just here to make your future life miserable while they suck-up to their Koch and Rush overlords.

I guess it is understandable socialists believe in overlords. That is their way.
RitchieGuy
1.1 / 5 (16) Mar 12, 2012
Excalibur says:
Well, the latter would certainly explain said fixation.

Wonder if it's with or without lubrication and/or condom.


LOL. . .apparently Excalibur is into buttphookery since he seems to know the procedure and methods of such activities. Thanks for the information about your personal life, Excalibur. I had no idea that you were into that $hit. Tch Tch
RitchieGuy
1 / 5 (13) Mar 12, 2012
Actually, a buttbuddy means "A butt buddy is a derogatory term for someone who plays the "gay card" For example, someone who follows someone around every where they go. Friends that sleep in the same bed. Normally one follows the other. They can not be separated. Are all examples of butt buddies."

http://wiki.answe...tt_buddy

This describes TheGhostofOtto1923 and FrankHerbert, AND it describes Excalibur and deepsand. The couples seem to be inseparable and are found in Physorg threads agreeing with each other and downvoting others as a couple. That was MY definition of a buttbuddy and I never mentioned anything sexual in that respect. But thanks again, Excalibur. You have explained a lot. LOL

It can also mean the passenger on a motorcycle who is close to the driver's butt.
RitchieGuy
1 / 5 (12) Mar 12, 2012
howhot says:
Rightwing deniers are just here to make your future life miserable while they suck-up to their Koch and Rush overlords.


Ummm. . .how about LEFTwing deniers?
Howhot
5 / 5 (2) Mar 12, 2012
"Only the 'progressives' have free reign to insult?" Good call R2.
Itchieguy just need to take his HIV meds.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.9 / 5 (9) Mar 13, 2012
As I've said before, I will be planting sweet sorghum soon, and the resulting sugars will be fermented into ethanol...to store the ethanol locally and each one take out only as much as was put in.
Funny. U of Arizona is only just now working on a pilot plant project for sweet sorghum. They've grown 40 acres (coincidence?) but couldn't manage the logistics for even this test project because the intermediate support is not yet available.
http://obpreview2...t%20.pdf

-So without further research (I don't feel like wasting an additional 5 minutes) I feel confident in reiterating the conclusion that I share with most everyone who reads your posts, that you are a liar. Unless you can disprove it? Got your BATF paperwork done for your still? Come on, prove you're not the imbecile you appear to be. IMO. LOL.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.