Anon

"What is...going to be the cause of life ending on earth..."

Big ****ing rock falling from the sky.

12,000 years and counting.

Trooth

I reckon we'll be ok for another 20 years or so. But once we can't get Bruce Willis into a spaceship, we'll be doomed .

Confed999

Could just clone him and we would allways be safe.

__________________
No man is free until all men are free - John Hossack
I agree completely with this Administration’s goal of a regime change in Iraq-John Kerry
even if that enforcement is mostly at the hands of the United States, a right we retain even if the Security Council fails to act-John Kerry
He may even miscalculate and slide these weapons off to terrorist groups to invite them to be a surrogate to use them against the United States. It’s the miscalculation that poses the greatest threat-John Kerry

tw-acs

I am talking about my ideas not Marx's or adam smith's.

If hemp, is industrialized:

Thousands of jobs if not more will be created.

We will have cheaper and Cleaner Fuel.

We will have better paper produced with less cost and less pollution. (Lower price to consumer, thus consumers buy more. Creating economic growth.

We will have many other types of products, too. This is good thing it will create competition. Competition is what keeps capitalism strong. As does diversity (competition) keeps nature strong.

The difference between man and animal as you say is:

Man kills what he likes for whatever reason:
If man wants to increase his food supply, he will manipulate the environment around him to suit his needs. This may be in disregard to all other LIFE in said environment. And if a plant or animal jeopardizes man's food supply, man will kill that plant or animal. E.G. ROCKY MOUNTAIN LOCUST

Whereas an animal:
Such as a lion. The lion will kill his prey. The lion will protect his prey, once it has been killed.

The lion will not protect his herd gazelles from hyenas. The lion will not wage war on the hyena to ensure the gazelle food supply does not become diminished.

Man has a concept of WAR. Man does think that the world is in order. So man must make the world in order, in effect man wages war on the world.

That is the difference between man and animal. Though man is an aniamal and I do not understand why you claim man to be superior. Would you claim to be superior when you realize that warm liquid on your head is bear drool. Would you care to jump and explain to the bear that you are better than he?

Superiority is circumstancial.

The African Bush man, he is man or animal?

Illicit drug, means illegal drug. I agree no drug should be illegal and it is the users choice and thus the affects of using are chosen. Though you may get addicted and want help that is why I am pro treatment.

The goal of all my "drug" talk is to raise awareness to create a larger, more solid, more complete base of knowledge to formulate thought from. And with this larger, more solid, complete base of knowledge humans would be more likely to abstain from drugs.

Capitalism is an economic system as others have stated, and thus cannot cause such problems as I complain about. Therefore I do not blame capitalism, though the persons that live in the system have responsibility to ensure that other persons dont do bad.

I never discredited the inventor. In fact, it is the intellectual that I hope to create through such discussion as this. Ideas are necessary as is labor as is management. It is the balance between these things that I am concerned about.

LIFE is what I am concerned about, I have never once said that I dont want the further development of man. That is my very purpose here, to further the development of man.

Exploited: www.dictionary.com

1. To employ to the greatest possible advantage: exploit one's talents.

2. To make use of selfishly or unethically: a country that exploited peasant labor. See Synonyms at manipulate.

3. To advertise; promote.



I want to use better resources to create a better society. The superiority of my said resources is known by and documented by the US Government.
US Dept of Energy, US Dept of Agriculture, and Congressional Records.

I propose exploiting (def #1,3) hemp and all other vegetable oil crops.

Praxus

The rest of life is governed by instincts. Man on the otherhand uses reason to solve problems, to better our own lives, etc. Man is supperior. Saying it depends on the situation is like saying the Iraqi Army is supperior because at some minute point in time they killed more Americans then we killed Iraqis.

As far as dumping waste in private water that is being sold. Just because a person is in a company that commits murder doesn't mean that person comes under "economics" and is somehow excluded from prosecution.

Therefor in my opinion Capitalism is the best way to preserve our planet for the benefit of man.

Trooth

Praxus, in your example there is no need for water standards because, handily, bad water kills people, so those at the back of the line know not to drink it? What a marvellous system.

Also, how would you guarantee that the legal process always produced the correct result (i.e. that the guilty were punished)? Presumably you would consider a legal precedant as a water quality standard, or would you ban legal precedance and make each case have to revert to first principles? Would this not mean that they were drawn out for years arguing the same points endlessly?

Unfortunately i see your theory as being only that. I don't live in a textbook.

Ironduke

I'll never pay for water. Or air.

Praxus

Sure there are precedents...

Anything they put in the water that harms the consumers(against their knowledge, thus without their permission) should be against the law. But this applies across the spectrum, there is no need to create a "water standered".

Anything that harms you against your will is banned.

I phrased it badly, yes there should be water standereds but not in the sense you are talking about.

I suppose you drive out to the mountains and drink the water in the rivers

Also why would you ever have to pay for air, there is no way to control it's distrabution:-D

tw-acs

Praxus

My example with the bear, I expierenced it. I was backpacking in California. My group was going on Glen's Pass. We started at 500 ft above sea level, the high point of this adventure was 11,500 ft above sea level, traversing forward about 47 miles in 5 days with one day of rest (So all the traversing was done in 4 days) with an 80 pound pack on my back.

If you were sleeping outside in a sleeping bag, would you care to explain your superiority to the bear?

Trooth

Can you elaborate how the banning would work without a standard to act as a yardstick?

Praxus

The standered is, anything that causes harm without the consumers permision should be banned.

Didn't I just say that?

Tw-acs:
Say you had a bear and a man and they were "hunting" each other. The bear would use his insticts to try and find and kill you. The man would use his mind, create traps, make weapons from sticks for defense and through his mind give him an advantage over the brute force of the bear.

Overall man is supperior to every other form of life.

Ironduke

I should be able to drink the water from any lake, river, or stream.

Privatizing the nation's water supply is one of the most absurd notions I've heard of late.

tw-acs

Bears do not hunt man.

Bacteria and viruses can kill man.

Viruses use the human body against itself. They get inside the human cells and destroy the body from within. Now that is using tools(humans).

Officer of Engineers

Really shows how much (in actuallity, how VERY LITTLE) you know.

__________________
Chimo

Officer of Engineers

In actuallity, you both know very little about wildlife. All predatory animals are known to adapt to new situations and new environments, thus negating the "instinct" vs "learn" theory. They learn and don't let anyone tell you otherwise. There are obviously limits to their limit but they can and do adapt.

Unless the man has survived in the wild for years, I'll bet on the bear vs the man anyday of the week. You have absolutely no idea how much the lack of knowledge gives weight to the bear's advantage.