Skip to content
BOL Conferences Top Gun 23
Learn More - Click Here!

Page 11 of 12 1 2 9 10 11 12
Thread Options
#717079 - 04/16/07 11:00 PM Re: The Politics of Attacking Al Gore B_F
straw Offline
Power Poster
straw
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 9,121
Originally Posted By: Bengalsfan
Originally Posted By: straw
what if we over fish the next fish that moves in to take the cod's place?

Or the next?



What if the trees turn blue and cows start to bark, while fish walk on the land, and sheep live in the sea?

Survival of the fittest. If we eat all the fish in the sea, and can't adapt, other creatures will survive.


Why is it you treat this question as an incredible proposition?

So, you don't think depleting the ocean of fish will have any repurcussions?

Or you are willing to bet humanity's survival on it?

Return to Top
Chat! - BOL Watercooler
#717108 - 04/17/07 04:23 AM Re: The Politics of Attacking Al Gore straw
TheManofSteel Offline
10K Club
TheManofSteel
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 10,068
Fortress of Solitude
While I certainly do not buy into the man-caused global warming argument, to take a position that causing the extinction of a species would not have negative repurcussions is not tenable. Yes, it is possible that another species will move in to fill the functional void, but that does not happen overnight. In the interim, a vacuum is created, wherein the functions of that species on both its immediate ecosystem and the larger ecosystems that are interdependent on it, suffer.

Case in point, wolves were killed off and nearly disappeared from the northeast, although they are finally making a comeback. The results have been a vast overpopulation of deer, with no other natural predators to maintain the balance. Black bears are netiher populace enough, nor do they hunt in packs, and they are largely omnivorous, meaning they eat plenty more vegetation. And of course, the other natural predators within the continental U.S. are not natural to the northeast, namely brown bears and mountain lions.
_________________________
"Beneath an ever watchful eye...the angels of the temple fly"

Return to Top
#717127 - 04/17/07 12:18 PM Re: The Politics of Attacking Al Gore TheManofSteel
Hrothgar Geiger Offline
10K Club
Hrothgar Geiger
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 10,395
Jersey Shore
Is anyone else a little boggled over Bengalsfan using an 'evolutionary' line of argument?

Return to Top
#717130 - 04/17/07 12:24 PM Re: The Politics of Attacking Al Gore Hrothgar Geiger
Hated By Some Offline
10K Club
Hated By Some
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 13,603
Somewhere vanilla
Quote:
the other natural predators within the continental U.S. are not natural to the northeast, namely brown bears and mountain lions.


you are right about the brown bears. but, like the wolves, the mountain lions were hunted to extinction in these here parts. the "nittany" lion lives on only in (brutally hokey) costume.

Return to Top
#717182 - 04/17/07 01:32 PM Re: The Politics of Attacking Al Gore straw
B_F Offline
Power Poster
B_F
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 7,228
Cincinnati, OH
Originally Posted By: straw
Originally Posted By: Bengalsfan
Originally Posted By: straw
what if we over fish the next fish that moves in to take the cod's place?

Or the next?



What if the trees turn blue and cows start to bark, while fish walk on the land, and sheep live in the sea?

Survival of the fittest. If we eat all the fish in the sea, and can't adapt, other creatures will survive.


Why is it you treat this question as an incredible proposition?

So, you don't think depleting the ocean of fish will have any repurcussions?

Or you are willing to bet humanity's survival on it?


Your proposition is no different from my proposition that fish will walk on land and sheep will grow gills and swim in the seas. Both are products of survival of the fittest. If we kill all the fish in the sea, there will be repercussions. It could mean humanity no longer exists. But the "balance of nature" will remain. I'm just not being selfish about it. Someone else said overfishing was greedy and gluttonous. I'm saying environmentalism is selfish and a religion in it's own right.

Return to Top
#717183 - 04/17/07 01:34 PM Re: The Politics of Attacking Al Gore TheManofSteel
B_F Offline
Power Poster
B_F
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 7,228
Cincinnati, OH
Originally Posted By: AMLFella
While I certainly do not buy into the man-caused global warming argument, to take a position that causing the extinction of a species would not have negative repurcussions is not tenable. Yes, it is possible that another species will move in to fill the functional void, but that does not happen overnight. In the interim, a vacuum is created, wherein the functions of that species on both its immediate ecosystem and the larger ecosystems that are interdependent on it, suffer.

Case in point, wolves were killed off and nearly disappeared from the northeast, although they are finally making a comeback. The results have been a vast overpopulation of deer, with no other natural predators to maintain the balance. Black bears are netiher populace enough, nor do they hunt in packs, and they are largely omnivorous, meaning they eat plenty more vegetation. And of course, the other natural predators within the continental U.S. are not natural to the northeast, namely brown bears and mountain lions.


Overpopulation of deer is not due to a lack of wolves. It is due to hunting laws. Sorry, try again. We brought the overpopulation of deer on ourselves by restricting our own predatory natures.

Return to Top
#717185 - 04/17/07 01:35 PM Re: The Politics of Attacking Al Gore Hrothgar Geiger
B_F Offline
Power Poster
B_F
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 7,228
Cincinnati, OH
Originally Posted By: AML-Barbarian
Is anyone else a little boggled over Bengalsfan using an 'evolutionary' line of argument?


When have I ever denied micro-evolution? It's the whole macro-evolution of we evolved from apes that I deny. I've never said survival of the fittest did not apply.

Return to Top
#717189 - 04/17/07 01:40 PM Re: The Politics of Attacking Al Gore B_F
Hated By Some Offline
10K Club
Hated By Some
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 13,603
Somewhere vanilla
Originally Posted By: Bengalsfan
Originally Posted By: AML-Barbarian
Is anyone else a little boggled over Bengalsfan using an 'evolutionary' line of argument?


When have I ever denied micro-evolution? It's the whole macro-evolution of we evolved from apes that I deny. I've never said survival of the fittest did not apply.

but yet:
Quote:
Your proposition is no different from my proposition that fish will walk on land and sheep will grow gills and swim in the seas.


bf, why don't you hand me that shovel before you throw out your back again.

Return to Top
#717206 - 04/17/07 01:55 PM Re: The Politics of Attacking Al Gore Hated By Some
B_F Offline
Power Poster
B_F
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 7,228
Cincinnati, OH
Originally Posted By: Ron Mexico
Originally Posted By: Bengalsfan
Originally Posted By: AML-Barbarian
Is anyone else a little boggled over Bengalsfan using an 'evolutionary' line of argument?


When have I ever denied micro-evolution? It's the whole macro-evolution of we evolved from apes that I deny. I've never said survival of the fittest did not apply.

but yet:
Quote:
Your proposition is no different from my proposition that fish will walk on land and sheep will grow gills and swim in the seas.


bf, why don't you hand me that shovel before you throw out your back again.


The chances of us eliminating every fish that can perform the function of every other species is just as unlikely as fish evolving to the point where most, like the walking catfish, can live on land.

Return to Top
#717208 - 04/17/07 01:58 PM Re: The Politics of Attacking Al Gore B_F
Hated By Some Offline
10K Club
Hated By Some
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 13,603
Somewhere vanilla
perhaps you could save your back if you leased a backhoe since you want to continue working on this jobsite?

Return to Top
#717230 - 04/17/07 02:21 PM Re: The Politics of Attacking Al Gore B_F
XODUS Offline
Power Poster
XODUS
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 4,384
Originally Posted By: Bengalsfan
Originally Posted By: AMLFella
While I certainly do not buy into the man-caused global warming argument, to take a position that causing the extinction of a species would not have negative repurcussions is not tenable. Yes, it is possible that another species will move in to fill the functional void, but that does not happen overnight. In the interim, a vacuum is created, wherein the functions of that species on both its immediate ecosystem and the larger ecosystems that are interdependent on it, suffer.

Case in point, wolves were killed off and nearly disappeared from the northeast, although they are finally making a comeback. The results have been a vast overpopulation of deer, with no other natural predators to maintain the balance. Black bears are netiher populace enough, nor do they hunt in packs, and they are largely omnivorous, meaning they eat plenty more vegetation. And of course, the other natural predators within the continental U.S. are not natural to the northeast, namely brown bears and mountain lions.


Overpopulation of deer is not due to a lack of wolves. It is due to hunting laws. Sorry, try again. We brought the overpopulation of deer on ourselves by restricting our own predatory natures.



maybe in the northeast this is true but certainly not all over the country. It is known from the Yellowstone reintroduction of wolves the effect taking predators out of the environment does. Who would have thought that not having wolves would affect the flora of Yellowstone? But now that they have been introduced the changes have already become evident.

Return to Top
#717285 - 04/17/07 02:58 PM Re: The Politics of Attacking Al Gore B_F
straw Offline
Power Poster
straw
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 9,121
Originally Posted By: Bengalsfan
Originally Posted By: straw
Originally Posted By: Bengalsfan
Originally Posted By: straw
what if we over fish the next fish that moves in to take the cod's place?

Or the next?



What if the trees turn blue and cows start to bark, while fish walk on the land, and sheep live in the sea?

Survival of the fittest. If we eat all the fish in the sea, and can't adapt, other creatures will survive.


Why is it you treat this question as an incredible proposition?

So, you don't think depleting the ocean of fish will have any repurcussions?

Or you are willing to bet humanity's survival on it?


Your proposition is no different from my proposition that fish will walk on land and sheep will grow gills and swim in the seas. Both are products of survival of the fittest. If we kill all the fish in the sea, there will be repercussions. It could mean humanity no longer exists. But the "balance of nature" will remain. I'm just not being selfish about it. Someone else said overfishing was greedy and gluttonous. I'm saying environmentalism is selfish and a religion in it's own right.


Right; one is natural, and takes millenia; the other is man-caused and can happen within a generation.

But you are right - apples to apples comparison.

Return to Top
#717288 - 04/17/07 03:00 PM Re: The Politics of Attacking Al Gore straw
Imagine Offline
Power Poster
Imagine
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 7,624
Let me ask you in terms you'd understand BF:
What would Jesus think of the way we treat the planet God gave us?

Return to Top
#717466 - 04/17/07 05:53 PM Re: The Politics of Attacking Al Gore Imagine
B_F Offline
Power Poster
B_F
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 7,228
Cincinnati, OH
Originally Posted By: NeophytePolitico
Let me ask you in terms you'd understand BF:
What would Jesus think of the way we treat the planet God gave us?


Sorry, but you don't get to pull out the religious question when you won't accept it in other instances. Thank you, play again.

Return to Top
#717469 - 04/17/07 05:54 PM Re: The Politics of Attacking Al Gore XODUS
B_F Offline
Power Poster
B_F
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 7,228
Cincinnati, OH
Originally Posted By: XODUS
maybe in the northeast this is true but certainly not all over the country. It is known from the Yellowstone reintroduction of wolves the effect taking predators out of the environment does. Who would have thought that not having wolves would affect the flora of Yellowstone? But now that they have been introduced the changes have already become evident.



We could have hunted the deer in Yellowstone too, but instead, we interferred with the natural order by demanding that others not hunt in the area, AND eliminating the other predators.

Besides, what makes the status quo so sacrosanct? What's wrong with changes to the environment?

Return to Top
#717476 - 04/17/07 05:59 PM Re: The Politics of Attacking Al Gore Imagine
Hated By Some Offline
10K Club
Hated By Some
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 13,603
Somewhere vanilla
Originally Posted By: NeophytePolitico
Let me ask you in terms you'd understand BF:
What would Jesus think of the way we treat the planet God gave us?

i'll answer for you because the truth of his answer makes him look bad.

God put his bounty on earth for us to use at our leisure. He will continue to provide.

(of course this ignores reality in many respects but why would you want to be inconsistent with your ideology--ignoring as well the fact that it is plausible for sheep to grow gills but impossible for astralopithecus to lead to homo sapiens.)


Return to Top
#717480 - 04/17/07 06:03 PM Re: The Politics of Attacking Al Gore B_F
BurntSienna Offline
Diamond Poster
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,407
Midwest
Wow, Bengalsfan, it seems to me that you can accept evolution in some cases, but you "won't accept it in other instances." Yet, interestingly, you completely shut down any discussion with NP because of *his* (perceived by you) inconsistency on "the religious question".

While reading through this entire thread, I've been VERY curious as to how you can have the views you have on extinction if you believe in Creationism to any extent. If, in fact, you believe that God created each creature as well as humans, as it says in the Bible, I find it interesting that you can simultaneously believe that it's "no big deal" to kill off whole species. The Bible teaches that every creature on earth is precious.

"In his hand is the life of every creature and the breath of all mankind." (Job 12:10)

"Are not five sparrows sold for two pennies? Yet not one of them is forgotten in God's sight." (Luke 12:6; cf. Matthew 10:29)

Global warming completely aside, stewardship of this earth is in everyone's best interest for so many reasons, particularly those of us calling ourselves Christians.
_________________________
"Gratitude makes sense of our past, brings peace for today, and creates a vision for tomorrow." - Melody Beattie

Return to Top
#717726 - 04/18/07 02:31 AM Re: The Politics of Attacking Al Gore B_F
TheManofSteel Offline
10K Club
TheManofSteel
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 10,068
Fortress of Solitude
Originally Posted By: Bengalsfan
Originally Posted By: AMLFella
While I certainly do not buy into the man-caused global warming argument, to take a position that causing the extinction of a species would not have negative repurcussions is not tenable. Yes, it is possible that another species will move in to fill the functional void, but that does not happen overnight. In the interim, a vacuum is created, wherein the functions of that species on both its immediate ecosystem and the larger ecosystems that are interdependent on it, suffer.

Case in point, wolves were killed off and nearly disappeared from the northeast, although they are finally making a comeback. The results have been a vast overpopulation of deer, with no other natural predators to maintain the balance. Black bears are netiher populace enough, nor do they hunt in packs, and they are largely omnivorous, meaning they eat plenty more vegetation. And of course, the other natural predators within the continental U.S. are not natural to the northeast, namely brown bears and mountain lions.


Overpopulation of deer is not due to a lack of wolves. It is due to hunting laws. Sorry, try again. We brought the overpopulation of deer on ourselves by restricting our own predatory natures.



Really, then I'd like to see evidence that man-made restrictions on man himself has resulted in overpopulations of deer, especially given that venison is not a major food stable. We killed off the wolves, and the deer got out of control, there is no other evidence to the contrary.
_________________________
"Beneath an ever watchful eye...the angels of the temple fly"

Return to Top
#717800 - 04/18/07 01:27 PM Re: The Politics of Attacking Al Gore TheManofSteel
XODUS Offline
Power Poster
XODUS
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 4,384
It's funny that this thread has begun to take on religious connotations. On Mondays episode of Planet Earth:Future on the Science Channel, the scholars were discussing how important it is that religious leaders take a stand on environmental issues and illustrated how the Dahli Lama once did and the resultant changes it caused. Religion, they said, has largely sat by and reaped the profits of human expansion without regard to the consequences. Anybody else watching this stuff but me? Anybody going to watch the Earth Day specials on Sunday? Or as usual are you guys just talking because you like to read your own typing??
Last edited by Pale Rider; 04/18/07 01:39 PM.
Return to Top
#717802 - 04/18/07 01:30 PM Re: The Politics of Attacking Al Gore XODUS
Hated By Some Offline
10K Club
Hated By Some
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 13,603
Somewhere vanilla
wasn't that one evangelical guy excoriated by that dobson character for causing a rift in the political base since the environment is NOT a traditional platform that keep relgious conservatives together?

Return to Top
#717814 - 04/18/07 01:44 PM Re: The Politics of Attacking Al Gore Hated By Some
Pale Rider Offline
10K Club
Pale Rider
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 34,318
under the Lone Star
Originally Posted By: Ron Mexico
wasn't that one evangelical guy excoriated by that dobson character for causing a rift in the political base since the environment is NOT a traditional platform that keep relgious conservatives together?


seemed like a legitimate concern by the "dobson character", mixed messages can dilute and confuse an argument, kinda like what is happening in this thread
_________________________
Societies that do not find work in and of itself "pleasing to God and requisite to Man," tend to be highly corrupt.


Return to Top
#717816 - 04/18/07 01:46 PM Re: The Politics of Attacking Al Gore Pale Rider
Imagine Offline
Power Poster
Imagine
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 7,624
Originally Posted By: Pale Rider
mixed messages can dilute and confuse an argument, kinda like what is happening in this thread


what exactly are the mixed messages of this thread?
And what is confusing?

Return to Top
#717818 - 04/18/07 01:46 PM Re: The Politics of Attacking Al Gore XODUS
TheManofSteel Offline
10K Club
TheManofSteel
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 10,068
Fortress of Solitude
Originally Posted By: XODUS
It's funny that this thread has begun to take on religious connotations. On Mondays episode of Planet Earth:Future on the Science Channel, the scholars were discussing how important it is that religious leaders take a stand on environmental issues and illustrated how the Dahli Lama once did and the resultant changes it caused. Religion, they said, has largely sat by and reaped the profits of human expansion without regard to the consequences. Anybody else watching this stuff but me? Anybody going to watch the Earth Day specials on Sunday? Or as usual are you guys just talking out your asses because you like to read your own typing??


here in fact, are some examples of religious involvement in stewarship of the earth movements and phenomena, in this case, the Catholic Church:

http://www.usccb.org/sdwp/ejp/resources/education.html


AND, in the following long link, scroll down to the following section:

VII. A Proper Understanding of Environmental Stewardship

The section is long, a good 5 minute reading, so be patient.

http://www.acton.org/ppolicy/environment/theology/m_catholic.html
_________________________
"Beneath an ever watchful eye...the angels of the temple fly"

Return to Top
#717829 - 04/18/07 02:03 PM Re: The Politics of Attacking Al Gore Pale Rider
Hated By Some Offline
10K Club
Hated By Some
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 13,603
Somewhere vanilla
Originally Posted By: Pale Rider
Originally Posted By: Ron Mexico
wasn't that one evangelical guy excoriated by that dobson character for causing a rift in the political base since the environment is NOT a traditional platform that keep relgious conservatives together?


seemed like a legitimate concern by the "dobson character", mixed messages can dilute and confuse an argument, kinda like what is happening in this thread

wow, so politics and tithing are more important than what guy was trying to say? in other words, he was disagreeing with the BF-type philosophy that God put the earth there for the disposal of humans?

Return to Top
#717876 - 04/18/07 02:50 PM Re: The Politics of Attacking Al Gore Hated By Some
Pale Rider Offline
10K Club
Pale Rider
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 34,318
under the Lone Star
all those topics are important, but you are putting words in that "evangelical guy's" mouth. There is absolutely no evidence I am aware of that he would disagree with Genesis 1:28 (fill the earth, subdue it...rule over the fish...birds...every living thing).

Politics and controversial topics like tithing, social gospel, enviro gospel and a host of others can dilute the essential message, don't you agree?
_________________________
Societies that do not find work in and of itself "pleasing to God and requisite to Man," tend to be highly corrupt.


Return to Top
Page 11 of 12 1 2 9 10 11 12