Armed Man Takes Hostages At Discovery Channel HQ
An anonymous reader writes "The manifesto of the man holding the Discovery Channel hostage with a bomb has been released. He has fired shots and taken hostages. His main complaints are about overpopulation, religion and civilization. He wants them to avoid encouraging people to produce more 'disgusting human babies,' to get people to accept 'Malthus-Darwin science,' reject civilization and its 'disgusting religious-cultural roots,' and to stop 'ALL immigration pollution.'" The man has now been shot by police, and the hostages have been freed.
TLC is the freak show network. All these ridiculous shows about dwarves, women with giant legs, women with no lower body, and families with too many kids are stupid.
If I disagree with you it's because you are wrong.
They'll have to work a lot harder to undo that one as long as the tea party is around.
The food supply curve is not exponential. It has exceeded exponential growth for a century, but only by consuming ever increasingly scarce resources to do so. Soil quality and aquifer levels are dramatically declining, soon even oil based fertilizers (that will become prohibitively expensive with peak oil) won't be enough to keep up production.
Malthus was failed to account for technological advances and declining human fertility. But he also failed to account for destruction of the soil and irrigation systems from over production. His ideas were far from perfect, but they do have merit.
What sucks about this is this guy has got a point, but that's lost because his actions are plain nuts and will drown out most mainstream discussion. But the point is that we are at a point where we are deeply concerned with climate change and resources on this planet, and people think that it's not at all irresponsible to have 19 children, and then the media encourages it!
China may be run by dictatorial fuckwads, but they have a point with their laws on having children. The entire society can't sustain it's population now, so adding another billion hungry mouths over 20 years is just going to fuck things up even more. With the scientific information I've been seeing as of late with global warming, potable water, oil, etc, I can actually envision near future where first world countries start considering birth limits. I understand the personal liberties some people feel they have a right to, but there comes a time when your insistence on having more children affects me and my family. If just you, me, and your spouse left on the planet, and there is only enough food to feed 3 people, and you and your spouse go and have a child without asking me, someone is going to have to give up food. You just impinged on me and my ability to stay alive by having a child. This is not a matter of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, this is good old fashioned primitive instinct of I want to live.
This guy might be an insane fuckwad, but he has a point. We should not be glorifying having 19 children when every new child strains our resources. Sure, we need to have babies to keep the species alive, but without resources to sustain them, there will be a huge population crash.
"All great wisdom is contained in .signature files"
This guy is not a teabagger despite the fact that he hates immigrants. He isn't a liberal despite the fact that he likes the environment. He is a dead crazy guy because he took hostages. He didn't need any help from political partisans to achieve his stunning degree of lunacy, I'm pretty sure he got there all on his own.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
I personally think having that many kids is pretty damn weird, but who the hell are you to judge? It's not like they're on welfare and you're paying for it--apparently, they were fine financially before the reality stuff. The US isn't an overpopulated nation, either. Our birth rate is below replacement, so we can tolerate the occasional outlier--and "outlier" is exactly what these people are--like this.
"In jail?" Fuck you.
What part of "shall not be infringed" is so hard to understand?