PDA

View Full Version : Can we actually save the world?



SarasotaRepub
09-05-2010, 07:21 PM
It's scary...I can predict what these assholes will post. (http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x9080873)




Taverner http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/images/donor.gif (1000+ posts) Sun Sep-05-10 06:00 PM
Original message Poll question: Can we actually save the world?


I mean, if our species is doomed, we might as well enjoy ourselves, right?


It's not even hard to guess how these idiots will vote or what they'll say.




Ozymanithrax http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/images/donor.gif (1000+ posts) Sun Sep-05-10 06:17 PM
Response to Reply #5 (http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x9080873#9080910)

8. Yes, but the answer may not be acceptable. For Overpopulation, we could release a pathogen that wipes out 90% of the human race. I don't think I know anyone that would do that or think that an acceptable answer. (Oh try harder, I'm sure you could find another fucking moron here on DU.)

On the other hand, we could do as China has and limit the number of children a family can have to one. I find that acceptable. (You're an idiot. I find that obvious.)

There are solutions to climate change with the current technology. We can use cloud whitening and reflect back a lot of the suns rays. This would cool the earth. There are other solutions. The problem with these is that many of them take an organization with world wide scope. So the probability is not high we will do that. We can make treaties with teeth that drastically limit greenhouse gasses. I think it is possible to beat global warming, but chances are we will suffer a lot.

We can be forced by peak oil to drastically reduce the use of petrocarbon, which in the long run would reduce the affect of global warming and will also lead to population reduction because we need that energy from petrocarbons to grow food...less food fewer people. (In other words, back to wiping out the worlds population...except of course, for those enlightened few.) :rolleyes: This dipshit didn't say that, but come on...

PoliCon
09-05-2010, 07:24 PM
Every last asshat who believes in overpopulation should do their duty and end their lives.

SarasotaRepub
09-05-2010, 07:32 PM
Every last asshat who believes in overpopulation should do their duty and end their lives.

Poli...come on, then they wouldn't be here to tell there is a problem!!! :D

PoliCon
09-05-2010, 07:41 PM
Poli...come on, then they wouldn't be here to tell there is a problem!!! :D

Which shows that they don't really believe in what they are saying.

warpig
09-05-2010, 08:26 PM
They are alway willing for everyone else to bear the burden of the solution. They of course will need to remain untouched so they can give direction to us otherwise unenlightened ones.

NJCardFan
09-05-2010, 09:32 PM
Overpopulation. I don't know if the data is correct but I heard tell that we can fit the entire world population in the state of Texas and have room to spare. These overpopulation people are so ridiculous. I guess they're not aware that only 20% of this country's land is occupied.

warpig
09-05-2010, 09:39 PM
Overpopulation. I don't know if the data is correct but I heard tell that we can fit the entire world population in the state of Texas and have room to spare. These overpopulation people are so ridiculous. I guess they're not aware that only 20% of this country's land is occupied.

Yeah yeah, Texas don't want everybody.................:D

3rd-try
09-06-2010, 01:05 AM
...and, don't leave out that "climate change" crap. Al Gore may be eying another ocean-front mansion.

Sonnabend
09-06-2010, 03:50 AM
Can we actually save the world?

No, but you need psychiatric help.....

malloc
09-06-2010, 07:23 AM
8. Yes, but the answer may not be acceptable. For Overpopulation, we could release a pathogen that wipes out 90% of the human race. I don't think I know anyone that would do that or think that an acceptable answer. (Oh try harder, I'm sure you could find another fucking moron here on DU.)

I do believe a person who just took over a Discovery Channel office had the same idea. Yeah, he murdered a few people, people with wives, and families and futures, people with future grandsons and daughters. You implicitly agreed with his motives knowing this, yet you condemned him out of fear of blow back. You only condemned the blow back, and not the motive and actions of this psycho, this means you too are a mass murderer, congratulations. Your daydream of a virus which wipes 90% of the humans off this planet will only end in your death or torture dumbass. Do you really think that the 10% of survivors will be easy people, who will view your effeminate ass as an expression of your individuality, or do you think these 10% survivors will regard you as one who contributes nothing to the hunt or survival of the species, and then kill you and wear your skin to keep warm. These survivors will be hard men and women who don't treat human life as sacred. In effect they will be the same death mobs as you have wished on everybody. Justice is never so sweet when it is ironic.



On the other hand, we could do as China has and limit the number of children a family can have to one. I find that acceptable. (You're an idiot. I find that obvious.)

Oh, so now you are going to tell me who I can bring into my family and still be acceptable? After this totalitarian proclamation goes into effect, are you going to make yourself publicly visible? After you force my family to abort a viable baby, are you going to stand up on stage and present your plan as a workable solution? Hypothetically, I would put 180 grain round into your head at 2,700 FPS as your payment. The Chinese won't do this because they hold the short end of every stick. The people at large don't have access to hardware capable of anything. If your DUmbass tries to enforce a law which requires me to abort a baby, I think you'll die a violent death, furthermore I think there won't be any suspects to prosecute in my home state.



[Th]ere are solutions to climate change with the current technology. We can use cloud whitening and reflect back a lot of the suns rays. This would cool the earth. There are other solutions. The problem with these is that many of them take an organization with world wide scope. So the probability is not high we will do that. We can make treaties with teeth that drastically limit greenhouse gasses. I think it is possible to beat global warming, but chances are we will suffer a lot.


There is no solution to climate change because there never will exist a solution to made-up climate change bullshit. It will forever be known as a political control tool, it wouldn't serve any purpose to have a mitigatory tool present when showcasing any political control tool would it?




We can be forced by peak oil to drastically reduce the use of petrocarbon, which in the long run would reduce the affect of global warming and will also lead to population reduction because we need that energy from petrocarbons to grow food...less food fewer people. (In other words, back to wiping out the worlds population...except of course, for those enlightened few.) This dipshit didn't say that, but come on...

Ok, so bring this situation to full on experiment. Go ahead, You know "Global Warming" exists, right? Bring this to full on experimentation. I bet you are scared to be proved wrong.

BadCat
09-06-2010, 09:07 AM
Cloud whitening?

What are they going to do? Spray them with bleach?

SarasotaRepub
09-06-2010, 09:36 AM
Cloud whitening?

What are they going to do? Spray them with bleach?


Yep!!!

http://innovationwatch.com/wp-content/uploads/aerosol_injection-560-310.jpg


:D

movie buff
09-14-2010, 02:43 PM
"Ozymanithrax (1000+ posts) Sun Sep-05-10 06:17 PM
Response to Reply #5

8. Yes, but the answer may not be acceptable. For Overpopulation, we could release a pathogen that wipes out 90% of the human race."
Ah, and Ozymanithrax supplies "DUmmy implied threat of genocide" post # 1,314,742,825,264.

"On the other hand, we could do as China has and limit the number of children a family can have to one. I find that acceptable."
Because you are clinically insane. No sane, rational American with any regard for human rights would go along with that.

Odysseus
09-14-2010, 03:22 PM
Because you are clinically insane. No sane, rational American with any regard for human rights would go along with that.

Ah, but that's the point. To them, anyone who isn't just like them isn't human. I don't mean racially, although I suspect that some of them are closet racists, but anyone who is not an enlightened advocate of peace and love and the environment, and who, in the name of peace and love and the environment, is willing to slaughter 90% of the human population so that the squirrels can have the parks to themselves.