The Conservative Cave
Current Events => General Discussion => Topic started by: CG6468 on August 24, 2011, 02:19:30 PM
-
From someone's email, I know not whom, nor do I know the author. But I have permission from the guy that posted it on another forum from an email.
"I'm 72 and I'm Tired"
I'm 72. Except for brief period in the 50's, I've worked hard since I was 16. Except for some some health challenges, I put in 50 plus-hour weeks, and didn't call in sick in nearly 40 years. I made a reasonable salary, but I didn't inherit my job or my income, and I worked to get where I am. Given the economy, it looks as though retirement was a bad idea, and I'm tired. Very tired.
I'm tired of being told that I have to "spread the wealth" to people who don't have my work ethic. I'm tired of being told the government will take the money I earned, by force if necessary, and give it to people too lazy to earn it.
I'm tired of being told that Islam is a "Religion of Peace," when every day I can read dozens of stories of Muslim men killing their sisters, wives and daughters for their family "honour"; of Muslims rioting over some slight offense; of Muslims murdering Christian and Jews because they aren't "believers"; of Muslims burning schools for girls; of Muslims stoning teenage rape victims to death for "adultery"; of Muslims mutilating the genitals of little girls; all in the name of Allah, because the Qur'an and Shari'a law tells them to.
I'm tired of being told that out of "tolerance for other cultures" we must let Saudi Arabia and other Arab countries use our oil money to fund mosques and mandrassa Islamic schools to preach hate in Australia, New Zealand, UK, America and Canada, while no one from these countries are allowed to fund a church, synagogue or religious school in Saudi Arabia or any other Arab country to teach love and tolerance.
I'm tired of being told I must lower my living standard to fight global warming, which no one is allowed to debate.
I'm tired of being told that drug addicts have a disease, and I must help support and treat them, and pay for the damage they do. Did a giant germ rush out of a dark alley, grab them, and stuff white powder up their noses or stick a needle in their arm while they tried to fight it off?
I'm tired of hearing wealthy athletes, entertainers and politicians of all parties talking about innocent mistakes, stupid mistakes or youthful mistakes, when we all know they think their only mistake was getting caught. I'm tired of people with a sense of entitlement, rich or poor.
I'm really tired of people who don't take responsibility for their lives and actions. I'm tired of hearing them blame the government, or discrimination or big-whatever for their problems.
Yes, I'm damn tired. But I'm also glad to be 72. Because, mostly, I'm not going to have to see the world these people are making. I'm just sorry for my children and their children.
Stresses portion mine.
I'm "only" 69, but I'm tired of the same shit too.
-
From someone's email, I know not whom, nor do I know the author. But I have permission from the guy that posted it on another forum from an email.
Stresses portion mine.
I'm "only" 69, but I'm tired of the same shit too.
65 and also tired........but hell, I was tired 40 years ago when all this shit was just getting started..
-
65 and also tired........but hell, I was tired 40 years ago when all this shit was just getting started..
We all are tired of this shit, but what can one do????
I ran into a family member that is a Marine for life and asked what he thought of all this crap.
His answers were a eye opener.
As he told me-----He at this time does not give a damn, the next generation will have to handle life as it comes to them.
All generations inhearted the good and the bad from the one before them. This he said was not his problem, not the kids or grandkids, how life goes on when we leave the planet is up to those we leave behind that may not know about us for 100 years unless they bother to check out gemology.
Interesting point of view, was there anything we the people could do to protect the future??? Nope, the future is not anything we today could understand.
Very sad and depressing until he told me that he believed we had but one life to live on earth, we need to live in OUR time, do what we can for those who also live in this time. The future is for those that live in it, it is totally unimaginable to us alive today.
Interesting thoughts from a man who cared nothing about tomorrow, just today.
Could be the man is on to something here, any little thing one does that is good today even with out though may make some small difference in another life. Live for today, the future we will never see.
-
I'm tired of being told that drug addicts have a disease
This is a central concept of AA, that alcoholism is a disease. I won't debate the truth of this. It really all depends on how you define disease. However, AA has helped millions of people who were hooked on alcohol lead happy productive lives. If calling alcoholism a disease is a useful concept I am all for it. I think AA and other similar recovery programs do much more to make people into productive citizens than putting them in jail.
Of course jail is sometimes the only option.
I'm tired of being told that drug addicts have a disease, and I must help support and treat them, and pay for the damage they do.
AA and similar programs are free. Addicts and alcoholics put a dollar in the basket. Churches give these groups cheap rent on unused rooms to meet in. Even more expensive government sponsored treatment programs are cheaper than jail.
-
I'm tired of being told I must lower my living standard to fight global warming, which no one is allowed to debate.
There is a lot of debate about this, both in the scientific and in the political community. There is a lot of debate about it right here. Who is it he thinks in the USA has the power to allow or not allow debate on this or anything else? There will always be people who shout each other down, throw insults and try to stifle debate, but I don't think they can really allow or not allow debate in the long run.
-
Global warming may exist, but man made climate change is bullshit.
-
Global warming may exist, but man made climate change is bullshit.
You are entitled to your opinion, although there are a lot of climate scientists who disagree with you. The point is that you are free to express that opinion and debate it. My point was that no one can allow us or not allow us to debate this, which is what the original article said.
-
You are entitled to your opinion, although there are a lot of climate scientists who disagree with you. The point is that you are free to express that opinion and debate it. My point was that no one can allow us or not allow us to debate this, which is what the original article said.
An extremely high percentage of so-called "climate scientists" have been found to be frauds, parroting the liberal tree hugger (including Gore) bullshit. That is not an opinion; that is a fact.
-
I am 37 and have been tired of it since I started working and saw my first paycheck. :bird:
-
An extremely high percentage of so-called "climate scientists" have been found to be frauds, parroting the liberal tree hugger (including Gore) bullshit. That is not an opinion; that is a fact.
Maybe you know something I don't. Where can I double check that fact?
-
Maybe you know something I don't. Where can I double check that fact?
I will not educate you. Just do a search on the Internet.
-
You are entitled to your opinion, although there are a lot of climate scientists who disagree with you. The point is that you are free to express that opinion and debate it. My point was that no one can allow us or not allow us to debate this, which is what the original article said.
It may exist, it may not exist, as far as man made change is concerned. But, the fact remains that on top of this issue is piled more issues, such as scientists behaving less than honestly, politicians attempting to bilk the concept for trillions of dollars, etc. And yes, in some scientific cirles at the university level, if you're not on the "right" side of the issue, you're ostracized if not fired. The Hadley CRU scientists proved this point. The mecca of climate change "science" and they're caught actively thwarting the efforts of those they debate, hiding or losing data, admitting privately that their models are messed up, etc. Such is not the behavior of the ideal scientist, though it is the typical behavior of flawed man.
Al Gore and many others positioned themselves to make lots of money on cap and trade, and then he argued for it. My main beef with this issue is that the only solution the left pumps is cap and trade, believing, as usual, that they can legislate around the laws of economics. Cap and trade is a wealth consolidator, which liberals say they are against. It would make everything more expensive, slow the economy to a crawl, and where it has been tried, it has failed to actually curb emissions. Further, scientists cannot tell if the efforts have even had an effect on global warming at all.
-
Maybe you know something I don't. Where can I double check that fact?
I once saw a list of "Scientist" that signed a 'something or other' that was used as proof that the "majority of climate scientist" supported the claim that "global warming" was real and manmade....one little problem with that list of scientist, most were not scientist and most of them that were scientist had degrees in subjects other than weather. A lot of those that signed were doctors(MD's), lawyers and PhD's in subjects such as English literature.
-
Maybe you know something I don't. Where can I double check that fact?
Dude. its been all over the internet and news sites for YEARS! That you are ignorant of the rampant fraud involved in Global Warming is evidence that you don't read much. A few years ago, a number of Brit scientists lost their jobs because they were falsifying temperature data to promote the Warming Hoax and keep their jobs.
Further Global Warming scientists and political proponents (I'm talking the leaders here) they all REFUSE to debate any non-believers in any forum, scientific or otherwise. That's where the No-debate clause comes out.
this has been all over the news for the last 10 years. and you never heard of it?!
Bitch Slap for being willfully ignorant.
-
Thank you, Mr. Mannn.
-
Comments, Mr Bush?
-
Comments, Mr Bush?
Either side could post hundreds of links to articles backing up their position.
I think we will have to agree to disagree on the subject of man made global climate change. Good people can disagree.
-
Either side could post hundreds of links to articles backing up their position.
I think we will have to agree to disagree on the subject of man made global climate change. Good people can disagree.
Once again you tapdance. Man-made climate change is a lie perpetrated by Gore and other flakes, just to make money.
-
Either side could post hundreds of links to articles backing up their position.
I think we will have to agree to disagree on the subject of man made global climate change. Good people can disagree.
agree to disagree? What a loser cop-out.
Good people can disagree, sure. But you came here casting stones at people who disagreed with you, the moment someone started a discussion, you RUN like a little girl.
No wonder FR banned you. It was for being a weasel.
-
I was born and raised on a farm. It didn't matter what the weather did, I was out in it taking care of cows. Then spent mu adult years in the grading business, again out in the weather regardless. I have seen cold icy winters, warm wet winters, wet cool wet summers and hot dry ones. One thing about the weather that is certain, it's going to change. It's no hotter and drier around here now than it was in 1954....1981.
For years I had a little black bank deposit book. I could look in that deposit book and tell what kind of summer or winter we had had by my bank deposits....damn electronic banking killed my weather records... :rotf:
-
Either side could post hundreds of links to articles backing up their position.
I think we will have to agree to disagree on the subject of man made global climate change. Good people can disagree.
All you talked about was debate, now it presents it self and you run.
BS for cowardice.
-
All you talked about was debate, now it presents it self and you run.
BS for cowardice.
Cowardice on an internet message board? Are you serious? Most people here will never even meet each other in real life. Most people remain anonymous. Anyone can come here and act like a tough guy, throw insults around and so on. I think of cowardice as the opposite of bravery, and I don't see how anyone could be brave on an anonymous internet forum. From what I can tell people who doubt their own courage are more likely to act like tough guys on line.
This is my reason for avoiding debate on man made climate change: It is a complex scientific issue and most of us don't have the time or the scientific background to really understand the detailed scientific evidence for or against. Most of us base our ideas on various expert sources that we either trust or do not trust. A discussion like this will involve passing back and forth various quotes from various expert sources. We will not trust a lot of the sources for different reasons, such as that they have political interests, professional interests or economic interests for their positions.
Another reason I am avoiding the discussion is all the anger I see here about it. If a person is really angry they don't take in new information from the source they are angry with. It is pointless to debate a scientific issue, or any issue, with someone who is angry with you. Both sides lay out what they think are obvious facts, the opposite side refutes those facts. Both sides accept their own facts and discount the others. It is a pointless back and forth. Discussions are only interesting with people who are genuinely curious.
I don't know what is going on with climate change. I have read a good bit about it from both sides and I am not sure. I think both sides have selfish reasons to distort the issue.
-
(http://i52.tinypic.com/vgrcky.jpg)
Reading about the 'science' that claims to 'prove' man made global warming can cloud things .. esp if your more 'prone' to either have little or no belief system or you just happen to naturally gravitate towards the left and eschew what you might consider to be of a conservative or right leaning position. Or... if your just plain ill informed. I believe that in order for many to hold to the position that man(kind) does have a significant impact on global climate that it would actually require a sort of form of 'faith', giving the appearance of a 'religion' of itself.
Also, some things do seem to 'work out' better when a certain amount of common sense is put into play. Which helps explain how many folks with little or no education seem to know or understand the most fundamental or basic things that the so called intelligentsia never quite seem to be able to comprehend. This also applies to many of our friends on the left who may or may not be indoctrinated .. err educated. Otherwise it would not constantly have to be explained to them how their stand on political correctness and multiculturalism is undermining our distinct American culture and ultimately our very existence as a free and prosperous nation.
Actually I sort of doubt that liberty or prosperity has anything to do with the argument to the no growth, flat earth society ... except to reverse it.
A nice little read to start you out if you were interested, which Im sure your not, could include "Climate Confusion: How Global Warming Hysteria Leads to Bad Science, Pandering Politicians and Misguided Policies That Hurt the Poor" (http://www.amazon.com/Climate-Confusion-Pandering-politicians-Misguided/dp/1594032106/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1195938841&sr=1-1)
-
Janice, thanks for your post. I just read about the author, Roy Spenser, on wikipedia. He seems to be the real thing, an interesting and top level Phd climate scientist. I was able to order the book used on Amazon for $4. I'll tell you what I think after I get it.
Here is what wikipedia has to say about Roy Spenser
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roy_Spencer_(scientist)
I agree with most of what you said about a belief system clouding understanding of a complex scientific issue. The thing I would add is that this operates on both sides. The left makes the same claim about the right. I think both sides are correct that the opposite side has a narrow fixed view. This is part of human nature. We all have it to a degree. It is always easier to see it in other people than to see it in our selves. Real inner growth comes from the attempt to see it in ourselves, but it is hard.
A nice little read to start you out if you were interested, which Im sure your not,
I'm sorry you had to throw in that insult at the end. Why was that necessary?
-
Perhaps it's because of your somewhat pedantic and patronizing posting style, which is mildly irritating. I sense a certain disingenuousness as well, on this issue at least, but perhaps that is just me.
You are at least grammatical, though, so the odds are you're not a DUer.
-
Perhaps it's because of your somewhat pedantic and patronizing posting style, which is mildly irritating. I sense a certain disingenuousness as well, on this issue at least, but perhaps that is just me.
Pedantic - Maybe so, that's just the way I talk. Other people have said the same thing. Nobody is perfect.
Patronizing - I've been called a coward and weasel here. Somebody said "a bitch slap to you". There have been a host of insults. In that kind of a situation a person can either sink to the level or throwing back insults, which I don't want to do, or remain polite, which can come across as patronizing.
Disingenuousness - Nope. I don't think so. Keep following my posts and see what you think.
-
climate change exists. no one will ever be able change my opinion.
10000 years where i sit in my living room their was large river. it drained from a MEGA lake created from melting glaciers from the last ice age. not to mention around that time there were beavers bigger than today's black bears.
these are facts, i will not let anyone dispute them. :old:
and no matter how much we debate and argue about global warming/climate change nothing will bring the large beavers back :bawl:
Recap: man didn't cause climate change 10000 years ago, and man can't change the climate today. so lets all fight for what we can control.
-
I agree with most of what you said about a belief system clouding understanding of a complex scientific issue. The thing I would add is that this operates on both sides. The left makes the same claim about the right.
I'm sorry you had to throw in that insult at the end. Why was that necessary?
Sorry about the barb but you did come across to me as defending the indefensible (Man made climate change). Which I normally find in people who have already studied the issue enough to satisfy themselves. Thus disinterested in whatever else might be proffered.
What belief system would the right have that you are referring to?
You mean our judeo/ christian values? I have no problem seeing how my values 'cloud' my views and I freely admit to them.
-
Pedantic - Maybe so, that's just the way I talk. Other people have said the same thing. Nobody is perfect.
Patronizing - I've been called a coward and weasel here. Somebody said "a bitch slap to you". There have been a host of insults. In that kind of a situation a person can either sink to the level or throwing back insults, which I don't want to do, or remain polite, which can come across as patronizing.
Disingenuousness - Nope. I don't think so. Keep following my posts and see what you think.
1, Well, perhaps so, I am a bit of a Iecturer myself but I try to sit on the urge.
2, As you noted, it's the internet, people respond with their first impression, it's best to have a thick skin, or grow one if not naturally gifted. Sounding offended back instead of just moving on, even in the sweet tones of reason, just tends to make you sound either whiny or condescending. It doesn't sound like you quite grasp the meaning of a bitchslap, which is the negative side here of what a more PC site might label 'Like/dislike,' 'Rec/unrec,' or some other mealy-mouth euphemism.
3. As I said, perhaps it's just me. Your 'agree to disagree' upthread seemed to take a stand rather than the 'no position' you claim later, on AGC or whatever this month's acronym is. However, I do see your 'position' could be in reference to the point that you were making about debate, which nobody was not really what anyone else was trying to discuss with you, they were all discussing the substantive merits of the climate change issue (Or lack thereof).
-
I'm sorry you had to throw in that insult at the end. Why was that necessary?
Your major thing seems to be attempting to control how people express themselves. Maybe if you were more concerned with how you conduct yourself, you would attract less of what you call insults.
This forum has existed for several years now and prior to that, many of us were at other forums. We start to recognize certain patterns of behavior and you have it within your power to control your own behavior. So when you get called out on your behavior, remember the guy in the mirror is responsible for that, not the guy calling you out on it.
-
I'm sorry you had to throw in that insult at the end. Why was that necessary?
Bitch Slap for being a big baby.
-
Janice, you asked
What belief system would the right have that you are referring to?
The left believes absolutely without any doubt that man made global climate change is happening, and that there is something wrong with people who think it is not.
The right believes absolutely without any doubt that man made global climate change is not happening, and that there is something wrong with people who think it is.
Those are the belief systems I was talking about. In a way they seem pretty similar to me.
-
In a way they seem pretty similar to me.
Similar? They're diametrically opposed. Geez....
-
Similar? They're diametrically opposed. Geez....
The feeling of certainty, the lack of curiosity about the possibility of being mistaken, and the contempt for people who disagree is similar.
-
Science simply does not support AGW. That is where 'faith' comes into play.
Man(kind) is just so full of himself. He didn't make this planet and he couldn't destroy it ... even if he tried.
Not only is it (AGW) a joke. Its a bad joke. That wont stop the lemmings though.
-
Science simply does not support AGW. That is where 'faith' comes into play.
Man(kind) is just so full of himself. He didn't make this planet and he couldn't destroy it ... even if he tried.
Not only is it (AGW) a joke. Its a bad joke. That wont stop the lemmings though.
:exactly:
And I'm done. :trolls:
-
Janice, you asked
The left believes absolutely without any doubt that man made global climate change is happening, and that there is something wrong with people who think it is not.
The right believes absolutely without any doubt that man made global climate change is not happening, and that there is something wrong with people who think it is.
Those are the belief systems I was talking about. In a way they seem pretty similar to me.
Wrong, although, of course I can't speak for all.
I believe it would be more accurate to write:
"The right believe absolutely without any doubt that man made global change is not happening, although there are multitudes of people who have a vested interest in suggesting that it is. These people generally have a financial agenda at the heart of their "belief" and thus, they and their opinions cannot be considered as remotely without bias."
Going on, I'd say that climate change, in and of itself, DOES exist. The question is, "how does man's activity impact the climate?" And to that, I have to say:
It doesn't -- at least not on an appreciable level. Too many truly gargantuan things have happened in our history which, on a single basis, makes anything man has ever done over the past 200 years look inconsequential in scope and effect.
But the Al Gores of the world would have you believe that the world will cease to exist as we know it if we continue to burn coal to make electricity. Al this, of course, while he maintains pretty nice digs for himself and his soon-to-be ex-wife Tipper.
-
Yes, as far as I understand it water vapor makes up about 95% of all greenhouse gasses (GHG), while CO2 only makes up about 4%. The human contribution of the total CO2 is only about 3.5%. In simple terms, if one assumes a football stadium holds 100,000 seats, representing the current atmosphere, total CO2 would take up a grand total of 40 seats, and the man-made CO2 would only occupy one (1) seat.
CO2 is NOT a pollutant, but an essential gas for plants to survive and they in turn provide oxygen for animals, including humans.
-
I am still curious to hear how man (who must have nearly over-populated the world at the time) with his SUV's and technology, brought about the warming that ended all the previous ice ages.
And now he's melting the ice caps on Mars?
Wouldnt be 'solar warming' would it?
:redx:
-
Yes, as far as I understand it water vapor makes up about 95% of all greenhouse gasses (GHG), while CO2 only makes up about 4%. The human contribution of the total CO2 is only about 3.5%. In simple terms, if one assumes a football stadium holds 100,000 seats, representing the current atmosphere, total CO2 would take up a grand total of 40 seats, and the man-made CO2 would only occupy one (1) seat.
CO2 is NOT a pollutant, but an essential gas for plants to survive and they in turn provide oxygen for animals, including humans.
I remember reading many years ago an article by Walter Williams. In it he stated that half the CO2 released every year is caused by termites eating wood. So, poison the termites and fire up the SUV.
-
Luv Prof Williams. They just dont make economists like that anymore.
-
This is not a question about global warming, but about man's ability to destroy the planet. Several people have said things like this:
Man(kind) is just so full of himself. He didn't make this planet and he couldn't destroy it ... even if he tried.
I agree that we could not destroy the planet, but we sure could mess it up. I think what you are talking about is CO2, right? But I am curious what you think about man's destructive ability in general. Do you think we could have pretty much ruined the planet if there had been a big nuclear war between the the USA and USSR and thousands of H-Bombs had been set off? I just want clarification on what you believe.
What I think is that nothing could end all life on earth, at least until the sun explodes or burns out in billions of years, and I am not even sure about that. I think a major nuclear war could wipe out a lot of life, possibly kill all humans, or at least make things really miserable for a long time for the humans left. I have no idea what future technology might be able to do. Will there really be planet killer weapons like in the first Star Wars movie? I don't know.
-
So the Vikings influenced the climate when Greenland became so cold they couldn't grow crops? Or the English did when it became to cold to harvest grapes of which they had 100's of large vineyards across the country? I'm sorry but it doesn't take a genius to see that the earth has a continually changing climate and that man has little if nothing to do with it.
-
RonBush, you have hijacked my thread. If you want to keep spewing your liberal bullshit, start your own thread. You and your idiotic comments are not welcomed on this thread.
Or on any thread I start.
Don't go away mad; just go away.
-
RonBush, you have hijacked my thread. If you want to keep spewing your liberal bullshit, start your own thread. You and your idiotic comments are not welcomed on this thread.
Or on any thread I start.
Don't go away mad; just go away.
Sorry you feel that way, but will respect your wishes.
-
Sorry you feel that way, but will respect your wishes.
Well that was a deflated response. I expected more spunk out of a penguin :lmao: