This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Beta
State of the Earth (Discussion)
Return to board index
Post by
Deepthought
No... I'm worried that if we keep using fertilizers to boost crop productivity and then we keep shipping crops to Africa, there's going to be problems for the rest of us once we can't feed our own growing populations anymore - the use of fertilizers is draining the soil and eventually that will bite us all in the ass.
Prehaps if this scares you so much you would care to turn your attention to the western world, which has a birth number per year and a higher population that Africa (see: my earlier post), and IS FED THE EXACT SAME WAY?
The soloution to the problem is not to cut aid, it is to fund research into a more efficent method of food production.
Post by
TheMediator
Another major problem here: The constant Palinesque (Palin-like...whatever) assumption that 'Africa' is one place. Theres over 50 nations in Africa, each with different population growth rates, industrialization levels and abilities to produce food. Zimbabwe for example is not able to produce enough food for political reasons. They were exporting food in the past (before a violent overthrow of the government).
I think its pretty clear when one talks about Africa, we're not talking about the developed Northern African countries.
By the way, nice troll attempt there at the end :) .
Post by
42080
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Deepthought
He never personally attacked any of you.
You presume that not one of us is a HIV/AIDs victim, or an African person. Remember, those who he claimed were sub-human?
Post by
TheMediator
No... I'm worried that if we keep using fertilizers to boost crop productivity and then we keep shipping crops to Africa, there's going to be problems for the rest of us once we can't feed our own growing populations anymore - the use of fertilizers is draining the soil and eventually that will bite us all in the ass.
Prehaps if this scares you so much you would care to turn your attention to the western world, which has a birth number per year and a higher population that Africa (see: my earlier post), and IS FED THE EXACT SAME WAY?
The soloution to the problem is not to cut aid, it is to fund research into a more efficent method of food production.
The western birth rate (relatively speaking) is going down over time, whereas the African birth rate (again, relatively speaking) is increasing.
And I don't think we need to look for ways to make
more
food, we need ways to keep the soil healthy.
Post by
42080
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Deepthought
The western birth rate (relatively speaking) is going down over time, whereas the African birth rate (again, relatively speaking) is increasing.
It will still take decades before they produce a comparable amount of people per year.
He never personally attacked any of you.
I really don't think that matters in regards to what is basically hate speach.
And even if he did call you out
"call out"?
CALL OUT?
Post by
42080
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
283199
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
386345
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
42080
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
448495
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
165617
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
448495
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
TheMediator
that borders on racism and bigotry.
Thank you. I take racist to mean not ignorant of differences in races, so to me it is a compliment.
AHAHAHAAHAHAHA
AHAHAHAHAHAAHA
OMFG
AHAHAHA
You're belief system is based off science from the 1880s to 1920ish. For anyone out there I want to make this perfectly clear- race is skin deep, end of story. This is not some belief system, IT IS SCIENCE. Race is only pigment, that is it.
Period.
Back in 1900 people thought that the Irish, Slavs, Jews, peoples from Eastern and Southern Europe are in face inferior to the Nordic peoples. The Irish were treated worse than Black people in the North. If I were to say to you, that guy is Irish, do you think that you would think, wow, that's a huge cultural and physical gap.
No.
That is because we are conditioned to think a certain way in every society.
Race is something defined by your society. Every, single, sociologist, biologist, in, the, world, will, back, this, up.
In face, people of African decent have in fact branched out more than any other racial group because they were the first peoples on Earth.
End of story.
There is no further discussion here on this.
Bull$%^&. There is plenty of further discussion. Have you heard of genetics? It seems to me like you haven't been keeping up with science. Yes, societal factors effect each race differently so that showing a clear 100% correlation between a race and a trait is difficult, but saying that such comparison is completely impossible is a load of bull@#$%.
Nature vs Nurture
wouldn't still be discussed if race had no impact on traits. Also, what about certain races that physically are bigger or smaller than others? Even with similar diets some races on average are larger than others.
Post by
165617
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
I'm going to go out on a limb and make a guess about TheMediator before this thread gets locked: He's 12-14 years old. Wears all black to school. Wears his black trenchcoat, even in the summer. Doesn't have too many friends. Occasionally gets severe weggies or shoved into the lockers by the jocks. Like to argue just for the sake of argument. Will violently defend any contrary viewpoint just to keep an argument going.
Minus the 12- to 14-year-old part, that's me :P
Now this is called Flaming. And it's not allowed here. He never personally attacked any of you.
Not me, but 2 of my rommates (one of whom is looking over my shoulder right now) are from Ghana...so yes, I do take that as a personal attack.
Everything he said is still generalized, so i re-iterate; He never personally attacked any of you. And even if he did call you out, report him. Don't flame.
So wait "Mongolians are all ass-holes" is not flaming because it doesn't mention an individual person? (No offense to any Mongolians out there; I love you, bros!) I'm not defending the flames he's getting back, I'm just stating a fact.
Oh, and
PS WTB more wikipedia quotes? Honestly if you can't find another source, the data isn't worth posting.
Post by
TheMediator
PS WTB more wikipedia quotes? Honestly if you can't find another source, the data isn't worth posting.
Wikipedia data comes from other sources. If the sources are legit, then posting the data from Wikipedia is legit. And since that data comes from known organizations, I'm going to say its legit.
The whole "Wikipedia is bull%^&* because its on the internet" thing is pretty old, keep up with the times.
And to the angry caps guy, race isn't just skin pigment - what makes a race (and I'm not talking about the "White, Black, Latino, Other" layout you see on government documents) is a group of physical traits - Irish and German people (and don't spout out that there are black Germans, I'm talking about the German race, not German citizens) have different physical traits that separate them from each other. If they continue to breed within their racial groups, they'll retain their genetic identity, but when they breed with other groups, then you start getting people who have mixed traits etc. I don't see why it'd be so far fetched to say that when the races developed apart from each other and got distinct physical traits, that one trait that would have changed is the size of specific parts of the brain and if they continued to breed within their race and didn't mix with other races, then they'd maintain that trait of a smaller part of the brain.
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
PS WTB more wikipedia quotes? Honestly if you can't find another source, the data isn't worth posting.
Wikipedia data comes from other sources.
If the sources are legit, then posting the data from Wikipedia is legit. And since that data comes from known organizations, I'm going to say its legit.
The whole "Wikipedia is bull%^&* because its on the internet" thing is pretty old, keep up with the times.
If it comes from other sources why aren't those being linked?
The fact that it can be edited by any kid on a nerd rage makes it that much more unreliable. I'm an avid wikipedia editor, and I can't tell you how many times that happens. Not only stupid things that aren't sourced, but things that are sourced but with skewed result that nobody bothers checking because it says National Department of Suchandsuch Data across the top.
I'll say it again: if it's legit information, link the source.
PS I'm not saying that any data here is wrong...I'm just saying that it's not backed up.
Post by
165617
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post Reply
This topic is locked. You cannot post a reply.