There is no tomorrow. [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : There is no tomorrow.


Gunhaver
07-05-2012, 16:37
This is why conservatives and republicans are both dead wrong. Just two camps both arguing over their own ignorant philosophies while ignoring and denying the obvious.

There's No Tomorrow - YouTube

No matter how you look at it you have to do the last thing that both sides want, control the population by letting people die off and severely limit how much each individual can consume.

kimo
07-05-2012, 16:38
Be a leader. show us the way by setting the example. Only you have full control over you.

Gunhaver
07-05-2012, 16:54
Be a leader. show us the way by setting the example. Only you have full control over you.

That kind of attitude has always struck me as a cop out. You don't have to change any behavior as long as you can point to others who don't change theirs? And hey, you don't even have to know their behaviors. Just pick some random guy on the internet that you know nothing about. Great. Now nobody has to change anything. Watch the 34 min. video that you obviously didn't since you commented 1 min. after I posted it if you'd like to know how that'll turn out.

NorthCarolinaLiberty
07-05-2012, 17:01
No tomorrow? Little Orphan Annie was wrong?

beforeobamabans
07-05-2012, 17:14
Three minutes was all I could take. What a bunch of commie propaganda. Ignore.

Gunhaver
07-05-2012, 17:37
Three minutes was all I could take. What a bunch of commie propaganda. Ignore.

Was something in the first 3 min. inaccurate? How so?

JBnTX
07-05-2012, 20:29
Three minutes was all I could take. What a bunch of commie propaganda. Ignore.

I agree.

The video says we've used half the world's oil supply.

To know we've used half means that they know how much
oil is in the entire world.

How did they come by that information?
How can we even know that?

The entire film is pure BS, full of scare tactics and hysteria..

..

Gunhaver
07-05-2012, 20:44
I agree.

The video says we've used half the world's oil supply.

To know we've used half means that they know how much
oil is in the entire world.

How did they come by that information?
How can we even know that?

The entire film is pure BS.

..

Actually is says we've used half of what's been discovered. The fact that we're going after the tar sands and shale, that those methods are now profitable as time and energy consuming as they are is good indication that there's a lot of truth to that. We're sitting on Anwar and other U.S. deposits only as a strategic reserve since they wouldn't last long at the current rate if we did tap them. Use everyone else's before we use up all of ours.

In all reality it doesn't really matter if there's twice as much out there as we've already discovered. The bottom line is that it's a finite amount and the exponential population growth and consumption that will soon have us needing a new Saudi Arabia every 3 years isn't exactly something we should be racing towards.

JBnTX
07-05-2012, 20:55
... The bottom line is that it's a finite amount...


How can anyone know that there's a finite amount of oil in the ground?

Some of the oil reservoirs in West Texas that were emptied in the 50's and 60's, have recently been found to be full again.

This has also happened in other parts of the world.
http://www.rense.com/general63/refil.htm

http://tccsa.tc/adventure/renewable_oil.pdf

http://www.nytimes.com/1995/09/26/science/geochemist-says-oil-fieldsmay-be-refilled-naturally.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm

This is something your government and the oil companies do not want you to find out about.

There are places where oil has been looked for and not found.
Today oil is being found in those locations.

Nobody knows how much oil is in the Earth, and nobody knows for certain that the Earth has stopped creating oil.

It sounds like your video was written and produced by Chicken Little himself.

..

Jerry
07-05-2012, 21:17
It sounds like your video was written and produced by Chicken Little himself.

..

Since the MORONS love throwing out unsubstantiated information and irrelevant numbers allow me to do the same. 75% of the people on planet Earth are illogical, gullible, idiots. I may be off but 10 or 20 %. :rofl:

RC-RAMIE
07-05-2012, 21:24
No matter how you look at it you have to do the last thing that both sides want, control the population by letting people die off and severely limit how much each individual can consume.

So does that mean the government can stop taking money to help some people's friends get medicine?



....

certifiedfunds
07-05-2012, 21:32
No matter how you look at it you have to do the last thing that both sides want, control the population by letting people die off and severely limit how much each individual can consume.

So why are we socializing medicine to keep your "friend" healthy when we need to let people die off?

People who believe as you do are the epitome of evil.

RC-RAMIE
07-05-2012, 21:33
So why are we socializing medicine to keep your "friend" healthy when we need to let people die off?

People who believe as you do are the epitome of evil.

He didn't say his friends.


....

certifiedfunds
07-05-2012, 21:34
He didn't say his friends.


....

Of course not. Those are the people you seize BMW's for.

Gunhaver
07-05-2012, 21:57
How can anyone know that there's a finite amount of oil in the ground?

Some of the oil reservoirs in West Texas that were emptied in the 50's and 60's, have recently been found to be full again.

This has also happened in other parts of the world.
http://www.rense.com/general63/refil.htm

http://tccsa.tc/adventure/renewable_oil.pdf

http://www.nytimes.com/1995/09/26/science/geochemist-says-oil-fieldsmay-be-refilled-naturally.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm

This is something your government and the oil companies do not want you to find out about.

There are places where oil has been looked for and not found.
Today oil is being found in those locations.

Nobody knows how much oil is in the Earth, and nobody knows for certain that the Earth has stopped creating oil.

It sounds like your video was written and produced by Chicken Little himself.

..

Oh boy, the old oil company conspiracy. You'd think they'd be thrilled about unlimited oil since they're in the business of finding and selling it. Instead they'd have us all believe that they're in the business of digging up and burning through a finite resource as fast as possible? If there was any truth to this the oil company PR people would be all over it. I rest assured that the most profitable companies in the world have looked into it rather closely.

The abiogenic oil theory has been long abandoned. Yeah, some still cling to it but it wouldn't be the first time in history that people believed something simply because they wanted to despite all the evidence.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenic_petroleum_origin

Seems the idea got started in Russia where today they're just as eager to work out oil deals with the middle east as us and everyone else. Wonder what happened? Guess they found the muslims such a pleasure to work with.

Those oil fields that do refill do so because after several years the oil left in porous rock has time to seep out and partially refill the well. But as even one of the articles you linked states, "According to marine geologist Harry Roberts, at Louisiana State University, "petroleum geologists don't accept it as a general phenomenon because it doesn't happen in most reservoirs. " This is like sucking a milkshake dry, coming back after the last little bit has melted and sucking it up and then proclaiming that all milkshakes are bottomless.

Do you have an article newer than 10 years old? The line in that first one cracks me up, "There are more oil seeps than all the tankers in the world" Oh boy! That should keep us going for a few months. :rofl:

Gunhaver
07-05-2012, 22:10
So does that mean the government can stop taking money to help some people's friends get medicine?



....

I think they should take the money from the least productive people first. Least productive meaning the least intelligent. Folks unable to watch a half hour video and comment on the contents of the video when attacking it would certainly qualify. Those people should probably also be sterilized.

:wavey:

Gunhaver
07-05-2012, 22:22
So why are we socializing medicine to keep your "friend" healthy when we need to let people die off?

People who believe as you do are the epitome of evil.

Why? Because we as a society are a bunch of retards. Most of us can't even watch a 30 min. video before spouting off ignorance about it.

So you guys lost the Obamacare fight. I know that most of you are also against his infrastructure spending because you clearly have no desire to bridge and GTF over it. It's not keeping her alive or healthy. She made it this far without it. It'll just make things a lot easier for her. Cry me a river. :crying:

lancesorbenson
07-05-2012, 22:52
Why? Because we as a society are a bunch of retards. Most of us can't even watch a 30 min. video before spouting off ignorance about it.

So you guys lost the Obamacare fight. I know that most of you are also against his infrastructure spending because you clearly have no desire to bridge and GTF over it. It's not keeping her alive or healthy. She made it this far without it. It'll just make things a lot easier for her. Cry me a river. :crying:

Shouldn't you be slingin' drinks or something. For a mere four hundred dollars a month you could radically improve your dear friend's quality of life.

countrygun
07-05-2012, 23:29
I think they should take the money from the least productive people first. Least productive meaning the least intelligent. Folks unable to watch a half hour video and comment on the contents of the video when attacking it would certainly qualify. Those people should probably also be sterilized.

:wavey:



And here we have it folks, the liberal elitist philosophy at its best

While he may (or may not) have been facetious, it none the less in a "freudian slip" kind-of way shows the way they think.

"I think they should take the money from the least productive people first. Least productive meaning the least intelligent"


Notice how the automatic connection is made? "Intelligent" means "most productive" to the liberal XXXXX (I was going to use a term for a German political movement of the mid-twentieth century), not actually producing anything but just more intelligent is good enough.

Now I don't know about everyone else, but I have worked long enough to know that some "intelligent" people can be pretty wothless, lazy and unproductive. On the other side of the coin I have known folks that may not be rocket scientist material, but can work anyone into the ground.

I would like to say that our subject was merely trying yo be humorous but I fear his words reveal much about his thining process.

Of course you do realize that he measures intelligence by the level of agreement, to his position, that is exhibited.

He will, no doubt, come out with a vitriolic "Ha Ha you're dumb, I was just making a point" type of defense.But, think about it. Many have probably made jokes about something similar, but the equating intelligence to productivity does reveal that he obviously feels himself intelligent and therefore more valuable to society than someone who scores lower on a test.

Yes class, the subject has revealed the despicable elitist attitude that comes along with leftist ideals. Another reason not to have any traffic with them when they are encountered.

VinnieD
07-05-2012, 23:55
Most of this video's critical arguments only function when they dismiss higher energy density options. Such as claiming plutonium breeder reactors and fusion are impossible. It entirely ignores more efficient forms of ethanol such as sugar cane and algae which DO produce more fuel than they consume. Algae in particular requires significantly less energy to harvest since it can just be grown in tanks. It also dismisses the plentiful supply of thorium for nuclear fission.

Food is more limited through distribution rather than supply. Strange that the parts of the world that actually face constant threat of famine are also the ones with overpopulation problems. That however becomes a self limiting problem.

And as for total land area. Big empty universe. Halting progress isn't going to help.

Fred Hansen
07-06-2012, 01:05
Obama's Hope-A-Doped hordes are always good for a laugh.Progress, far from consisting in change, depends on retentiveness. When change is absolute there remains no being to improve and no direction is set for possible improvement: and when experience is not retained, as among savages, infancy is perpetual. Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.

George Santayana

The Life of Reason (1905-1906) Vol. I, Reason in Common SenseWhen I was a kid, all the hipster libtard dolts would wave Paul R. Ehrlich's book The Population Bomb around, and declare Spaceship Earth a dead planet. What a sad little bunch of fools. :rofl:

44 years later they're still as full of **** as ever.

Oh, and in 1990 (at the conclusion of a decade long bet) Ehrlich got his ass handed to him by Julian L. Simon. Even having the help of John Holdren--present day Obommunist advisor--wasn't enough to save him.

Although the Swedes were nice enough to give Mr. Ehrlich the Crafoord Prize in 1990. I guess that's better than a case of Turtle Wax as a consolation prize. :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Simon–Ehrlich wager (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simon%E2%80%93Ehrlich_wager)

Of course, to know any of that information, one would need a sense of history and perspective that is of somewhat longer duration than a 30 minute leftist agitprop video stitched together by some 'Communications major with a double-minor in Herp & Derp'.

And as it has already been pointed out, a truly committed Saver-of-the-Earth would snuff themselves the moment they discovered "the truth". Of course, I could never be so lucky. :upeyes: :wavey:

Gunhaver
07-06-2012, 01:21
And here we have it folks, the liberal elitist philosophy at its best

While he may (or may not) have been facetious, it none the less in a "freudian slip" kind-of way shows the way they think.

"I think they should take the money from the least productive people first. Least productive meaning the least intelligent"

Yeah, that was a smartass response to the dumbass comment about the ACA issue that so many of you don't seem to be able to let go of.

Notice how the automatic connection is made? "Intelligent" means "most productive" to the liberal XXXXX (I was going to use a term for a German political movement of the mid-twentieth century), not actually producing anything but just more intelligent is good enough.

How do you know what I produce?

Now I don't know about everyone else, you could have fooled mebut I have worked long enough to know that some "intelligent" people can be pretty wothless, lazy and unproductive. On the other side of the coin I have known folks that may not be rocket scientist material, but can work anyone into the ground. I know these things as well which is why there's no need to take my comments so seriously.

I would like to say that our subject was merely trying yo be humorous but I fear his words reveal much about his thining process.

Of course you do realize that he measures intelligence by the level of agreement, to his position, that is exhibited.

Actually, I measure intelligence by the ability to support the position that one holds on any given matter because it shows that you've researched the facts and weighed all the options instead of just parroting the tired old, "yer just a liberal or a socialist" BS and feeling like you really gave somebody what for. If someone can show me where I'm wrong then I welcome the chance to change my mind to become more right. That's kinda what I was thinking when I posted the video.

He will, no doubt, come out with a vitriolic "Ha Ha you're dumb, I was just making a point" type of defense.But, think about it. Many have probably made jokes about something similar, but the equating intelligence to productivity does reveal that he obviously feels himself intelligent and therefore more valuable to society than someone who scores lower on a test.

Yes class, the subject has revealed the despicable elitist attitude that comes along with leftist ideals. Another reason not to have any traffic with them when they are encountered.

Yes, don't have any traffic with them. Don't talk to them at all. Never try to make a point or discuss the flaws in their position, best just to keep all those wonderful points against the "Liberal Agenda" inside the echo chamber than to try to convince an actual liberal. This is why I'm far less conservative than I was 5 years ago. Liberals will talk to people that think differently and discuss ideas with them and they're very good at making good points on most issues.

You guys,OTOH, flat out suck at debate. This might be why you're dying out. Why your party has had to move so far to the left to even survive that your best choice presidential candidate is basically white Obama and you've all been fooled into thinking anything will change if he's elected.

RC-RAMIE
07-06-2012, 06:33
Yes, don't have any traffic with them. Don't talk to them at all. Never try to make a point or discuss the flaws in their position, best just to keep all those wonderful points against the "Liberal Agenda" inside the echo chamber than to try to convince an actual liberal. This is why I'm far less conservative than I was 5 years ago. Liberals will talk to people that think differently and discuss ideas with them and they're very good at making good points on most issues.

You guys,OTOH, flat out suck at debate. This might be why you're dying out. Why your party has had to move so far to the left to even survive that your best choice presidential candidate is basically white Obama and you've all been fooled into thinking anything will change if he's elected.

How do you debate somebody who think it is ok to redistribute wealth based on intelligence levels?


....

JFrame
07-06-2012, 06:42
How do you debate somebody who think it is ok to redistribute wealth based on intelligence levels?


....


You then need to discuss with such a person further breakdowns in the wealth redistribution process -- by racial purity, by service to the Fatherland, etc.


.

DonGlock26
07-06-2012, 07:01
There is no tomorrow.




If you follow Obama:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v223/DonGlock26/Obamafanboys.gif


_

automatic slim
07-06-2012, 07:04
How do you debate somebody who think it is ok to redistribute wealth based on intelligence levels?


....

Hey, they do it on Jeopardy!:supergrin:

You then need to discuss with such a person further breakdowns in the wealth redistribution process -- by racial purity, by service to the Fatherland, etc.


.

Sounds a little familiar, eh?

Gunhaver
07-06-2012, 07:06
How do you debate somebody who think it is ok to redistribute wealth based on intelligence levels?


....

I'll tell you what you don't do. Don't just call them Socialist or liberal and leave it at that. Makes you look ignorant as can be when that's the best you can muster.

DonGlock26
07-06-2012, 07:07
Hey, they do it on Jeopardy!:supergrin:





Matthews Gets Pummeled on 'JEOPARDY!' - YouTube

:rofl:


_

JFrame
07-06-2012, 07:21
Sounds a little familiar, eh?


Indeed it does -- it's no coincidence that eugenics was the brainchild of leftist progressives.


.

Lethaltxn
07-06-2012, 07:24
I'll tell you what you don't do. Don't just call them Socialist or liberal and leave it at that. Makes you look ignorant as can be when that's the best you can muster.

But calling for the theft of personal property does not?
Where are all these arguments you've won spouting the nonsense you do?

RC-RAMIE
07-06-2012, 07:50
I'll tell you what you don't do. Don't just call them Socialist or liberal and leave it at that. Makes you look ignorant as can be when that's the best you can muster.

I think they should take the money from the least productive people first. Least productive meaning the least intelligent. Folks unable to watch a half hour video and comment on the contents of the video when attacking it would certainly qualify. Those people should probably also be sterilized.

:wavey:

What else do I call this? :dunno:

DonGlock26
07-06-2012, 07:51
Indeed it does -- it's no coincidence that eugenics was the brainchild of leftist progressives.


.

The ends always justify the means to the pragmatic Left.

_

Cavalry Doc
07-06-2012, 08:22
I think they should take the money from the least productive people first. Least productive meaning the least intelligent. Folks unable to watch a half hour video and comment on the contents of the video when attacking it would certainly qualify. Those people should probably also be sterilized.

:wavey:

Paraphrased as: I posted a boring azzzed 1/2 hour video, and none of you guys want to watch it, so I want them to take your money.... whhhhhhaaaaaahhhhhhhhh.

http://www.nonstopgifs.com/animated-gifs/funny/funny-animated-gif-004.gif

evlbruce
07-06-2012, 08:35
Paraphrased as: I posted a boring azzzed 1/2 hour video, and none of you guys want to watch it, so I want them to take your money.... whhhhhhaaaaaahhhhhhhhh.

http://www.nonstopgifs.com/animated-gifs/funny/funny-animated-gif-004.gif

Plan 9: Your Stupid Minds! - YouTube

Fred Hansen
07-06-2012, 09:34
Bob Hope on Democrats- YouTube

certifiedfunds
07-06-2012, 21:47
Why? Because we as a society are a bunch of retards. Most of us can't even watch a 30 min. video before spouting off ignorance about it.

So you guys lost the Obamacare fight. I know that most of you are also against his infrastructure spending because you clearly have no desire to bridge and GTF over it. It's not keeping her alive or healthy. She made it this far without it. It'll just make things a lot easier for her. Cry me a river. :crying:

If she made it this far without it, clearly she can continue. She has no claim to my money or anyone else's here. If you feel she needs help, man up and help her cowboy.

As for "infrastructure spending"....what spending is that exactly?

I'm against any spending that isn't Constitutionally authorized in the enumerated powers.

countrygun
07-06-2012, 22:01
I'll tell you what you don't do. Don't just call them Socialist or liberal and leave it at that. Makes you look ignorant as can be when that's the best you can muster.


In other words.........

http://i1231.photobucket.com/albums/ee518/CountryG/ThatsFrankenSTEEN.png

happyguy
07-07-2012, 05:34
I agree.

The video says we've used half the world's oil supply.

To know we've used half means that they know how much
oil is in the entire world.

How did they come by that information?
How can we even know that?

The entire film is pure BS, full of scare tactics and hysteria..

..

We actually used up the world's entire oil supply back in 2000 just like they predicted back in the 70's. You know what I found out?





























































IT'S PEOPLE!!!!!!























Regards,
Happyguy :)

Snowman92D
07-07-2012, 09:26
Why? Because we as a society are a bunch of retards. Most of us can't even watch a 30 min. video before spouting off ignorance about it.

When in trouble,
Or in doubt,
Run in circles,
Scream and shout.

G29Reload
07-07-2012, 12:25
I agree.

The video says we've used half the world's oil supply.

To know we've used half means that they know how much
oil is in the entire world.

How did they come by that information?
How can we even know that?

The entire film is pure BS, full of scare tactics and hysteria..

..

Would you expect a drive-by commie to post anything different? He found something that agrees with his perverse deviant view of life, so he decided it was a fact. Next, he'll claim there's something wrong with you for not agreeing with him.

Other poster was right. Ignore.

Fred Hansen
07-07-2012, 14:07
Would you expect a drive-by commie to post anything different? He found something that agrees with his perverse deviant view of life, so he decided it was a fact. Next, he'll claim there's something wrong with you for not agreeing with him.

Other poster was right. Ignore.I expect him to post Mikey Moo-er's award winning crockumentary Bowling For Columbine next.