PETA roars over U.K. army?s bearskin hats

Well, if nothing else, this thread has been illuminating. You never know how some people think.




Well, I do now, anyway.
 
happychem said:
I don't know if I agree with that, or at least not 100%.

Your so-called increase in productivity is only from a human perspective. With the exception of GMO's and hybrids, the actual productivity has changed very little. Crop rotations don't increase productivity, they decrease the rate of soil depletion. While infinitely better in terms of soil health, they also result in a greater area necessary to grow the same quantity of food, I would define that as a decrease in productivity, where I'm defining productivity as food produced per unit area. This also means a greater amount of deforestation. While some of this wood will be used as lumber, when increasing agricultural area, most is slash and burn, which means converting carbon from plant matter to greenhouse gases, ultimately, CO2.
Click to expand...

What about selective breeding?
 
Beeker said:
Happychem,

I would agree with you if your information were correct. Fortunately for the Earth and its inhabitants, the information about global warming and such are lies. Over 18000 scientists including the head of the department of Meteorology and Atmospheric Studies at MIT explain that fears about global warming are based on myth. Many of them will go on to say that environmentalism is being driven to promote a more sinister agenda of land grabs and enslavement.
Another myth widely spoken about is overpopulation. It will never happen. Our country alone contains about a third of the population of the planet, and central U.S. is still barely populated. Those who promote the myth of overpopulation are most commonly those elitists that promote eugenics and enslavement. Hitler, Stalin, Lenin, etc.
Click to expand...

Now, if only all of your information were correct...
The world already IS overpopulated, and is getting worse.
Global warming IS also happening, just ask Canadians, coral reefs, and Scandanavians.
 
Beeker said:
I just wanted to clarify: not all industrialists are evil, look at Henry Ford. He was a good man. I used the term "elitists" to be more specific.
Click to expand...

P.S. If Ford wasn't evil, are you idolizing Nazism? He published a newspaper promoting the idea and denouncing Jews, by the way. :thud:
 
slipknottin said:
Youve got to figure, if there is that much of an abundant supply of food for these animals, that there is a waste of resouces somewhere. Either that other animals that also eat these foods have been eliminated, or that the bears are not in sufficient numbers yet to control these prey items (wether plant or animal).
Click to expand...
You lost me. What prey items? I'm not going to argue about the extent of the cull, perhaps it is high. Other than that article, which I consider to be of repudable source, I've not researched the numbers. I agree that 50k sounds high, but again, an issue of scale. It looks like about a 10% cull. Is that a lot? I don't know, we'd have to ask a wildlife biologist in the field.
 
Fishypoo,
I don't think we are referring to the same Ford.

Happychem,
I, more often than not, hold your posts as well informed and quite weighty, but this time, considering that these are topics that I have studied for most years of my life, I know that my facts, unlike those you are offering, are true and have been proven as such.

Also, I used those certain posts because they were easiest to access. I'm sure if you knew what the New American is you would probably understand that it isn't one source but a website that contains multiple sources in one place for easy access.

Most people are guilty of using sweeping generalizations. I try my best not to. But no one can truthfully say that "all scientists" agree that global warming is really happening. That statement just is plain wrong and global warming isn't happening. That has been proven. If you want to find flaws in the articles I've provided go ahead and find evidence. I don't want anybody to take this the wrong way, I'm not saying this in a bad tone. I just will not listen to opinions, only proof. I recommend that everybody do just that. If people don't do that, than just about everybody would end up agreeing with PETA (for example).
 
Regardless of what you believe I still say that using The New American as your sole source is a bad idea. It is actually a website that is filled with information from the New American Magazine which has a mandate of confronting the liberal mainstream media.

Your arguements will have much better weight if you use other sources and since you have been studying this for so many years I am sure you can easily find other sources that don't sound so anti-the rest of the world. As a Canadian all I can say is that The New American sounds a little one sided to me, which is funny since they are saying how the liberal media is one sided.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
AquariaCentral.com
Top Bottom