I'll probably watch a few more of these...... our secondary behaviours are the nasty ones that so many refer to as human nature eh. Go figure.
Aio ki te Aorangi
I'll probably watch a few more of these...... our secondary behaviours are the nasty ones that so many refer to as human nature eh. Go figure.
I didn't think!!! I experimented!!!
Comfortably numb
Interesting video. Yet another example of when man tries to fight or deny Nature bad things 'happen' (e.g. industrialised farming, unbridled antibiotic use, GMOs?, rampant refined food consumption, rain forest [carbon sink] destruction, etc.). And the real question is whether one or more of these will snuff out our species before we wise up to where we're heading?
Just faidin away!
Hmmmmmmmmm 10 minutes eh!.... Well, I guess it was worth it but I may need another 10 minutes or more to digest it all entirely.
Forum whore
Very interesting and pretty accurate IMHO.
The main issue we need to get solved if Mankind is to survive is the death of bees and the oceans. We cannot live without either and these two things are dying faster than we can deal with. Scientists are generally agreed we have between 30 and 50 years left, maybe at the outside 100. If you Google "Are the Oceans Dying?" it makes sobering reading, but stick to the actual scientific studies, not the vested interests.
You don't get to be an old dog without learning a few tricks.
Shorai Powersports batteries are very trick!
black cat
Sources?Originally Posted by Edbear
I love how you pull sweeping statements out of your arse, but what is scary is I think you actually believe your own bullshit.
Forum whore
What part of this is beyond your comprehension?
"If you Google "Are the Oceans Dying?" it makes sobering reading, but stick to the actual scientific studies, not the vested interests."
You don't get to be an old dog without learning a few tricks.
Shorai Powersports batteries are very trick!
black cat
I asked for your source Ed, not a lesson in how to google or a vague sweeping reference that has no basis in realty. This appears to be beyond YOUR comprehension.What part of this is beyond your comprehension?
"If you Google "Are the Oceans Dying?" it makes sobering reading, but stick to the actual scientific studies, not the vested interests."
I will retract my statement that you are full of shit once you provide the relevant information.
When 'scientists' make an ascertation they follow that with a citation. I am looking forward to seeing that from you. Just once.
111000101000100010011110
Dial down the condescension and up the empathy a bit bud, or did you learn nothing from that video?What part of this is beyond your comprehension?
"If you Google "Are the Oceans Dying?" it makes sobering reading, but stick to the actual scientific studies, not the vested interests."
"A shark on whiskey is mighty risky, but a shark on beer is a beer engineer" - Tad Ghostal
Forum whore
I have little patience with idiots who have no other agenda than to ridicule.
The reason I recommended doing his own research was simply that whatever I post he will contradict outright or ridicule.
As always, certain people will never find anything out for themselves as it would destroy their precious prejudices. It is not hard to find the scientific studies if anyone cares to.
You don't get to be an old dog without learning a few tricks.
Shorai Powersports batteries are very trick!
111000101000100010011110
Then post something that is not open to contradiction or ridicule, seems like a no-brainer really.
It is hard, I just looked on google scholar and found nothing like what you suggested, the few articles that did pique my interest were from journals I do not have subscriptions to. But if you'd rather make up shit and berate others for not being able to find your fiction in order to 'win' a discussion, then by all means, go suck a bag of dicks.
"A shark on whiskey is mighty risky, but a shark on beer is a beer engineer" - Tad Ghostal
black cat
Ahh the irony.
You also have little patience for backing up your statements with any facts.
Like bogan, I did in fact embark on some quick research to find out if I was going to have egg on my face asking you for a source. I too was unable to find anything resembling your numbers and certainly no 'agreement' between most scientists.
To make such a vast generalisation and expect it to be taken seriously in itself is ridiculous.
Forum whore
It is hard not to sound condescending, but so be it I will dig them out and post them...
You don't get to be an old dog without learning a few tricks.
Shorai Powersports batteries are very trick!
Forum whore
http://www.fisherycrisis.com/
http://www.uga.edu/gm/1202/FeatDeep.html
http://www.seashepherd.org/commentar...oceans-die-144
http://theextinctionprotocol.wordpre...ng-extinction/
http://theweek.com/article/index/216...e-oceans-dying
http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/death-oceans/
http://dgrnewsservice.org/2012/03/12...ual-continues/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NUT_8C-Qrw8 (Some very clear messages in here if you can pick through it).
http://www.oceansentry.org/en/2557-s...s-oceanos.html
Enjoy...
You don't get to be an old dog without learning a few tricks.
Shorai Powersports batteries are very trick!
111000101000100010011110
Absolutely none of those were scientific studies. There were a lot of claims about scientists finding within them, but none had proper referencing or citations.
Anyone can write things like that and make it sound like the science backs it up (you should know as you try to do it all the time), but unless proper referencing is used the article is unable to be subject to peer review, and therefor worthless in a debate.
"A shark on whiskey is mighty risky, but a shark on beer is a beer engineer" - Tad Ghostal
black cat
And I did enjoy. Nowhere in any of those pages did I see any agreement among 'most' scientists that the world only had 30 to 50 years left.
I am also astounded that when asked to provide a citation, all you can do is come up with a list of web pages. Yes some are relevant to the conversation, but you show repeatedly that you are unable to comprehend what I mean when I ask you to show us exactly where you get your 'facts' from.
Come on Ed, back it up mate. Point me to the one paragraph, anywhere in there that says there is a consensus by MOST scientists. From what I read there, it is hard enough to get most in any particular branch of science to agree never mind all the scientists that have no relevant experience in the field.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks