Political Crossfire Forums

[Infinite911911]

perdidochas wrote: Infinite911911 wrote: The Grandmaster wrote:
And yes, I think the Earth would obviously benefit from us being gone. That is obvious. We are damaging the earth, and doing nothing good for it. How could it possibly hurt the Earth if we left? It obviously would have no negative effects, only good ones, as far as the physical planet goes. With that being said, I'm glad we're here. The Earth will just have to deal with it.

Why can't we have it both ways? Why do we seem not to care that we are killing our only home and every animal in it, including ourselves? Humans do not own the earth, we are merely guests in it. Our goal should be to live as one with the earth, not destory it.

Of course we own the earth. We have the power to own the earth, therefore we own it. That said, of course we should take care of the earth. It makes no sense to pollute your own house.

No one owns the Earth. You don't even own that little area of land you call your Property. Try not paying your Property taxes and see what happens.

[Infinite911911]

John Galt wrote: perdidochas wrote: Infinite911911 wrote: The Grandmaster wrote:
And yes, I think the Earth would obviously benefit from us being gone. That is obvious. We are damaging the earth, and doing nothing good for it. How could it possibly hurt the Earth if we left? It obviously would have no negative effects, only good ones, as far as the physical planet goes. With that being said, I'm glad we're here. The Earth will just have to deal with it.

Why can't we have it both ways? Why do we seem not to care that we are killing our only home and every animal in it, including ourselves? Humans do not own the earth, we are merely guests in it. Our goal should be to live as one with the earth, not destory it.

Of course we own the earth. We have the power to own the earth, therefore we own it. That said, of course we should take care of the earth. It makes no sense to pollute your own house.

We wasn't talking about pollution, he was talking about "being one with the earth." Which would mean denying our nature of moral rational beings and return to a state of animalistic amoral irrationality. The Return to the Garden, in other words.

Dude you are a _____. Stop putting words in other peoples mouths, Ok Mr. Mod? Teach by example, or stop being a mod if you like to troll so much.

[Infinite911911]

John Galt wrote:

Who owns it then? Someone has to. First person to homestead it sold the land and so on and so forth. I now own my land I have the title to prove it. And I'd defend mine and my own. I don't see how making the world a better place for humanity is "destroying it." The world is a better place with more and more humans and better and better technology.

If you want to reject humanity (and all his greatness which includes his technology and his changing of the enviornment around him to his will), fine. Perhaps you could start with selling your computer and then moving into a hobbit-home in Montana with no electrictiy where you could become one with nature, leaving no legacy for anyone or anything. It'd be like you never existed.

:gdgf: Wanting a clean Earth now is "reject humanity". You are really desperate John Galt.

[perdidochas]

Infinite911911 wrote: perdidochas wrote: Infinite911911 wrote: The Grandmaster wrote:
And yes, I think the Earth would obviously benefit from us being gone. That is obvious. We are damaging the earth, and doing nothing good for it. How could it possibly hurt the Earth if we left? It obviously would have no negative effects, only good ones, as far as the physical planet goes. With that being said, I'm glad we're here. The Earth will just have to deal with it.

Why can't we have it both ways? Why do we seem not to care that we are killing our only home and every animal in it, including ourselves? Humans do not own the earth, we are merely guests in it. Our goal should be to live as one with the earth, not destory it.

Of course we own the earth. We have the power to own the earth, therefore we own it. That said, of course we should take care of the earth. It makes no sense to pollute your own house.

No one owns the Earth. You don't even own that little area of land you call your Property. Try not paying your Property taxes and see what happens.

That's due to extortion by the government, not by me not owning the property.

[Infinite911911]

perdidochas wrote: Infinite911911 wrote: perdidochas wrote: Infinite911911 wrote: The Grandmaster wrote:
And yes, I think the Earth would obviously benefit from us being gone. That is obvious. We are damaging the earth, and doing nothing good for it. How could it possibly hurt the Earth if we left? It obviously would have no negative effects, only good ones, as far as the physical planet goes. With that being said, I'm glad we're here. The Earth will just have to deal with it.

Why can't we have it both ways? Why do we seem not to care that we are killing our only home and every animal in it, including ourselves? Humans do not own the earth, we are merely guests in it. Our goal should be to live as one with the earth, not destory it.

Of course we own the earth. We have the power to own the earth, therefore we own it. That said, of course we should take care of the earth. It makes no sense to pollute your own house.

No one owns the Earth. You don't even own that little area of land you call your Property. Try not paying your Property taxes and see what happens.

That's due to extortion by the government, not by me not owning the property.

So who really owns the land then?

[John Galt]

Infinite911911 wrote: John Galt wrote: perdidochas wrote: Infinite911911 wrote: The Grandmaster wrote:
And yes, I think the Earth would obviously benefit from us being gone. That is obvious. We are damaging the earth, and doing nothing good for it. How could it possibly hurt the Earth if we left? It obviously would have no negative effects, only good ones, as far as the physical planet goes. With that being said, I'm glad we're here. The Earth will just have to deal with it.

Why can't we have it both ways? Why do we seem not to care that we are killing our only home and every animal in it, including ourselves? Humans do not own the earth, we are merely guests in it. Our goal should be to live as one with the earth, not destory it.

Of course we own the earth. We have the power to own the earth, therefore we own it. That said, of course we should take care of the earth. It makes no sense to pollute your own house.

We wasn't talking about pollution, he was talking about "being one with the earth." Which would mean denying our nature of moral rational beings and return to a state of animalistic amoral irrationality. The Return to the Garden, in other words.

Dude you are a _____. Stop putting words in other peoples mouths, Ok Mr. Mod? Teach by example, or stop being a mod if you like to troll so much.

"Our goal should be to live as one with the earth" means something other than "Our goal should be to live as one with the earth"?

[John Galt]

Infinite911911 wrote: John Galt wrote:

Who owns it then? Someone has to. First person to homestead it sold the land and so on and so forth. I now own my land I have the title to prove it. And I'd defend mine and my own. I don't see how making the world a better place for humanity is "destroying it." The world is a better place with more and more humans and better and better technology.

If you want to reject humanity (and all his greatness which includes his technology and his changing of the enviornment around him to his will), fine. Perhaps you could start with selling your computer and then moving into a hobbit-home in Montana with no electrictiy where you could become one with nature, leaving no legacy for anyone or anything. It'd be like you never existed.

:gdgf: Wanting a clean Earth now is "reject humanity". You are really desperate John Galt.

Rejection of humanity is the rejection of reason and technology.

There may come a time when technology would do something harmful to the enviornment that impacted us (as it has in the past) in a negative fashion. At said time, humanity will adapt and change its technology to impact the enviornment in a postive fashion (positive in that it helped humanity). In the meantime, while our impact on the enviornment may not be hurting us, I agree it may be hurting certian wildlife. The difference between us, however, is that I care about humanity above all, and could not care less if a species of slug goes extinct.

[Infinite911911]

John Galt wrote:
Rejection of humanity is the rejection of reason and technology.


I disagree. No one is Rejecting humanity because I want us to develop clean alternative energies. No one is Rejecting humanity for caring about the Billions of other animals that have the same right to this Earth as you and I do. No one is Rejecting humanity for just wanting a clean, healthy Earth where we can all live in and prosper. If anything you are the one rejecting Humanity, because if we stay down the current path that you want to there will be no Humanity.

Quote: Humankind has not woven the web of life. We are but one thread within it. Whatever we do to the web, we do to ourselves. All things are bound together. All things connect.
- Chief Seattle -

[John Galt]

Infinite911911 wrote: John Galt wrote:
Rejection of humanity is the rejection of reason and technology.


I disagree. No one is Rejecting humanity because I want us to develop clean alternative energies. No one is Rejecting humanity for caring about the Billions of other animals that have the same right to this Earth as you and I do. If anything you are the one rejecting Humanity, because if we stay down the current path that you want to there will be no Humanity.

Quote: Humankind has not woven the web of life. We are but one thread within it. Whatever we do to the web, we do to ourselves. All things are bound together. All things connect.
- Chief Seattle -

to claim that amoral creatures can hold us hostage and that they somehow have "rights" to this planet is perposterous. Furthermore the idea that humanity could destroy this earth or itself is outrageous. What proof do you have? You have none.

The earth is billions of years old and has suffered far worse than humanity. Humanity also can adapt to whatever the earth throws at us.

Like I said, it's your personal choice you can make in life. You can buy "alternative energy." In fact, I want you too. More alternatives means cheaper energy in general, even if the new alternatives are expensive, because people like you who think that we are somewhow destroying this earth will want to change, thus lowering demand on current energy supplies. That's fine. I'm all for it. But forcing me to comply to your bogus claims? No no no. Until "alternative energy" is cheaper than current energy I do not want it (and no, not through artifical price increases by Big Brother).

I agree that certian emmisions from cars and industry (nitrogenous wastes for example) are bad for the enviornment. I also agree that these ought be curbed. Does it bother me to a point where I would like to take a finaincial hit for it? No, not at the moment. Furthermore I do not agree that CO2 emmisions are anything to really care about. The groupthink coming out of these people leaves me in awe. Everything that is happening in weather is being attributed to global warming, no matter how contratictory it may seem, and then in turn humans are bing blamed. I do not doubt that there has been local warming around human populations, which in turn shows a general "global" trend. But that does not mean that tehre is an actual cause to global warming that is man-made. Anyway, point is, I reject your side and want no part of it. You can reject my side and not want any part of it. You live your life and I'll live mine. I ask nothing of you and you better ask nothing of me.

[Infinite911911]

John Galt wrote: Infinite911911 wrote: John Galt wrote:
Rejection of humanity is the rejection of reason and technology.


I disagree. No one is Rejecting humanity because I want us to develop clean alternative energies. No one is Rejecting humanity for caring about the Billions of other animals that have the same right to this Earth as you and I do. If anything you are the one rejecting Humanity, because if we stay down the current path that you want to there will be no Humanity.

Quote: Humankind has not woven the web of life. We are but one thread within it. Whatever we do to the web, we do to ourselves. All things are bound together. All things connect.
- Chief Seattle -

to claim that amoral creatures can hold us hostage and that they somehow have "rights" to this planet is perposterous. Furthermore the idea that humanity could destroy this earth or itself is outrageous. What proof do you have? You have none.

The earth is billions of years old and has suffered far worse than humanity. Humanity also can adapt to whatever the earth throws at us.

Like I said, it's your personal choice you can make in life. You can buy "alternative energy." In fact, I want you too. More alternatives means cheaper energy in general, even if the new alternatives are expensive, because people like you who think that we are somewhow destroying this earth will want to change, thus lowering demand on current energy supplies. That's fine. I'm all for it. But forcing me to comply to your bogus claims? No no no. Until "alternative energy" is cheaper than current energy I do not want it (and no, not through artifical price increases by Big Brother).

I agree that certian emmisions from cars and industry (nitrogenous wastes for example) are bad for the enviornment. I also agree that these ought be curbed. Does it bother me to a point where I would like to take a finaincial hit for it? No, not at the moment. Furthermore I do not agree that CO2 emmisions are anything to really care about. The groupthink coming out of these people leaves me in awe. Everything that is happening in weather is being attributed to global warming, no matter how contratictory it may seem, and then in turn humans are bing blamed. I do not doubt that there has been local warming around human populations, which in turn shows a general "global" trend. But that does not mean that tehre is an actual cause to global warming that is man-made. Anyway, point is, I reject your side and want no part of it. You can reject my side and not want any part of it. You live your life and I'll live mine. I ask nothing of you and you better ask nothing of me.

We'll just agree to disagree John. I don't understand your view point and you don't understand mine. Just know one thing, people that want whats best for the environment also want whats best for Humanity (we're not "Rejecting humanity"). Both things go hand in hand. (Not saying you don't)

[John Galt]

I agree to disagree so long as it does not negatively impact me (certian regulations, certian taxation, etc) or is illegal action by the government (certian regulations, certian taxation, etc). But so long as it's your life you are impacting and not mine, it is your life you can lead it how you wish.

[perdidochas]

Quote: Humankind has not woven the web of life. We are but one thread within it. Whatever we do to the web, we do to ourselves. All things are bound together. All things connect.
- Chief Seattle -

Chief Seattle's speech is mythical, not real.

www.snopes.com/quotes/seattle.htm

[Infinite911911]

perdidochas wrote: Quote: Humankind has not woven the web of life. We are but one thread within it. Whatever we do to the web, we do to ourselves. All things are bound together. All things connect.
- Chief Seattle -

Chief Seattle's speech is mythical, not real.

www.snopes.com/quotes/seattle.htm

You ever going to answer my land question? Or do you just want to tell me Im right now?

[perdidochas]

Infinite911911 wrote: perdidochas wrote: Infinite911911 wrote: perdidochas wrote: Infinite911911 wrote: The Grandmaster wrote:
And yes, I think the Earth would obviously benefit from us being gone. That is obvious. We are damaging the earth, and doing nothing good for it. How could it possibly hurt the Earth if we left? It obviously would have no negative effects, only good ones, as far as the physical planet goes. With that being said, I'm glad we're here. The Earth will just have to deal with it.

Why can't we have it both ways? Why do we seem not to care that we are killing our only home and every animal in it, including ourselves? Humans do not own the earth, we are merely guests in it. Our goal should be to live as one with the earth, not destory it.

Of course we own the earth. We have the power to own the earth, therefore we own it. That said, of course we should take care of the earth. It makes no sense to pollute your own house.

No one owns the Earth. You don't even own that little area of land you call your Property. Try not paying your Property taxes and see what happens.

That's due to extortion by the government, not by me not owning the property.

So who really owns the land then?

The government, who are the people. Regardless of what you think, humankind owns this earth. Animals and plants certainly don't own it.

[perdidochas]

Infinite911911 wrote: perdidochas wrote: Quote: Humankind has not woven the web of life. We are but one thread within it. Whatever we do to the web, we do to ourselves. All things are bound together. All things connect.
- Chief Seattle -

Chief Seattle's speech is mythical, not real.

www.snopes.com/quotes/seattle.htm

You ever going to answer my land question? Or do you just want to tell me Im right now?

BTW, did you ever actually believe that Chief Seattle bulls**t was real?

If so, you are much more gullible than I thought.

[Infinite911911]

perdidochas wrote:

The government, who are the people. Regardless of what you think, humankind owns this earth.

:lol: Nice dodge. So the individual doesn't own any land, right? So according to you the Government owns the Earth. :lol: Mother Earth, property of the United States Government. :lol:

[perdidochas]

Infinite911911 wrote: perdidochas wrote:

The government, who are the people. Regardless of what you think, humankind owns this earth.

:lol: Nice dodge. So the individual doesn't own any land, right? So according to you the Government owns the Earth. :lol: Mother Earth, property of the United States Government. :lol:

Not the whole earth. Just the part that is the United States. Other governments own other parts of the earth.

Earth is a conglomeration of rocks with some water and a few living things on it. It is not a mother of anything, or even alive.

Mother Earth is another environmental myth.

[Josh]

I thought we were just renting the place. :neutral:

[perdidochas]

Infinite911911 wrote: John Galt wrote:

Who owns it then? Someone has to. First person to homestead it sold the land and so on and so forth. I now own my land I have the title to prove it. And I'd defend mine and my own. I don't see how making the world a better place for humanity is "destroying it." The world is a better place with more and more humans and better and better technology.

If you want to reject humanity (and all his greatness which includes his technology and his changing of the enviornment around him to his will), fine. Perhaps you could start with selling your computer and then moving into a hobbit-home in Montana with no electrictiy where you could become one with nature, leaving no legacy for anyone or anything. It'd be like you never existed.

:gdgf: Wanting a clean Earth now is "reject humanity". You are really desperate John Galt.

Well, it depends on what you define as clean.

[perdidochas]

Josh wrote: I thought we were just renting the place. :neutral:

From who?