Oh those wacky enviromentalists...

[Sava]

well said Boris... Fez basically just proved my point with that link to that political party. Ahhh Spain... the one European country that never really stepped out of the realm of Fascism.

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov


So let's not hold any companies accountable for destroying the environment. Brilliant. What planet are you from? Well, the planet you will end up being on is going to be a barren rock if you had your way. What good will all that R&D do you if you have to suit up like an astronaut to go to the corner store for milk?

I never said that you dumb know-it-all. I said lets give them the incentive to find new technology with grants to. That will be the only way. Not punishing them. But giving them a financial opportunity to develop new technology.

The only think more disconcerting that environmental extremists are anti-environment extremists like you.

The only thought you mean. Sorry I am picky on typos. I am not against the environment and I am not against capitalism.

Don't need any help from me, they did that on their own!

OMG here we go again.

What wasn't I clear on? I think every one of my statements was clear. Yours about environuts in the 1800s was not, as you yourself admitted.

I was clear. I just used that as an inference... I was saying if they were around then the economy still be based on farming and the industrial revolution would of never occured.

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by Sava
Ahhh Spain... the one European country that never really stepped out of the realm of Fascism.

Another spit in the face for my country from the true know-it-all.

[Sava]

Sorry Fez, "I just call evil by its name" --- Dubya

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Fez


I never said that you dumb know-it-all.

You whine about perceived insults, then use blatant ones yourself? Chalk up hypocrisy to that list, Sava.

I said lets give them the incentive to find new technology with grants to. That will be the only way. Not punishing them. But giving them a financial opportunity to develop new technology.

I just reviewed every post you have in this thread. Not once, ever, did you say this in a post. Stop lying.

The only though you mean.

What? Oh yeah, you're real clear, always...

OMG here we go again.

Hey, you set yourself up for that one.

I was clear. I just used that as an inference... I was saying if they were around then the economy still be based on farming and the industrial revolution would of never occured.

That wasn't what your first post said. It implied you were stating that there were environuts around in 1800, and if they had won we'd be agrarian. Don't blame people for not understanding your misplaced modifiers.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by cia
The difficulty I have with environmentalists is twofold:
They ignore the fact homo sapiens are PART of the environment, NOT existing outside of it.

You sound just like my father, who has never listened to an environmentalist in his life. He has all kinds of ideas about what environmentalists think, thanks to listening to Rush, but he's never actually picked up anything written by them and to se what they actually do think.

[Sava]

Hypocrisy.... check

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov


You whine about perceived insults, then use blatant ones yourself? Chalk up hypocrisy to that list, Sava.

This is getting pathetic. You really don't know how to argue?

I just reviewed every post you have in this thread. Not once, ever, did you say this in a post. Stop lying.

And neither did I say otherwise.

That wasn't what your first post said. It implied you were stating that there were environuts around in 1800, and if they had won we'd be agrarian. Don't blame people for not understanding your misplaced modifiers.

No I DIDN'T. WRONG. I said if there were, and that is what I implied. If I typed incorrectly, then I correct myself. Going to insult my english now I see?

This forum is just packed with liars and insulters.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Fez
This is getting pathetic. You really don't know how to argue?

Defensive snarling 101

And neither did I say otherwise.

What?!

I quote you:

I said lets give them the incentive to find new technology with grants to. That will be the only way. Not punishing them. But giving them a financial opportunity to develop new technology.

Then I said:

I just reviewed every post you have in this thread. Not once, ever, did you say this in a post. Stop lying.

And you have the balls to say:

And neither did I say otherwise.

Hoisted on your own petard!

No I DIDN'T. WRONG. I said if there were, and that is what I implied. If I typed incorrectly, then I correct myself. Going to insult my english now I see?

No what you said was:

If these environuts got there way in 1800s we all would living in a wild west scenario... 90% of the economy dependent on agriculture.

Not "if there were." Don't blame other people for misconstruing your intent when you wrote it badly. I wasn't insulting your English, I was pointing out how you implied something stupid. You then insisted you'd been clear and I had not. This is starting to be like shooting fish in a barrell.

This forum is just packed with liars and insulters.

Don't be so hard on yourself, buddy.

[Sava]

I guess I can understand Fez's frustration. It's easier to find supporters when he's atop the soapbox on the playground instead of talking to intellegent people.

[Lincoln]

The forests need to be put into the care of conservationists like Teddy Roosevelt. He preserved millions of acres when he was in office and established several national parks that both people and animals enjoy. Radicals on both sides of the issue just create animosity where there doesn't need to be any. As least some of the fires that are now burning in the west could have been brought under control by now if reasonable people were allowed to clear the forests of dead wood and thin them some and maintain fire roads. Now we have hundreds of square miles destroyed and made a wasteland. In the process precious animals were burned alive along with the endangered species that were supposed to be protected.

So now what do the extremists say about this? They say that forest fires are part of the natural course of events so therefore we should let them burn! Meanwhile whole cities are in the paths of these fires But I suppose the possibility of wiping out millions of 'evil' people is appealing to some of these nuts.

Yes, forest fires are a part of nature and a renewal process will begin after the burn but there is now a small factor that must be considered as we let nature take its course: People.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Sava
I guess I can understand Fez's frustration. It's easier to find supporters when he's atop the soapbox on the playground instead of talking to intellegent people.

The problem is he wants people to give him a free pass when he says dumb things, but jumps on others when he doesn't agree with them. No double-standards in a forum, though.

If you can't take the heat...

[Boris Godunov]

Lincoln, that's why most environmentalists (that I know, at least) advocate controlled, rotational burns of forests that have minimal impact on humans. They're already doing this in some parts of the west, and the result has been a dramatic drop in uncontrolled forest fires. You simply have to have forest fires if you're going to have forests.

[chequita guevara]

Actually, the conservationists pretty well screwed up the national forest system. They're the ones who wiped out the alpha preditors (wolves, bears, pumas) in an effort to conserve the deer. Result, massive dear population explosion. We now have serious deer problems in many suburbs because there's nothing killing off the dear. Attempts to cull the dear population are often met with protest by liberal animal lover protests.

The same thing with the fires. By surpressing forest fires for nearly a century, an unnatural undergrowth has built up creating a massive amount of kindling. Because of the conservationist fire surpression, forest fires are now bigger and hotter than they should be, and consequently far more dangerous.

[Giancarlo]

I don't even know why I argue with idiots... take your sig in mind Boris.