Jude 2

I'm watching a horrid mess of a show on National Geographic channel right now, called "Aftermath: Population Zero". The premise is, what would happen if humans disappeared from the earth. History Channel did a similar show months ago that was actually pretty good. This show, however, is nothing but greenie propaganda. The viewpoint of the show is basically about how much of a better place earth would be without us dirty humans. They keep talking about how awful it is that we humans have "forced our will" on the planet.

First they want to make us ashamed of being Christians. Then they want to make us ashamed of being Americans. Now the liberals want to make us ashamed of being HUMAN BEINGS. These people are self loathing morons!

Look at the Moon. There's no humans there and it's a veritable wasteland! Is that what these tree-huggers want? For the Earth to be just like the Moon?

DaJudge,
I am no tree hugger. Far from it, I do however believe in responsible development of our resources. My views on this are largely shaped by what I have witnessed happening to the south Florida. In it's natural state, the way that God created it, south Florida was mostly wetlands (the Everglades). It is the water table for the area. Then along came man, the land developers, and pressured Congress and the Corp of Engineers to drain the Everglades so that it could be developed. The Corp gladly dug drainage canals, "it will control the flooding" was the excuse. The Corp then went on and dug the Kissimmee Barge Canal to provide the sugar cane industry a more direct route to ship the product. This canal diverted the water course of the Kissimmee River which fed Lake Okeechobee, which in turn feeds the Everglades. The volume of fresh water flowing into the Glades was reduced, which allowed the salt water from the ocean to begin intruding the water table. Fourty years ago, when I was a young man, there wasn't any salt water intrusion more than a thousand feet inland. The salt water now intrudes as much as twenty five inland or more presently. The Everglades are being filled in and developed. Millions of tract houses and condos continue to place an ever increasing demand on the water supply, which because of the ongoing development is diminishing. Eventually a point will be reached where the water table collapses, then there will be no fresh water to supply all the people that have moved to the region, to water the crops of the farmers. South Florida will become, for all purposes, a dessert. What little that is left of the Everglades will be a salt marsh.

In fairness I will state that finally some have come to their senses and the Corp is now restoring the Kissimmee River to it's natural course, at the cost of many hundreds of millions of dollars. Tax payer money was used to create this mess and now we have to pay even more to clean it up.

Man has not proven to be a good steward of the world that God gave us. Yes, develop our resources, I have no problem with that. However, do so in a responsible manner, understand the limitations of the environment you are developing. Develop in a manner that will allow it to be renewed. Don't just come in and do something just to make a buck without thought as to what will happen down the road.


TW

TW wrote:I am no tree hugger. Far from it, I do however believe in responsible development of our resources.

So do I TW. But here's the thing. God made us different from the animals and plants. He gave us creativity and self awareness. He gave us the ability, not only to survive, but to change our environment. We are supposed to use our intellect. God doesn't want us sitting around in caves like wild animals.

Should we pollute the earth needlessly? No. It's not in mans' longterm best interests to do so. But these greenies seem to view humanity as an infestation of the earth.

DaJudge wrote:We are supposed to use our intellect.

Good point.

I thought this was a thread about the Greenie dog treats my poodle loves to eat...My bad!

Tim Elston wrote:

DaJudge wrote:We are supposed to use our intellect.

Good point.

Thanks. Hope you took something from it. Instead of thinking with your bleeding heart, feel good emotions, maybe you'll use some logic from now on.

I, too, realize that we are to be proper environmental stewards. However, the green movement is at once a religious and a political movement. They profess to protect the earth, but in fact they seek to break the economies of the developed world, and to control the population of mankind.

I believe it not to be a conspiracy, because their goals are openly declared. Renowned enironmentalist Jacques Cousteau advocated population control as a means to preserve our planet, as he said, "One American burdens the earth much more than twenty Bangladesh...This is a terrible thing to say. In order to stabilize world populations, we must eliminate 350,000 people per day. It is a horrible thing to say, but it's just as bad not to say it."

More quotes such as this can be found at http://www.oicu2.com/afc/mixedquotes.html

In fact, China is right now claiming to have carbon credits to sell based on their efforts to reduce carbon emissions through population control, in concordance with the Kyoto Protocol!

If that is true, then some of the world's worst dictators could be viewed as great environmentalists! Come on people! Wake up, people!

bibleguy wrote: However, the green movement is at once a religious and a political movement.

You are 100% right. The green movement is a religion for atheists. You are required to believe in it despite all the evidence (that's another way of saying you must have "faith").

Any scientist or professor who questions greenie dogma is ostracized and frequently will loose his/her job (excommunication).

They even have a Pope named AlGore (or maybe he's just the false prophet).

Heck, they even sell indulgences just like the Catholic Church used to. They just call them carbon offsets.

It's a fraud and a sham.

DaJudge wrote:

bibleguy wrote: However, the green movement is at once a religious and a political movement.

You are 100% right. The green movement is a religion for atheists. You are required to believe in it despite all the evidence (that's another way of saying you must have "faith").

Any scientist or professor who questions greenie dogma is ostracized and frequently will loose his/her job (excommunication).

They even have a Pope named AlGore (or maybe he's just the false prophet).

Heck, they even sell indulgences just like the Catholic Church used to. They just call them carbon offsets.

It's a fraud and a sham.

Man we agree on so many levels Dajudge

DaJudge wrote:

Tim Elston wrote:

DaJudge wrote:We are supposed to use our intellect.

Good point.

Thanks. Hope you took something from it. Instead of thinking with your bleeding heart, feel good emotions, maybe you'll use some logic from now on.

What I took from it is that we should use our intelligence. In my opinion we should use it to assess and prioritize problems instead of to react emotionally on the basis of partisanship. Reason does not usually cut along emotional lines. As far as this issue goes, I think it is a mistake to be so intent on reacting to environmental extremism that we set ourselves against reasonable conservationism. It is a mistake to buy into either extreme environmentalism or extreme anti-conservationism.

DaJudge wrote:Heck, they even sell indulgences just like the Catholic Church used to. They just call them carbon offsets.

It's a fraud and a sham.

Carbon offsets are an effective economic instrument in providing incentive to put money into alternative energy research and development and in reducing energy waste and polution. I am a global warming skeptic, but I see the value in these effects of carbon offsets and so am not inclined to denigrate them.

Tim Elston wrote:Carbon offsets are an effective economic instrument in providing incentive to put money into alternative energy research and development and in reducing energy waste and polution. I am a global warming skeptic, but I see the value in these effects of carbon offsets and so am not inclined to denigrate them.

Wikipedia much, Centrist?

Carbon offsets are a scam. Take for instance the case of the patron saint of global warming, AlGore. He claims to be "carbon neutral", even though his mansion in Tennessee consumes 20 times the energy an average American household uses, and he flies around in gas guzzling private jets instead of commercial aircraft. He claims that he "offsets" his "carbon footprint" by purchasing carbon offsets.

Guess who he buys them from?

The company that he is a major stockholder in and Chairman of, Generation Investment Management.

He's not purchasing offsets, he's buying stock in his own company.

Furthermore, don't you find that it might POSSIBLY be a conflict of interest that AlGore is making millions of dollars selling carbon offsets that are being purchased because of the HYSTERIA that he himself is whipping up?

Don't you think that the fact that he is personally profiting from global warming hysteria might have some impact on his credibility on the matter?

DaJudge wrote:Don't you think that the fact that he is personally profiting from global warming hysteria might have some impact on his credibility on the matter?

Al Gore has no credibility with me. One of the reasons I remain a global warming skeptic is because I understand that there is a profiteering industry behind the scare. Both rightists and leftists profiteer from fear--the right on fear of enemies, the left on fear of environmental threat. And if we are going to take umbrage at Al Gore for profiting from a scare for which he is a spokesman, then it is inconsistent not to take it at Dick Cheney, who has set himself up to profit from the no-bid contracts he distributed to Halliburton for a War for which he scandalously ordered and claimed false evidence. I condemn both Gore and Cheney for profiteering from self-made conflicts of interest at the public's expense.

Emissions trading was effective in reducing air pollution in the United States during the 1970s and has been shown to be effective according to economic theory. New Zealand has recently instituted a carbon emissions trading system that rewards energy innovation and conservation. On a national or international scale such emissions trading programs have proven effective, and since I see that there is something to be gained from reduced fossil energy consumption I generally support such programs.

Wow. A thread about Global Warming that I did start. Bravo.

1) No environment on this planet is constant. Sheer nature will change it.. EVEN if we leave it alone and live in caves. The blasted continents move as the Almighty God in Heaven directs. Estimated over 95% of all the species that ever lived on Earth are extinct. We are all finite. Deal with it.

2) Global Warming is pure bunk devised to CONTROL pure and simple via an Elite European religion. The earth hasn't warmed since 1998 and has been in a downward spiral since then. The Polar Ice caps are back 5% greater than in 1979!


This manufactured crisis bubble will BURST soon as these CONTROL PUSHERS are going to REACH to far.. to fast as they see this CONTROL slipping from they're hands. SO they will attempt to move quickly even as the planet is literally REJECTING they're worship. You have to love it.


Nobody rejects conservation applied via effective common sense... but even THAT is up for debate of late.