Bush and Big Oil

ocelot

Registered User
Forum Member
May 21, 2003
1,937
0
0
Mount Shasta
In theory, presumably we have elections so that we can put intelligent forward-thinking people in a position to steer us around the icebergs ahead. Increasingly it seems that now we elect people to tell us what we WANT to hear and that will allow us to remain in our dreamy little dreamworld.

It is a mystery how to me how a person can deny that human activity is having an adverse impact on the environment and yet believe that Bush didn't fudge or even fabricate the WMD issue in Iraq despite clear evidence.

To each his own comfortable little delusion I suppose.
 

ocelot

Registered User
Forum Member
May 21, 2003
1,937
0
0
Mount Shasta
Wilson issues forth with his usual drool. I am beginning to suspect he may be a member of the White House staff.
 

dr. freeze

BIG12 KING
Forum Member
Aug 25, 2001
7,170
8
0
Mansion
ocelot said:
Yes, I suppose it is ludicrous to concern oneself about pollution, overpopulation and deforestation (not to mention the rise of superstition and religious fundamentalism which looks at every self-inflicted wound as part of "Jehovah's Master Plan" thus conveniently enabling the "faithful" to take no responsibility to solve or prevent anything).

Real humorous issues these are. Truly humanity is hopelessly blind and ignorant. As Bill Hicks said - "A virus with shoes".

who is the deluded?

Facts:

Though nearly 75 percent of the total industrial wood production comes from Northern Hemisphere industrial countries, the temperate forest lands of this region are expanding.

Almost all of the timber harvested in the United States, Europe, and Nordic countries comes from second-growth/plantation forests

Fully two-thirds of the deforestation in the United Sates occurred in the sixty years prior to 1910 and most of the other third before 1850.

Although the United States has been the world's number one timber producer since World War II, U.S. forests have experienced an increase in volume in the past fifty years and have maintained roughly the same area over the past seventy-five years.

In recent years, private forest lands have accounted for 85 percent of total tree planting and seeding in the United States. The expansion of American forests has been made possible by improved tree-growing technology, the advent of tree plantations, improved control over wildfire, and the reversion of many agricultural lands, especially in the South and East, to forest.
 

ocelot

Registered User
Forum Member
May 21, 2003
1,937
0
0
Mount Shasta
So now Freeze actually believes as the Earth's population grows exponentially that the forests are as well. Somehow that doesn't seem to square with the steady decrease of wild habitat, animal and fish populations.

Ahh yes - "tree-growing technology" and tree plantations. Sounds very natural to me. I'm sure fully functional ecosystems can be found there. Undoubtedly confining tree harvesting and controlling it as the U.S. has done is a positive thing. As far as the US in concerned what is more of a problem is the loss of farmland and woodlands to real estate development. Happening all around where I live. These trees are not being replaced by tree farms but by suburban malls and subdivs. Farmland being sold off for the same.

It is rare to see planning for a sustainable community in the mad dash to make a buck by the developers who also seem to control county commissions and have big lobbying interests at the State level.
 

dawgball

Registered User
Forum Member
Feb 12, 2000
10,652
39
48
50
ocelot--sometimes I think you just search for shit to complain about. I don't think anyone here has denied that people adversely effect the world we live in. It is an unavoidable fact. What we need to do is look for ways to improve the way we treat it. Freeze's post points out a way that we, as a country, have made attempts to put back or at least improve the way we previously raped forest land. It's amazing that you even have a problem with that.

"tree growing technology"--Are you against this? Should we go back to walking around with bags of seeds HOPING that trees magically sprout up?

the world is growing. You can either have a positive impact by your personal decisions or you can sit around and bitch about how Republicans are to blame for everything.

I'm not sure what Kool-Aid you keep referring to but make mine Tropical Punch. Just make sure you don't lace mine with the Bitchy Pills that you have been fed.
 

ocelot

Registered User
Forum Member
May 21, 2003
1,937
0
0
Mount Shasta
The original point of all this is that by electing people like President Cheney we are not going to be doing anything about it - in fact we are going to make it worse.

At least with other choices there is a small chance that worse damage won't be deliberately inflicted and that problems won't have their existence denied.
 

dr. freeze

BIG12 KING
Forum Member
Aug 25, 2001
7,170
8
0
Mansion
obviously Ocelot is not living in our century as we have been taking care of our country very well during the last 100 or so years

nor has he probably been around much of the country as there are still a couple undeveloped acres in some parts of the country

but he still whines about deforestation, after facts have been presented about how forests are alive and growing and have been for years

maybe we have too many trees! maybe that will cause an ice age! (these will be the headlines in 25 years once the greenpeaceniks catch up to the facts)
 

dr. freeze

BIG12 KING
Forum Member
Aug 25, 2001
7,170
8
0
Mansion
ocelot said:
The original point of all this is that by electing people like President Cheney we are not going to be doing anything about it - in fact we are going to make it worse.

At least with other choices there is a small chance that worse damage won't be deliberately inflicted and that problems won't have their existence denied.

yeah, look at what Cheney did to his homestate of Wyoming....a total urban disaster lol

ocelot it might be time to take a vacation, go to Montana and visit Glacier National Part...see some wildlife, do some fishing, hike on some trails

Personally, I need a refresher every once in a while or i get cynical myself...might be time to take one for you
 

ocelot

Registered User
Forum Member
May 21, 2003
1,937
0
0
Mount Shasta
I think we need a President who puts his priorities on fighting medical scientific advances likestem-cell research and prayer in schools - who cares about little problems like Global Warming.
 

dr. freeze

BIG12 KING
Forum Member
Aug 25, 2001
7,170
8
0
Mansion
ocelot said:
I think we need a President who puts his priorities on fighting medical scientific advances likestem-cell research and prayer in schools - who cares about little problems like Global Warming.

lol changing the subject to "global warming"

whatever happened to the impending ice age that I was indoctrinated with as a child?

today's children are fueled with "global warming" perpetuated by inference, myth, incomplete data, short history of data, incomplete understanding of the atmosphere, etc. etc

for some reason its a huge problem in some people's minds
 

JT

Degenerate
Forum Member
Mar 28, 2000
3,592
81
48
60
Ventura, Ca.
I tried to be a tree hugger once but got tired of the trees not hugging me back so I decided to be a evil earth rapist instead. :bump:
 

ferdville

Registered User
Forum Member
Dec 24, 1999
3,165
5
0
77
So Cal
Ocelot - I am getting a little tired of your groundless attacks on people who differ with your twisted and distorted view on various issues that you always see as Republican vs Democrat. Your latest salvo on global warming is just as specious and unintelligible as most of your other baseless dribble that you virtually vomit forth on the forum.
Before getting in to your absurd attack on me, let's review your brilliant statement that "All scientists agree on the cause..."
Besides being a patent lie, please illuminate the dullards like me out here and clearly explain what the "cause" is. Then we can go from there. Somehow you have extrapolated facts that lead you to believe that Bush is responsible for global warming. Are you really serious about that? Have you read your statements before embarrassing yourself by printing it for all to see? What type of educational background do you have? Are you a post elementary grad student?
You have the temerity to equate my logic with that of a monkey. I would actually consider that a relatively bright monkey could give you a run for your money when it comes to logic. When you start with such an idiotic lie ("All scientists agree...") it simply points out your close minded approach to this and most every topic you choose to spew forth here. You, me, and everybody else that has even an iota of intelligence knows that "All" is the wrong word to use here. So tell me, there is not any scientist anywhere that disagrees? It is just a perfect example of the blinders you must wear as you skip through your world as you see it.
Then you compound your original inane statement by popping off about my God, according to you - George. I assume you meant Bush, not Jetson, Jefferson, or Curious...but who in the hell are you to determine what my God is? If you had ever read any of my posts, you would know that I have stated my disapproval of Bush and his policies and actions many times over. That is, of course, assuming that your reading comprehension allows even a modicum of understanding.
You are mired in a morass of ignominy. You can't deal with anyone who disagrees with you simply because ... uh, uh, they disagree with you. It is your way or the highway. I'll let you in on a secret. You will be about as successful debating me as someone trying to sink a battleship with a spitball. Your distorted views are becoming as boring and repetitive as the proverbial broken record. Turn the record over and sing a new song once and a while. Look at the overall picture not the slice of life you choose that is tilted toward nothing else but slamming Republicans and Bush. I would think you would be able to distinguish that the so-called global warming controversy has gone on far longer than the time Bush has been in office. And despite your insistance that "All scientists know the cause..." that isn't really the case. The world has experienced temperature change from day one and will continue to do so until it extinguishes. Global warming today was global cooling in the 1970's. Iceland isn't even covered with ice any more. Deal with the problem in what ever way you see fit, but it doesn't boil down to George Bush against the environment and no matter how many fallacious claims you continue to make, it will remain that way. You choose to attack what you consider the cause rather than absorb the facts and then speak your mind.
 

ocelot

Registered User
Forum Member
May 21, 2003
1,937
0
0
Mount Shasta
ferd - if YOU could read you would not claim that I "blamed" global warming on Bush Jr or Sr but rather their denial of its existence and refusal to take steps to reduce our contribution to it - rather they attempt to roll back environmental legislation at EVERY turn - just as the LAST 2 Repub Presidents did.

As for Iceland, do some research on how it got its name and how Greenland got its name. In any case, your use of Iceland as an example of a place that is no longer icy only supports the argument for global warming so I am not sure what that was supposed to mean.

For your benefit I will modify my statement "All scientists" to "All credible scientists".

Furthermore I stated that Democrats may very well not be any better on addressing this but that Republicans will SURELY not and will even exacerbate the problem. If you don't like it, noone forces you to read my topics nor do I need to listen to you pop-off in your usual wise-ass way without responding.
 
Bet on MyBookie
Top