It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Ah, sort of like how where many places are predicted to actually become even colder due to the effects of "Global Warming" when in fact a better term to describe the situation is Global Climate Change? Are all the people that use the term Global "Warming" also vile and evil?
Well, you never answered me on that
Apropos of this, a quite
witty remark is reported of the wife of Argentocoxus,
a Caledonian, to Julia Augusta, when the latter after
the treaty was joking her about the free intercourse of
her sex in Britain with men. Thereupon the foreigner
asserted: "We fulfill the necessities of nature in a
much better way than you Eoman women. We have
dealings openly with the best men, whereas you let
yourselves be debauched in secret by the vilest. " This
is what the British woman said.
Originally posted by Lasheic
reply to post by tinfoilman
"Global" Warming pertains to the mean average temperature across ALL environments on the earth. To claim that "some" areas are predicted to get cooler is fallacious, because you'd be comparing a local climate to a global temperature average.
You are correct in that I did not address your question in regards to editing Wikipedia's entry. If you would like to enter into a discussion on the entry over at Wikipedia, please let me know and I'll sign up an account over there. You do need an account to make edits now, correct
Originally posted by theindependentjournal
reply to post by LactoseIntolerant
Noah lived to over 600, Adam to 932, Methuselah to 956, Abraham over 400 so I disagree with longevity of life NEVER BEFORE SEEN. And you can't accept Darwinism without accepting the survival of the fittest, it is integral part of the racist theory. And if evolution is correct we should kill off the inferior to make the next evolutionary jump for mankind, can' have all those inferior types messing up the gene pool. Just ask Hitler who dedicated Mein Kampf to Darwin...
Everyone on the planet can fit inside Jacksonville county Florida USA, let alone Australia.
It has nothing to do with resource delivery systems either, we pay farmers here not to grow food. There are ample resources for all to live and all that they NEED to survive...
Population decline is an example of emergence within a complex system, a consequential response to modernization and urbanization. It's simply not economical to have a large family in an urban area - where 50% of our population now live. It's expensive, the children don't support the family as they do in rural farming communities, and they take too much time away from the parents who are focusing on their educations and careers
Originally posted by Lasheic
I think the religion factor is going to be a tough one to tackle, and not just because of the zealotry and dogmatism it invites when it gains a substantial population of fundamentalists. The doctrines which demand that women must submit to their husbands can still be useful in many cultures which do not have the resources to industrialize and improve their society.
Originally posted by Lasheic
Many third and second world nations are highly agricultural - some even still barely past the early Mesopotamian level of agricultural revolutions. Techniques such as irrigation are simply untenable given the proximity to a proper water source, and the research and technology needed to make it workable is prohibitive within the structure of baser tribal societies.
Originally posted by Lasheic
So it is preferable to have larger families in these societies, because without ample food, medicine, and security - mortality rates dictate that those with the largest families will have the best chance to pass on their genes.
Originally posted by Lasheic
Further, it takes a large family to tend to the farms or gather resources for the family in order to make them more prosperous.
Originally posted by Lasheic
So I think religion does still have a place, but it needs to mailable to the situation. Rules which dictated how to live in tribal societies, does not necessarily work in industrialized societies. I don't think the Pope was necessarily wrong dissuading the use of contraceptives in third world countries, but he definitely IS wrong in dissuading it in countries like the US or the UK.
Originally posted by Lasheic
Insofar as the violence which religion can inspire, I don't think this is necessarily religion's fault. The people who wrote the world's holy books were human, and our evolution helped to shape our behavior.
Originally posted by Lasheic
Alot of people took note of it after 9/11 when America stood together in our showing of sorrow and anger - regardless of race and creed.. because we had a common and outside enemy to our tribe. It didn't last long, however. But it was there.
Originally posted by Lasheic
Once we make contact, we will all become ONE tribe, competing against the "Alien" tribe.
Originally posted by Lasheic
This is a dual edged blade - as tribalism can promote diversity, which is what evolution does... diversify life. Violence, unfortunately, has been a major component of this competition. I don't know if we can escape it. Thus, it's also represented in religion.
Originally posted by Lasheic
America is thus far the most resistant nation to this - but even with our substantial religious population, we're seeing a sharp rise in the number of agnostics, deists, and atheists.
Originally posted by Lasheic
I think that promoting tribalism and diversity of social groups is a good and beneficial thing, but we really do need to work on the mechanisms by which our tribal groups interact.
Originally posted by Lasheic
And you never know... religion may once again be useful should we find ourselves in a period of post-societal collapse.
Originally posted by LactoseIntolerant
As I reread the article, Clinton's advisor is suggesting that the population is growing at a remarkable expontentially rate. In other words, people are popping out kids like no tomorrow.
At the current rate of child births and mortality, it is apparently very unbalanced. But one has to think with common sense: advances in the medical field and scientific studies have prolonged life expectany to never-before-seen levels in our history. It's kind of a no-brainer."
[edit on 31-3-2009 by LactoseIntolerant]