Unfortunately that's impossible to accomplish without genocide or some massive abridgment of human rights, neither of which I would like to see. There is a third option. Your supposed need for population control could be done voluntarily. You and all the other elitist fools who believe in this unsustainable population growth hogwash could remove yourselves from the planet. Then no one would have to do anything against their will. It's for the greater good. Funny how you didn't think of that to begin with.
Or maybe the real solution is to drastically increase the resource output of the planet through the spread of technological innovation and free market forces, which is what has actually happened every time consumption begins to match or exceed resource production (macro-economically speaking).
Thanks anyway, Malthus.
The Palestinians have no military to speak of, and so it makes sense to them to resort to terrorist attacks in what they see as a battle to gain the right to self determination and freedom the control of Israel. It makes Sense!?! No it doesn't!! I've seen this moral relativism all over this comment string, and it's really ridiculous. I belong to a group of people who spent the first 50 years of our existence being persecuted by mobs with the sometimes explicit authorization of the government. Number of suicide attacks originating from our group: 0.
You pose the theory that if the situations were reversed, Jews would be carrying out suicide attacks and other random attacks on civilians in the same way. I emphatically state that this is false. Jewish groups throughout have recent history have endured unimaginable oppression and hatred worse than anything Gaza or the West Bank faces today. Never has there been organized, widespread violence directed against civilians by these Jews in any case.
Israeli hands may not be completely clean in all this fighting, but the fault is of the aggressor, which Israel has shown in their short history that they are NOT.
this can only end with him showing her his lightsaber.
In which case, the cartoon will take on a sort of "James-Bond-strapped-to-a-table-with-a-laser-between-his-legs-about-to-cut-him-in-half" kind of feel.
--Script Excerpt-- (Anakin "shows his lightsaber)
Ahsoka: You expect me to talk?
Anakin: No, Miss Ashoka, I expect you to die!
Holes in the Ozone layer were caused by CFCs, which chemically are interesting compounds, but one problem of which is that they were depleting the ozone layer.
I disagree with this premise. http://www.nature.com/news/2007/070924/full/449382a.html Here's an article from last week from Nature magazine.
This is not settled science. To borrow a quote from your post:
"I am not really a tree-hater, but I have no trust of these environmentalists and believe they are quite capable of radically screwing up the economy and my daily life for a long time all for a short-term feel good.
I have seen this "car accident" argument a lot lately on Slashdot. You wackos all must read the same forums, and you were unjustly modded up accordingly. It is an ignorant position. I could make a list of all the things the gov't spends more money on than car safety defending against that kill far fewer people. Things like murder, HIV, Breast Cancer, etc. It's not about the body count. It's about how these things affect our lives and what level of risk society is willing to accept. For things like car travel that exist for the betterment of society, we accept a level of risk to have the boon that auto travel is. Terrorism, like disease and crime, have no societal benefit and do far greater harm to the health of our society than car accidents. The acceptable level of risk from these threats is much much lower because of this.
The Intuit whale take is below the species replacement rate, so they aren't putting the bowheads survival in any danger.
Plus, I would think they make a killing on that tax software they sell every year.
I would have thought this weird, too, until I started working as an IT Auditor and saw all manner of crazy old legacy systems supporting the accounting and financial reporting systems of major companies. I've seen major tax expenses totaling millions of dollars tracked through some of the most wicked Excel spreadsheets you could imagine. There was one fairly major software company I worked on ($1 Billion in revenue last year) that ran their whole online company store (where 90% of it's sales went through) on a couple of NT boxes. The point is that accountants and accounting departments do not like big changes, so my experience has been that systems supporting financial reporting have a long life.
...and having spent 4-6 years in New York schools (which, apparently, are not part of the Great State of Virginia) did not know the minutiae taught here in order to pass the standard learning tests...
Speaking of minutiae, Virgnia is a commonwealth, not a state. I bet that question would be on the SOL.
----------------
P.S I am a troll.
Slashdot Mirror
Or maybe the real solution is to drastically increase the resource output of the planet through the spread of technological innovation and free market forces, which is what has actually happened every time consumption begins to match or exceed resource production (macro-economically speaking). Thanks anyway, Malthus.
In which case, the cartoon will take on a sort of "James-Bond-strapped-to-a-table-with-a-laser-between-his-legs-about-to-cut-him-in-half" kind of feel.
--Script Excerpt--
(Anakin "shows his lightsaber)
Ahsoka: You expect me to talk?
Anakin: No, Miss Ashoka, I expect you to die!
That comment was coherent, logical, intelligent, and persuasive, so you are hereby BANNED from slashdot forever!!1!1
I have seen this "car accident" argument a lot lately on Slashdot. You wackos all must read the same forums, and you were unjustly modded up accordingly. It is an ignorant position. I could make a list of all the things the gov't spends more money on than car safety defending against that kill far fewer people. Things like murder, HIV, Breast Cancer, etc. It's not about the body count. It's about how these things affect our lives and what level of risk society is willing to accept. For things like car travel that exist for the betterment of society, we accept a level of risk to have the boon that auto travel is. Terrorism, like disease and crime, have no societal benefit and do far greater harm to the health of our society than car accidents. The acceptable level of risk from these threats is much much lower because of this.
We all know the pilot is going to be D.A.R.Y.L.
The Intuit whale take is below the species replacement rate, so they aren't putting the bowheads survival in any danger. Plus, I would think they make a killing on that tax software they sell every year.
How do you get a one-armed polariton out of a tree?
I would have thought this weird, too, until I started working as an IT Auditor and saw all manner of crazy old legacy systems supporting the accounting and financial reporting systems of major companies. I've seen major tax expenses totaling millions of dollars tracked through some of the most wicked Excel spreadsheets you could imagine. There was one fairly major software company I worked on ($1 Billion in revenue last year) that ran their whole online company store (where 90% of it's sales went through) on a couple of NT boxes.
The point is that accountants and accounting departments do not like big changes, so my experience has been that systems supporting financial reporting have a long life.
----------------
P.S I am a troll.