Fight Club: Episode One: TmanVS D1B: Subject: Overpopulation

[dbackjon]

Explain putting Rachel Carson in there...

Without some false enviro-whacko bullshit that you usually pull outta ur ass.

[travelinman67]

So T-man, TTBF, et all - do you think the planet has a carrying capacity? Or will we be able to cram 10s of billions of people on here?

What surprises me about your knee-jerk support of this "overpopulation" "progressive" agenda, is your blind spot as to how it's implementation would play out.

Every population control method has some form of class bias incorporated. Either contraception/abortion (non-believers), selective elimination of life sustaining services, "progressive" (draconian) government "incentives" for limiting births, or outright forced sterilization. Accordingly, from a pure eugenics viewpoint, it would seem logical that the "master race" philosophies of Sanger, Huxley and Mengele would prevail if for no other reason than the "weakest" and "least viable" classes of people would be the first to go.
1. People with congenital health issues would go first...and that includes fat azzes like me, Cap'n, D1B, and just about every OL on the planet. (Diabetes, MS, Parkinsons, obesity, bad vision, balding, or familial history of cancer or heart problems...all need to be eradicated)
2. Folks incapable of high volume physical labor (i.e., small and/or weak people...there goes half the DB's and all of Citadel's team.)
3. Mentally infirm/weak-minded, determined by IQ examination (...most of GSU's squad and any OL not included in #1).
4. People incapable of reproduction. (infertile or incapable of childbearing, tiny dick, gays and lesbians...which wipes out most of the CAA teams. NOTE: the elderly will be covered by item #5: The Unproductive)
5. The Unproductive. (chronicly unemployed, those bred-for-entitlement, all daytime TV viewers, the elderly, every Elon team since '99.)
6. Caucasions. To be genetically "fair", the dark-skinned ethnicities have superior genetics for withstanding heat/UV light...and since global warming is a sure thing, it makes sense for mankind's survivability if all light skinned people are eliminated. As an added bonus, the remaining world cultures will all have the innate ability to dance.
7. People who recreate. Anyone who spends any amount of time fishing, bowling, hiking, bird watching, golfing, traveling, participating in or watching any recreational sport has the disposition to waste time, and hence their genetic line should be terminated.

Anyway...

...I hope you get my point, Jon. Regardless what our Momma's told us, we are not perfect, and would find ourselves on that eugenics "short list" sooner rather than later.

[dbackjon]

You didn't answer the question. What did Rachel Carson do to make you beleive she supported Eugenics?

[dbackjon]

T-man - your list looks suspisiously like a list I just came upon on a CREATIONIST website, that used stats like yours to proclaim the EVILS of Science.

[travelinman67]

Explain putting Rachel Carson in there...

Without some false enviro-whacko bullshit that you usually pull outta ur ass.

"...false enviro-whacko bullshit..." ????

In the eyes of an enviro-whacko extremist such as yourself, I can understand how ANY information which reveals enviro-whacko hidden agendas can be interpreted as BS.

So, take it or leave it...

Rachel Carson was added for one reason: World Wildlife Fund.

Up until the mid-50's, Carson's work appears to be strictly environmentally focused, but then in the mid-50's she began mirroring Huxley's research and methods. When Huxley published "Evolution As A Process", Carson was in the midst of writing her own book about human evolution (non-natural selection) which she abandoned as she felt Huxley's stated all she was attempting to convey. In 1961, when the World Wildlife Fund was founded by racist/eugenicists Prince Phillip, Julian Huxley, Prince Bernhard and Lord Mountbatten, it was with the specific intent of utilizing environmentalism-as-cause to facilitate their arguably malthusian social engineering beliefs: Rachel Carson was an early member and member-celebre of WWF. If you fairly examine the three big hitter environmental organizations who shaped media and pop-culture environmental policies in the '60's, Environmental Defense Fund, World Wildlife Fund, and Sierra Club, all three had "population control" as a foundational tenet.
Even WWF Board member Durster has been quoted several times during the late 60's ('67-'69), during Congressional/EPA/Media discussions as quoting that the banning of DDT would benefit third world population control, and all alternative methods of malaria control have lower success and higher toxicity rates amongst the mostly African and Hispanic workers/citizens effected by malaria (the ban was a double win for the eugenicists).

Did Carson KNOWINGLY promote the ban with the knowledge of it's results? Several sources attempt to defend her stating she never intended it to be banned. That's pure horseshit. It's akin to saying a criminal prosecutor who tries a case and presents the evidence isn't responsible for the conviction and jail term meted out to the defendant simply due to the "technicality" that the prosecutor didn't actually say the words, "Convict him and sentence him to jail".

Carson intended for DDT to be banned. Carson hadn't investigated the alternative methods of control. In all fairness to Carson, had she lived long enough to realize the genocidal impact of her book, I suspect she would have publicly repudiated her conclusions (or attempted to reconcile an alternative solution). Unfortunately, mini-malthusian, William Ruckelshaus, a died-in-wool EDF eugenicist, became EPA's director, and ram-rodded through the ban, continuing to defend it's unfathomable impact even in his post-service years, which has ultimately resulted in the unneeded death of tens of millions.

P.S.
I realize Carson was a "birdie" and a "lesbian", but attempting to defend a no'er do well environmentalist whose shoddy research and thoughtless decision to hurriedly publish a book without fully weighing the consequences, is IMHO an unsound practice. There's an army of progressive/greenie talking head operatives attempting to salvage Carson's "legendary" reputation by attempting to put a positive spin on the DDT carnage...and that's just foolish.

[travelinman67]

T-man - your list looks suspisiously like a list I just came upon on a CREATIONIST website, that used stats like yours to proclaim the EVILS of Science.

Hey, Tod...

Go fv(k yourself. I'm an original, so they must have copied me.

BTW, this fight is between Tampon1Breath and me...



...go do something constructive...

...like studying up on DDT.

[D1B]

T-man - your list looks suspisiously like a list I just came upon on a CREATIONIST website, that used stats like yours to proclaim the EVILS of Science.

Hey, Tod...

Go fv(k yourself. I'm an original, so they must have copied me.

BTW, this fight is between Tampon1Breath and me...



...go do something constructive...

...like studying up on DDT.

Tman, you are a whack job. No use arguing with you.

[D1B]

Explain putting Rachel Carson in there...

Without some false enviro-whacko bullshit that you usually pull outta ur ass.

"...false enviro-whacko bullshit..." ????

In the eyes of an enviro-whacko extremist such as yourself, I can understand how ANY information which reveals enviro-whacko hidden agendas can be interpreted as BS.

So, take it or leave it...

Rachel Carson was added for one reason: World Wildlife Fund.

Up until the mid-50's, Carson's work appears to be strictly environmentally focused, but then in the mid-50's she began mirroring Huxley's research and methods. When Huxley published "Evolution As A Process", Carson was in the midst of writing her own book about human evolution (non-natural selection) which she abandoned as she felt Huxley's stated all she was attempting to convey. In 1961, when the World Wildlife Fund was founded by racist/eugenicists Prince Phillip, Julian Huxley, Prince Bernhard and Lord Mountbatten, it was with the specific intent of utilizing environmentalism-as-cause to facilitate their arguably malthusian social engineering beliefs: Rachel Carson was an early member and member-celebre of WWF. If you fairly examine the three big hitter environmental organizations who shaped media and pop-culture environmental policies in the '60's, Environmental Defense Fund, World Wildlife Fund, and Sierra Club, all three had "population control" as a foundational tenet.
Even WWF Board member Durster has been quoted several times during the late 60's ('67-'69), during Congressional/EPA/Media discussions as quoting that the banning of DDT would benefit third world population control, and all alternative methods of malaria control have lower success and higher toxicity rates amongst the mostly African and Hispanic workers/citizens effected by malaria (the ban was a double win for the eugenicists).

Did Carson KNOWINGLY promote the ban with the knowledge of it's results? Several sources attempt to defend her stating she never intended it to be banned. That's pure horseshit. It's akin to saying a criminal prosecutor who tries a case and presents the evidence isn't responsible for the conviction and jail term meted out to the defendant simply due to the "technicality" that the prosecutor didn't actually say the words, "Convict him and sentence him to jail".

Carson intended for DDT to be banned. Carson hadn't investigated the alternative methods of control. In all fairness to Carson, had she lived long enough to realize the genocidal impact of her book, I suspect she would have publicly repudiated her conclusions (or attempted to reconcile an alternative solution). Unfortunately, mini-malthusian, William Ruckelshaus, a died-in-wool EDF eugenicist, became EPA's director, and ram-rodded through the ban, continuing to defend it's unfathomable impact even in his post-service years, which has ultimately resulted in the unneeded death of tens of millions.

P.S.
I realize Carson was a "birdie" and a "lesbian", but attempting to defend a no'er do well environmentalist whose shoddy research and thoughtless decision to hurriedly publish a book without fully weighing the consequences, is IMHO an unsound practice. There's an army of progressive/greenie talking head operatives attempting to salvage Carson's "legendary" reputation by attempting to put a positive spin on the DDT carnage...and that's just foolish.

Tman, get some help. You are insane.

[D1B]

Tman, are ya even gonna try to tackle the subject?

What a coward...

[SeattleGriz]

Tman, are ya even gonna try to tackle the subject?

What a coward...

Dude. You need to get a new fight manager. Don King ain't cuttin' it for you. Tman punched you in the mind so hard your kids are saying, "duh".

Nothing but fluff and bluster from the Don King and Queen (that's you) camp on this fight.

I want my money back motherfvcker!!!

[Pwns]

F[*]ck population control. It's all based on a simplistic assumption that "the population increases x percent, therefore consumption of resources will increase x percent". The bulk of the population growth is in dirt poor countries that use a very small percentage of the resources. If anything, we should be concerned about low birth rates in developed nations. We (the US) as well as Russia, China, Japan, and much of Europe are headed for a reverse population bomb that will be devestating to the economy. Those of us born in the late 70s or later are going to get screwed over because a bunch of hippie baby boomers (who will be dead before the bottom falls out of social security and the economy goes to hell in a handbasket because of excess housing) bought into the new world order bullsh^t about overpopulation.

This issue is seriously causing me to rethink the issue of illegal immigration. Bringing in folks from poor latin-American countries and making educated workers out of them is a good way to give the finger to the ecomisanthropes.

[D1B]

Tman, are ya even gonna try to tackle the subject?

What a coward...

Dude. You need to get a new fight manager. Don King ain't cuttin' it for you. Tman punched you in the mind so hard your kids are saying, "duh".

Nothing but fluff and bluster from the Don King and Queen (that's you) camp on this fight.

I want my money back motherfvcker!!!

Hey retard, he whiffed. This thread aint about eugenics. Tman, lost right off the bat. You are just too fucking dumb to realize it.

[Appaholic]

I realize Carson was a "birdie" and a "lesbian", but attempting to defend a no'er do well environmentalist whose shoddy research and thoughtless decision to hurriedly publish a book without fully weighing the consequences, is IMHO an unsound practice.

Oh, if only Chris would use the same criteria regarding your posts.... :snooze:

[SeattleGriz]

Hey retard, he whiffed. This thread aint about eugenics. Tman, lost right off the bat. You are just too **** dumb to realize it.

So let me get this straight. You don't even inform anyone what the show you watched was fully about, but yet expect everyone to read 13 pages of article, and then bitch that nobody understands where you are coming from?

That is rich.

Do I need to point out that "he whiffed" well before you gave the link to the story?

[D1B]

Hey retard, he whiffed. This thread aint about eugenics. Tman, lost right off the bat. You are just too **** dumb to realize it.

So let me get this straight. You don't even inform anyone what the show you watched was fully about, but yet expect everyone to read 13 pages of article, and then bitch that nobody understands where you are coming from?

That is rich.

Do I need to point out that "he whiffed" well before you gave the link to the story?

Not bitching. This thread isnt and wasnt about you, so STFU Bible-Boy. Tman and I have had numerous convos on this issue and HE knows the subject matter. His intitial reply, while well-crafted and entertaining, was nothing but an assumption-laden personal attack on me. Additionally it is full of red herrings (Hitler? ).



He whiffed.

[SeattleGriz]

So let me get this straight. You don't even inform anyone what the show you watched was fully about, but yet expect everyone to read 13 pages of article, and then bitch that nobody understands where you are coming from?

That is rich.

Do I need to point out that "he whiffed" well before you gave the link to the story?

Not bitching. This thread isnt and wasnt about you, so STFU Bible-Boy. Tman and I have had numerous convos on this issue and HE knows the subject matter. His intitial reply, while well-crafted and entertaining, was nothing but an assumption-laden personal attack on me. Additionally it is full of red herrings (Hitler? ).



He whiffed.

Too bad. I actually wanted to join in on this one because I thought there were things to be learned. I know now to stay out of your drunken posts at least for anything other than fun.

[D1B]

Not bitching. This thread isnt and wasnt about you, so STFU Bible-Boy. Tman and I have had numerous convos on this issue and HE knows the subject matter. His intitial reply, while well-crafted and entertaining, was nothing but an assumption-laden personal attack on me. Additionally it is full of red herrings (Hitler? ).



He whiffed.

Too bad. I actually wanted to join in on this one because I thought there were things to be learned. I know now to stay out of your drunken posts at least for anything other than fun.

By all means, jump in. All you've done so far is protect Tman. He's a big boy.

What are your thoughts?

[Appaholic]

My thoughts are this: This thread sucks.......please put this fokking thread to bed....it's fokking torture to see this thread get bumped.....

[SeattleGriz]

Too bad. I actually wanted to join in on this one because I thought there were things to be learned. I know now to stay out of your drunken posts at least for anything other than fun.

By all means, jump in. All you've done so far is protect Tman. He's a big boy.

What are your thoughts?

I just don't see overpopulation being a problem right now, for some of these simplistic reasons:

1) We are paying American farmers to enroll land in what is called Conservation Reserve Program. Granted it is only 34 million acres, but farmers are still being paid by the government not to farm, but let the land sit.

2) When I read about other countries having farming issues, I can't help but think what their land could produce if they had some real farmers working the land. A perfect example was how S Africa forced the white farmers to give up the land to black farmers, only to see the farms drop significantly in production.

Also included in this is all the land that had potential but was fvcked up by those in the third world who don't know their azz from a hole in the ground.

3) Some of the most productive farmland in the US is in metropolitan areas. I could grow a pretty good garden in my backyard if I had to. Where the hell is Wedgebuster? He had some photos of a really nice garden.

Essentially, I just don't see us as having come close to squeezing the full yield out of our current lands.

[dbackjon]

By all means, jump in. All you've done so far is protect Tman. He's a big boy.

What are your thoughts?

I just don't see overpopulation being a problem right now, for some of these simplistic reasons:

1) We are paying American farmers to enroll land in what is called Conservation Reserve Program. Granted it is only 34 million acres, but farmers are still being paid by the government not to farm, but let the land sit.

2) When I read about other countries having farming issues, I can't help but think what their land could produce if they had some real farmers working the land. A perfect example was how S Africa forced the white farmers to give up the land to black farmers, only to see the farms drop significantly in production.

Also included in this is all the land that had potential but was fvcked up by those in the third world who don't know their azz from a hole in the ground.

3) Some of the most productive farmland in the US is in metropolitan areas. I could grow a pretty good garden in my backyard if I had to. Where the hell is Wedgebuster? He had some photos of a really nice garden.

Essentially, I just don't see us as having come close to squeezing the full yield out of our current lands.

You make some good points there, SG.

As for #1 - a lot of the land in the Conservation Reserve Program needs to stay there - poor quality land that has been overfarmed, much of it prone to erosion. Helps save water supplies (from siltation). One of the worst things that ever happened to our farmland was when Nixon's Ag Secretary Earl Butz encouraged farming from fencerow to fencerow - eliminating many of the grass buffers that helped slow erosion and soil loss.

#2 - I think you are thinking of Zimbabwe - but yes, that is very true. Zimbabwe has gone from being the breadbasket of Africa to a food importer

#3) Again, very true. Just think if all those suburban lawns had gardens and orchards in them.

[TwinTownBisonFan]

I just don't see overpopulation being a problem right now, for some of these simplistic reasons:

1) We are paying American farmers to enroll land in what is called Conservation Reserve Program. Granted it is only 34 million acres, but farmers are still being paid by the government not to farm, but let the land sit.

2) When I read about other countries having farming issues, I can't help but think what their land could produce if they had some real farmers working the land. A perfect example was how S Africa forced the white farmers to give up the land to black farmers, only to see the farms drop significantly in production.

Also included in this is all the land that had potential but was fvcked up by those in the third world who don't know their azz from a hole in the ground.

3) Some of the most productive farmland in the US is in metropolitan areas. I could grow a pretty good garden in my backyard if I had to. Where the hell is Wedgebuster? He had some photos of a really nice garden.

Essentially, I just don't see us as having come close to squeezing the full yield out of our current lands.

You make some good points there, SG.

As for #1 - a lot of the land in the Conservation Reserve Program needs to stay there - poor quality land that has been overfarmed, much of it prone to erosion. Helps save water supplies (from siltation). One of the worst things that ever happened to our farmland was when Nixon's Ag Secretary Earl Butz encouraged farming from fencerow to fencerow - eliminating many of the grass buffers that helped slow erosion and soil loss.

#2 - I think you are thinking of Zimbabwe - but yes, that is very true. Zimbabwe has gone from being the breadbasket of Africa to a food importer

#3) Again, very true. Just think if all those suburban lawns had gardens and orchards in them.

The point of CRP is to improve water resources (which in turn makes the acres in production, more productive, and on the whole makes more sense than putting it back in production.

as for the other stuff... educating farmers around the world, rather than marketing to them would be a big boost... moreover, having them grow food crops for local consumption would make more sense than using all their acreage to make cash crops for first world consumers. (there needs to be a balance - right now there isn't)... or at least get a better price for their production - there is currently no incentive to do the right things...

my friends who were in ag pointed out you could be hyperproductive with "urban farms" greenhouses, hydroponics... etc

[Cap'n Cat]

"Well, fer starters, there's jes' too damn many nee-groes in this here world."

[Cap'n Cat]

Damn, I know how to kill a thread, don't I?

[SeattleGriz]

*crickets*

[dbackjon]

*crickets*

is that your response to my reply to yours?