EPA Radiation Coverup? - Page 2

Sgt Shultz · 2012-06-11, 10:38 AM

Originally Posted by Warborn

Germany's knee-jerk idiocy of closing down nuclear power plants over the Fukushima incident was genuinely surprising. I mean, I get that politicians pander to the hysterical masses to an extent, but there were really that many constituents concerned about nuclear safety in Germany after the combo earthquake/tsunami broke Fukushima Daiichi?

This is one of the things I've always found so annoying about environmentalists. They'll go on warning about the dangers of global warming and how people need to do something, and yet that something can never be nuclear power because ATOMS R DANGEROUS or something. What do they really expect? That the power of hugs is going to fuel the planet? Well, what they get is coal plants, which are vastly more harmful to people and the environment than nuclear power.

Have you by chance ever read one of George Monibot's articles in The Guardian? The material he puts forth is a bit difficult to stomach but its usually the comments that are esp revealing. Typically it starts with the usual boilerplate about evil corporations, then sooner or later one of commenters "let's the mask slip" and starts talking about population reduction. After that the rest tend to smugly agree that it's needed for the good of the planet.

I am pretty much convinced that today's environmentalist stop being strictly concerned about the environment years ago, in favor of promoting their own totalitarian visions of society, with then at the top. Everyone else is just a cockroach awaiting their turn under the boot.

**Malorn** · 2012-06-12, 02:33 AM

Meh.

Vash02 · 2012-06-12, 05:37 AM

Originally Posted by Malorn

Best way to reduce your carbon footprint is to not exist.

Hey wait, that means the best way to save the planet is for humans to not exist...

It's like something out of an Asimov book.

Hello Mr Strawman.

Sgt Shultz · 2012-06-12, 07:56 AM

Originally Posted by Vash02

Hello Mr Strawman.

Strawman? Really?

http://www.treehugger.com/corporate-...n-control.html

This particular Strawman seems to have a lot of people propping it up.

Figment · 2012-06-12, 08:25 AM

Yes extreme strawman even.

Population control is not exactly the same as global genocide to mass extinction.

And yes, the best thing to happen to Africa would be a stop to the exponential growth of the population, in fact a severe reduction of populace would help them a lot.

Of course, nobody can say who is to live and who is to die, but the way things are now in Africa is not sustainable in the long run. I'd expect a huge implosion of populace and even more massive emigration waves. Hell, if there wasn't the mediteranean sea, we'd probably have seen a mass migration that would make the coming of the **** look like a schooltrip.

Unfortunately, birth control would not suffice for that, if it was even likely to happen or be acceptable in a continent where self-discipline is not exactly a priority and sexual standards are below any acceptable norms (aids spread, rape, teen and single mothers almost being the norm). Getting 5 to 21 children in a populace already starving to death and too poor to even pay for the education of one child is not exactly brilliant economics, is it? Also, why do you think condom programs exist? Because we've seen how the Catholic abstainance policy worked out so far. We're dealing with uneducated, erratic populace here, some of whoms leaders think aids can be cured by a diet of garlic and vegetables and where sex with random women is a man's right.

What we'll see instead is wars, because humanity has become a plague to themselves in Africa: not enough food, huge unemployment, extremely low wages, lacking ethics, not enough resources, combined with increasing ethnic and religious hatred and tensions throughout the continent.

It's a massive gunpowder barrel with the fuse plugged in, waiting to be lit.

Warborn · 2012-06-12, 04:24 PM

Africa has a lot more trouble in its house than population growth. And actually Africa's situation is perfectly sustainable. They were a lot worse off before the European powers carved up the dark continent for themselves. Even if everything there collapses, well, millions will die and they'll return to the more primitive roots many people in Africa still participate in. Personally, I'd rather we in the not-Africas interfere less in the affairs of Africa rather than more. Calling it a powder keg implies its collapse would have some serious consequences on the rest of us, which I don't think it does, provided we don't get involved in any serious way.

Figment · 2012-06-12, 05:51 PM

Originally Posted by Warborn

Africa has a lot more trouble in its house than population growth. And actually Africa's situation is perfectly sustainable.

Yes, that's why there's severe famines every decade in many regions of Africa, people poach for endangered species because they're already extremely loaded, loads of tropical forest is burned down and turned into farmland before turning into eroding desert area, the desert is expanding into previously fertile agricultural zones, civil wars are raging all over the continent due to the excellent economical and civilian situation, etc. etc. etc.

Sounds perfectly sustainable to me.

They were a lot worse off before the European powers carved up the dark continent for themselves. Even if everything there collapses, well, millions will die and they'll return to the more primitive roots many people in Africa still participate in. Personally, I'd rather we in the not-Africas interfere less in the affairs of Africa rather than more.

Millions will die, but they won't return to their primitive roots.

They'll turn to ideological extremes, whether religious or political. With the low levels of education and high level of biggotry and superstition, they're easy prey for whatever person comes along with promises, or a machete. They'll turn to ethnic violence as they grow more desperate as they've always have.

They are part of the world, they have access to technology, they just don't have access to wealth. If they had, we'd have ran out of natural resources already. Imagine if everyone in the world used as many resources as we personally do. It'd be an even bigger disaster than it is already and we already all lose in the end.

Calling it a powder keg implies its collapse would have some serious consequences on the rest of us, which I don't think it does, provided we don't get involved in any serious way.

Why do you suppose everything that's an explosive situation has to reflect on us? A powder keg (see image below) is simply a situation that's going to do a lot of harm to its immediate area and area of influence.

And regarding its influence on us... You ever hear about this thing called "natural resources"? It turns out Africa has extensive valuable minerals, oil supplies and large forests creating oxygen...

Warborn · 2012-06-12, 08:05 PM

Africa needs to sort its own shit out, period. Nothing you or I or our respective nations can do will fix what ails them. They need a fundamental reform of how they look at government and each other. Maybe it'll take hundreds of years. I don't know. What I do know is that the end-game for Africa, either way, isn't a mass graveyard. People will always live there. The ecosystem may change and some animals may die out, but life will go on. And one day Africa may join the rest of the world as a continent filled with nations which are not disastrous shitholes with a couple exceptions. Or maybe the world will end before that happens.

Either way, it's about the most pointless thing to worry about. Chip in for some mosquito nets and worry about problems that have any chance of you or yours affecting within the span of your lifetime. There's a lot of things in the world to concern yourself with without depleting yourself against the monument to lost causes of outside intervention that is Africa.

**Malorn** · 2012-06-12, 08:27 PM

Meh.

Figment · 2012-06-12, 09:18 PM

Oh they definitely need to sort things out. But Warborn, they are part of the world. They are not isolated and even if we are not there we still dominate their market. China is still mining stuff. Can we ignore them? Not as much as we would like to.

But yeah, I'm not talking about food aid etc. That never worked. The only help I'm in favour of is education and legal aid really. Competition and nurishment wise they should strike their own balance. If they can't support themselves, they should slim down. We can't bring welfare there. We can lend a walking cane for the first steps and stimulate business. I like micro-loans.