• All Purchases made this month instantly go into the draw to win a USD $ 100.00 credit to your HoP account.
 
Page: 1234...10
arashi


arashi

Pooh-Bah
Location: austin,tx

Total posts: 2364
Posted:so sorry

-Such a price the gods exact for song: to become what we sing
-Seek freedom and become captive of your desires. Seek discipline and find your liberty.
-When the center of the storm does not move, you are in its path.

Delete Topic

coleman
SILVER Member since Aug 2002

coleman

big and good and broken
Location: lunn dunn, yoo kay, United Kin...

Total posts: 7330
Posted:you are wise my friend.



Written by: arashi


2) BamBam is cute. ubblol (and DFQ)







not to mention your impeccable taste wink





cole. x


"i see you at 'dis cafe.
i come to 'dis cafe quite a lot myself.
they do porridge."
- tim westwood

Delete

stickman


World Champ Procrastinator
Location: ||...lost...||

Total posts: 580
Posted:hey dantana, good arguments by the way.. probly the best ive heard from someone supporting the repblican party..
but i have to agree with arashi on this one.. the US is not an environmentally conscious country.. with 4% of the world population, it produces 24% of the worlds pollution.. now is that environmentally friendly and aware? one problem could be that half the cars on the US car market these days are gasguzzling SUVs.. but if those polluting companies were to diminish emissions, they would lose money like you wouldnt believe..


Delete

SpitFire
GOLD Member since Dec 2002

Mand's Girl....and The Not So Shy One
Location: Calgary, Alberta Canada

Total posts: 2723
Posted:Dio, the Federal Constitution does NOT Define marriage between a man and a woman. The Defense of Marriage Act is an Act, and is not part of the constitution.

While Clinton may have signed it, I doubt seriously he would have wanted to ban civil unions as well, as 6 of those same states have done.

But this part of the argument is being addressed in another thread...and to be honest, I don't think anyone is going to convince anyone else that gay couples who decide to commit themselves to a life long monogomous relationsip deserve the same rights as heterosexual couples who decide the same thing.

I doubt I'll convince anyone who disagrees with same sex marriage or civil unions that I'm denied equal rights because my Fiancee, who happens to be a woman can't immigrate to this country because there is no same sex equivalent to the fiancee visa, and the provisional green card given to married heterosexual couples.


Solitude sometimes speaks to you, and you should listen.

Delete

Dom
BRONZE Member since Dec 2001

Dom

Carpal \'Tunnel
Location: Bristol, UK

Total posts: 3009
Posted:Dantana, a bit of a fact check:



The crime rates in the UK have nothing to do with banning handguns a few years back. There's been a bit of a policing breakdown here and there was a rise in gun crime and one of the responses was to cut access to firearms. The reason why banning guns is good: the more 'legal' guns there are the more 'illegal' guns there are. Guns in houses can get stolen. The guns used to kill students in schools in the US have all been 'legal'. Sure you can buy an illegal gun in London, but I'm guessing it's cheaper and easier to get a gun in the states. Drugs are illegal in the states as well, that doesn't mean you can't buy them.



You seem to have an image that we're all running round scared of gun crime. We're not. I don't think anybody here is really scared of gun crime. I've lived in areas of London with pretty high crime rates and the only guns I've ever seen are carried by the cops.



Written by: Home Office Figures




Contrary to public perception, the overall level of gun crime in this country is relatively low less than half of 1 percent of all crime recorded by the police and in the year ending 31 March 2004, there was:



* a 15 per cent reduction in homicides involving firearms

* a 13 per cent reduction in robberies involving firearms







In the UK last year the total number of firearms offences in England and Wales was 10,590: a figure which includes fatal injuries, serious injuries, slight injuries, threats and no injury. 70 people died. In the US over 10,000 people were killed. Even adjusting for population the conclusion is clear and you can't argue it. People with guns are more likely to use them to kill people.





Stem Cells:

It's a new area of research so not many people have had a chance to approve funding yet. In 1995 Congress voted to ban Federal funding of Stem cell Research. Clinton worked to find a way round this and got funding to stem cell research approved in 1999 but wasn't in power long enough to see through the budget that sent funds its way, that did happen at the beginning of Bush's term.

Bush placed restrictions on Stem Cell research. August 2001 he signed an executive order limiting federal research funding for stem cell research to 78 embryonic stem cell lines then in existence. No new cell lines allowed.



Environmental policy. "Not perfect, but far from bad" You're funny wink



And why do you think Kerry was going to be a dictator?

So, maybe he wasn't a great alternative, but he was better then somebody who's made loads of mistakes nationally and internationally. You know why the more liberal rest of the world thinks you're stupid? Because we all said 'This is what will happen if you do what you're going to do: more terrorism, more instability, more death, more unilateralism, etc...'. And sure enough, that's how it worked out, but you people still think you're doing 'the right thing'.



"It is unfortunate that extreamist leftists are unable to use logic and facts to support their views" - there's over emotional morons on both sides. Find me an example of 10 Democrats hurling insults and I'll find you 100 Republicans. If I could be bothered.


Delete

_Clare_
BRONZE Member since Oct 2002

_Clare_

Still wiggling
Location: Belfast, Northern Ireland (UK)

Total posts: 5967
Posted:Incidentally Dom, we do have fewer gun crimes here... but sadly stabbings are on the increase.

However, the benefit (if any) of knives is that you won't get any bystanders - no drive-by stabbings killing numerous people. I fully support the ban on guns and support long jail terms for offenders.


Getting to the other side smile

Delete

musashii


musashii

starring Skippy the green llama
Location: Seattle, WA

Total posts: 1148
Posted:Written by: arashi

but to say that bush has a good environmental record... you obviously are oblivious. i like you man but you're oblivious. cars are killing us all, and bush IS cars! coastal drilling in wetlands! melting our icecaps! polluting our air! destroying our ozone! ever heard of the van allen radiation belts? EM shielding? that's gonna go too. the magnetic belts are undergoing recent changes as well, the whole ecosystem is CONNECTED. ever hear of solar wind? grab a sailboat cause we're going for a cruise!



Ditto on that..two words, Kyoto treaty(Bush backed out of it). So let me get this straight Dan, you would rather have guns than good foreign policy, civil rights, privacy, less of a national deficit, and a healthier environment? Is that what really matters? Say it isn't so


First intention, then enlightenment..
Ars Pyronomica

" Life is programmed. Whether death is programmed or not is yet to be determined."

Delete

stickman


World Champ Procrastinator
Location: ||...lost...||

Total posts: 580
Posted:ditto

word up B!! that actually really pissed me off when i heard that.. like i said, the US produces 24%of the worlds pollution, and still has the guts to back out of the Kyoto Protocol.. now theres no justification for that.. that is simply pure greed!!


Delete

SpitFire
GOLD Member since Dec 2002

Mand's Girl....and The Not So Shy One
Location: Calgary, Alberta Canada

Total posts: 2723
Posted:capitolism run amuck.

*sigh*


Solitude sometimes speaks to you, and you should listen.

Delete

DJ Dantana
BRONZE Member since Aug 2001

veteran
Location: Stillwater, Ok. USA

Total posts: 1495
Posted:Any of you ever been to China and seen the amount of pollution produced there? Any of you know how bad the toxic emmitions are in china? I don't see any of you griping about china. All I hear is "USA is bad... blah blah blah". Yea, we produce a lot of car exaust, but car pollution is the least of the world's problems right now. There are massive dead zones in the ocean around south eastern asia, and other places, caused by toxins and agricultural run off. At least the toxic zones in the USA are from OLD pollution that we outlawed decades ago. USA has tight controls over agricultural run off because of our protected wetlands (which are primarily supported by the money from hunters/ gun owners, unlike china). You all need to wake up and see that the USA's pollution is tiny compared to china and other developing nations. But USA gets all the flak, why? Cause we are the top dog. And the Kyoto treaty got backed out of because it was becoming to one sided. Sure, I am dissapointed, but we need to be fair about this.

The big car companies also need to unsurpress the decades old technology that would reduce pollution even more. Such as the WWII technique of injecting water into the gas engine, thus doubling gas milage. That is old technology, yet you don't see it in new cars... why? Because the car companies also own the oil companies. angry When the TV puts an expert witness on TV to tell us that we don't have the technology, guess who this "expert" is? The CEO of the Car/Oil company! But like I said, a little smog in the USA is nothing compared to massive amounts of cancer causing wastes being pumped into the air and water by china. There was a special in National Geographic magazine just this year about how bad things are in China.

Musashii, in case you didn't notice, Kerry voted for the Unpatriot act, and has said nothing about removing it. Kerry's budget was just as big as Bush's. Kerry's "civil right's" package is laughable, for someone labled "liberal" he sure wanted to take away a lot of our CONSTITUTIONAL liberties. As for the healthier environment, first of all... Bush's agenda and hunter's moneys (sportsmen) do more for protecting wet lands, and put more money into protecting the welfare (habitate) of wetlands than all the "animal rights" groups combined. Besides, it isn't the president who votes in congress! And you and I elect our congress, put blame where it belongs.

Dom, biggrin there you go again, repeating those same misleading statistics... but I thank you for giving the me opportunity to address this misinformation! I'll treat this as a seperate post.... It's gona be a long one. Get ready for some facts and logic! rolleyes I'm not going to try to convince YOU of anything, but the other people here deserve to hear a rational retort. hug


we eat and we drink and we smoke and we try!

Delete

DJ Dantana
BRONZE Member since Aug 2001

veteran
Location: Stillwater, Ok. USA

Total posts: 1495
Posted:In response to Dom's misleading statements... here is the true picture in London, and England.

GUN crime has almost trebled in London during the past year and is soaring in other British cities, according to Home Office figures.

Police chiefs fear that Britain is witnessing the kind of cocaine-fuelled violence that burst upon American cities in the 1980s. Cocaine, particularly from Jamaica, now floods into Britain, while the availability of weapons - many of them from eastern Europe - is also increasing.


Detectives in London say that the illegal importation of guns started after the end of the Bosnia conflict and that they are changing hands for as little as 200. During the 10 months to January 31, 2002 - there were 939 crimes involving firearms in the Metropolitan Police area compared with 322 in the 10 months to the end of January, 2001 - an almost three-fold increase.

In Merseyside there were 57 shootings during the 12 months to last December compared with 15 in the same period the year before. Greater Manchester also recorded a 23 per cent increase in gun crime and there have been rises in Nottinghamshire, Avon and Somerset, West Yorkshire and the Northumbria Police area which covers Newcastle.

Gun crimes during the first 10 months of the annual period have trebled in most of the urban areas which have so far submitted statistics to the Home Office. Sir John Stevens, the Metropolitan Police Commissioner, said gun gangs were spreading across the country whereas, until recently, they were confined to a handful of London boroughs.

Sir John said: "We have to stem the large number of guns coming in. We know you can buy a gun in London for 200 to 300, and that's frightening. The price of hiring or buying a gun has come down because there are more guns circulating. We are having success; we are taking out about 600 guns a year."

The new gun crime figures also show that handgun crime has soared past levels last seen before the Dunblane massacre of 1996 and the ban on the weapons that followed. The ban on ownership of handguns was introduced in 1997, the year after Thomas Hamilton, an amateur shooting enthusiast, shot dead 16 schoolchildren, their teacher and himself in Dunblane, Perthshire.

It was hoped that the measure would reduce the number of handguns available to criminals. According to internal Home Office statistics, however, handgun crime is now at its highest since 1993.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2002/02/24/nguns24.xml
br>
A newspaper from your own contry.

Sit tight, more sources to come. And some more data.


we eat and we drink and we smoke and we try!

Delete

DJ Dantana
BRONZE Member since Aug 2001

veteran
Location: Stillwater, Ok. USA

Total posts: 1495
Posted:In 1997 Britain imposed a ban on ownership of handguns.

Officials hoped the ban would lower gun-related crimes. Instead -- exactly as gun rights advocates predicted -- gun-related crime and violence has skyrocketed. Honest citizens have been disarmed and rendered HELPLESS before criminals, while the criminals themselves have greater access to black-market guns than ever before. Gun crime has almost *tripled* in London during the past year alone.

And other cities are reporting similar numbers. Gun-wielding gangs -- a phenomenon almost unknown outside a few London boroughs before the ban -- are now spreading across the country.

Frequently the violence is related to the illegal drug trade, another predictable occurrence. Overall, handgun crime is now at its highest since 1993. Increasing numbers of citizens are fed up and are demanding change. In a fiery column entitled "If the state fails us, we must defend ourselves," British journalist Simon Heffer said: "Now we have reached a situation in which few can feel safe even in their homes, and this could be the breaking point"

The Government absolutely lacks the political will to deal with the violation of one of the most fundamental liberties of the people it governs: their right to feel safe in their own homes. Given this scandalous situation, it is time for the Government to confer a new right on the people: the right to bear arms.

Gun control in the UK is in any case a joke. There is far more gun crime now than there was before the idiotic law passed by the Major government to ban handguns... The police obsessively regulate shotguns and rifles held by sportsmen who have no intention of killing anyone with them, while failing utterly to control illegal weapons.

In America, the two states with the highest level of gun ownership -- New Hampshire and Vermont -- have the lowest levels of crime. One of the most murderous places in the United States, Washington DC, has the most rigorous gun control in the Union. For a householder to shoot a burglar in most states in the US is regarded not so much as permissible as part of his civic responsibilities.


we eat and we drink and we smoke and we try!

Delete

flash fire
BRONZE Member since Jan 2001

flash fire

Sporadically Prodigal
Location: Sydney, NSW, Australia

Total posts: 2758
Posted:(hopes that this thread doesn't turn into something from back in the day of Raymond Phule)

HoP Posting Guidelines
Is it the Truth?
Is it Fair to all concerned?
Will it build Goodwill and Better Friendships?
Will it be Beneficial to all concerned?
If you can answer YES to these 4 questions then you may post a reply.

Delete

DJ Dantana
BRONZE Member since Aug 2001

veteran
Location: Stillwater, Ok. USA

Total posts: 1495
Posted:Here is the true picture of crime in the USA.

http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm
br>
pay special attention to the bottom half of teh page, where the crimes are listed Per Capita, or "number of crimes per 100,000 people. As you can see, crime has been going down dramaticaly for the last 23 years. Or murder rate is now the lowest since 1966.

This is due in large part to the vast majority to state allowing citizens to defend themselves with guns. 2,000,000 times every year, a private citizen defends his or her self with a gun. in 90% of those cases, there are no shots fired. That is right, the mear display of a gun in the hands of a law-abiding citizen is enough to stop 90% of crimes.

In 38 states, it is now mandatory for the government to issue liscences to carry concealed pistols to every law abiding citizen, after they pass a criminal records check, and complete safety training. This has put millions of pistols into the hands of law-abiding citizens. These citizens can now carry these pistols with them, hidden on their person, which they can use to stop deadly assaults by criminals.

In the UK the "citizens" are now rendered helpless in the face of armed criminals, The UK "citizen" must sit and watch as the armed criminals rape, rob, and murder at will. They must call for police, and pray that the police arrive before the criminal finishes. It matters not if you are dead because of a gun crime or baseball bat crime or a knife crime, you are still dead.

Little old ladies in the USA are able to defend against any criminal, because the gun is the great equalizer. In the UK little old ladies are being attacked are higher rates than ever before, because the unarmed thugs know they can come into their homes, beat them up, and take whatever they want to take. One should not look at gun crime so much as overall crime (besides, I have already shown that gun crime has NOT gone down, despite what Dom would have you believe.)

In the USA the criminals fear law abiding citizens. Why? Because we have the guns, and 90% of the time, we don't even need to pull the trigger to end a crime and protect life.

Yes there is crime in the USA, but it is not nearly as bad as some would have you believe. Remember that we are talking about a country with about 5 times as many people as the UK. For what it's worth, I would feel more at risk walking down the street in London or Leeds at closing time in the UK than at home here in the states.

The safety of English people has been staked on the thesis that fewer private guns means less crime. The government believes that any weapons in the hands of men and women, however law-abiding, pose a danger, and that disarming them lessens the chance that criminals will get or use weapons.

The results -- the toughest firearm restrictions of any democracy -- are credited by the worlds gun control advocates with producing a low rate of violent crime.

In reality, the English approach has not re-duced violent crime. Instead it has left law-abiding citizens at the mercy of criminals who are confident that their victims have neither the means nor the legal right to resist them

The illusion that the English government had protected its citizens by disarming them seemed credible because few realized the country had an astonishingly low level of armed crime even before guns were restricted. A government study for the years 1890-92, for example, found only three handgun homicides, an average of one a year, in a population of 30 million. In 1904 there were only four armed robberies in London, then the largest city in the world. A hundred years and many gun laws later, the BBC reported that Englands firearms restrictions "seem to have had little impact in the criminal underworld." Guns are virtually outlawed, and, as the old slogan predicted, only outlaws have guns. Worse, they are increasingly ready to use them.

Last December, Londons Evening Standard reported that armed crime, with banned handguns the weapon of choice, was "rocketing." In the two years following the 1997 handgun ban, the use of handguns in crime rose by 40 percent, and the upward trend has continued. From April to November 2001, the number of people robbed at gunpoint in London rose 53 percent.

Gee, it looks like that "15 percent decrease in the last few months" does not make much of a dent, does it?

The murder rates of the U.S. and U.K. are also affected by differences in the way each counts homicides. The FBI asks police to list every homicide as murder, even if the case isnt subsequently prosecuted or proceeds on a lesser charge, making the U.S. numbers as high as possible. By contrast, the English police "massage down" the homicide statistics, tracking each case through the courts and removing it if it is reduced to a lesser charge or determined to be an accident or self-defense, making the English numbers as low as possible.

The English rate of violent crime has been soaring since 1991. Over the same period, Americas has been falling dramatically. In 1999 The Boston Globe reported that the American murder rate, which had fluctuated by about 20 percent between 1974 and 1991, was "in startling free-fall." We have had nine consecutive years of sharply declining violent crime. As a result the English and American murder rates are converging. In 1981 the American rate was 8.7 times the English rate, in 1995 it was 5.7 times the English rate, and the latest study puts it at 3.5 times.

Preliminary figures for the U.S. this year show an increase, although of less than 1 percent, in the overall number of violent crimes, with homicide increases in certain cities, which criminologists attribute to gang violence, the poor economy, and the release from prison of many offenders. Yet Americans still enjoy a substantially lower rate of violent crime than England, without the "restraint on personal liberty" English governments have seen as necessary. Rather than permit individuals more scope to defend themselves, Prime Minister Tony Blairs government plans to combat crime by extending those "restraints on personal liberty": removing the prohibition against double jeopardy so people can be tried twice for the same crime, making hearsay evidence admissible in court, and letting jurors know of a suspects previous crimes.

Saddly, in the USA, the rate of dead by murder of White males, ages 18 to 28 is 7 per 100,000. The death rate for Black males, ages 18 to 28 is 70 per 100,000!!! Drug and gang violence.


Americas founders, like their English forebears, regarded personal security as first of the three primary rights of mankind. That was the main reason for including a right for individuals to be armed in the U.S. Constitution.


we eat and we drink and we smoke and we try!

Delete

DJ Dantana
BRONZE Member since Aug 2001

veteran
Location: Stillwater, Ok. USA

Total posts: 1495
Posted:And for the final kicker.....

I'll make this short, since I'm sure all of you are tired of reading all these statistics.

In the UK, 2003...... 2,781,000 people were subject to violent assault. That is, According to the British Crime survey, 4.1% of the population was subject to violent assault in the year 2002

http://www.crimestatistics.org.uk/output/Page1.asp
br>

In the USA, in 2000 1,424,289 people were subject to violent assault. That is, 0.5% of the population was subject to violent crime in the year 2000.

http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm
br>
Looks like the UK is 8 times more dangerous that the USA.


we eat and we drink and we smoke and we try!

Delete

DJ Dantana
BRONZE Member since Aug 2001

veteran
Location: Stillwater, Ok. USA

Total posts: 1495
Posted:Rape in the UK

0.4% of women in the UK were raped in the year 2000

http://www.crimestatistics.org.uk/output/Page60.asp
br>


And rape in the USA

0.032% of women in the USA were raped in the year 2000

http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm
br>
That means, per capita, there is 12 times as much rape in the UK!!!

And UK women have no way to defend themselves. It is illeagal for english women to have the great equalizer (the gun)( to defend themselves.

In the USA, rapists live in fear, because many USA women have a gun hidden on their person, and the training to use it!!!

So Dom, you may not live in fear, but a large number of the sisters, daughters, and mothers in the United Kindom DO live in fear. frown


we eat and we drink and we smoke and we try!

Delete

DJ Dantana
BRONZE Member since Aug 2001

veteran
Location: Stillwater, Ok. USA

Total posts: 1495
Posted:" but we did it for the children! " rolleyes

we eat and we drink and we smoke and we try!

Delete

ado-p
GOLD Member since May 2004

ado-p

Pirate Ninja
Location: Galway/Ireland

Total posts: 3882
Posted:DJ

did you really need to copy and paste all that.... how much of it did you actually write?

for those that are interested here is a pdf with stats and raw figures. Its informative.

Right click and save as...

I'd also like to say that stats can be very misleading if you dont know that math behind it.

as an example

take stillwater where your located dj and compare it to new york

You get this

now compare it to the actual raw numbers

You get this

They both give a radically different impression.

just my two cents.


Love is the law.

Delete

Dom
BRONZE Member since Dec 2001

Dom

Carpal \'Tunnel
Location: Bristol, UK

Total posts: 3009
Posted:This really is going nowhere but a couple of reassurances to put any potential visitors to the UK at ease. We're not the crime filled land Dantana makes us out to be.



Crime figures depend upon how you analyse and classify them. Quoting from a web site Dantana provided: "In many cases, the NCRS has led to an increase in recorded crime figures, making it look like more crimes were committed, when that might not be the case."



Violent crime. I can't find anything in those US stats that says what's classed as 'violent', but in the UK we do like to massage numbers - this means violent crime includes those where no injury occurred. And self reported surveys aren't an accurate measure of crime levels



Deaths from guns in the UK: 70 US: 12,102 Homicides and 866 accidents. Plus 17000+ suicides



Also from the web site: total number of rape cases: 11,441 (which is a disturbing number) Total female population 15-64: 19,736,516 = 0.057%



I believe the reality is that crime isdeterredd by the good conscience of a country's population not by giving everyone the power to easily kill each other. Maybe this helps explain the difference between Canada and the US. (God we love Canada over here! wink ) I've fired guns, guns kept in the house I lived in. And I still got my car broken into!



The thing with stats is that they can be bent either way. I'm anti gun and Dantana likes to go off in to forest and fire machine guns whilst listening to heavy metal. Fair enough as he's safely in the US. But I'm happy that if he did so in the UK he'd be locked up.



Cheerio! And should you happen to visit our green and pleasant land, then do pop in for a cuppa.


Delete

Faberg
GOLD Member since Aug 2003

veteran
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Total posts: 1459
Posted:Written by: DJ Dantana

Any of you ever been to China and seen the amount of pollution produced there? Any of you know how bad the toxic emmitions are in china? I don't see any of you griping about china. All I hear is "USA is bad... blah blah blah".

But like I said, a little smog in the USA is nothing compared to massive amounts of cancer causing wastes being pumped into the air and water by china.



here's some info on emissions, seeing as you couldn't be bothered citing any credible source

Written by:
Emissions by continents

About a third of the world's CO2 emissions come from Asia, Australia and Oceania and 28% comes from North America.

So almost 60% of the global CO2 emissions come from these two regions.

However, even though both regions emit almost the same amount of CO2 per year, the causes are quite different.

About 3,882 million people live in Asia, Australia and Oceania, that's 61% of the world population, whereas only 5% of the world population lives in North America (around 323 million people).

High CO2 emissions in Asia, Australia and Oceania are simply the result of the huge number of people living in the region, in North America it is the very high consumption of energy which is the cause



taken from here


My mind not only wanders, it sometimes leaves completely smile

Delete

Kat
BRONZE Member since Dec 2000

Kat

Pooh-Bah
Location: London, Wales (UK)

Total posts: 2211
Posted:Written by:
Cheerio! And should you happen to visit our green and pleasant land, then do pop in for a cuppa.




Dom you're such an English gentleman biggrin


Come faeries, take me out of this dull world, for I would ride with you upon the wind and dance upon the mountains like a flame.

- W B Yeats

Delete

stickman


World Champ Procrastinator
Location: ||...lost...||

Total posts: 580
Posted:well i was gonna copy and paste two pages of statistics.. but instead i think ill post a link..

i think this shows very well what weve been talking about: that the US, compared to most other rich nations(and therefore having the funding to do something about it) is the number one polluting nation in the world.. by far in some cases.. what i also find interesting is that it is one of the worst recyclers in the world too...

well,pls check it out, esp. dantana since you were so sure that my statistics on pollution were incorrect.. well, iwas off by 3%, im so sorry..
heres the link:

http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-pollutioncomparisons.htm


Delete

bluecat


bluecat

geek, level 1
Location: everywhere

Total posts: 5300
Posted:not that i'm in disagreement, but thats an old page of stats. can you find an updated version?

R


Holistic Spinner (I hope)

Delete

stickman


World Champ Procrastinator
Location: ||...lost...||

Total posts: 580
Posted:http://www.sierraclub.org/globalwarming/maps/map2.pdf
br>
ok thats true, here is a more updated version, but you need adobe reader to open it(i think) this one goes until 1998.. still not ideal, but it hasnt changed much since the last one.. but as you can see dantana, china emitted HALF the amount of CO2 in 1998 as the US, and china has more than 4 times the population of the US..
and US light trucks and cars alone produced more CO2 emissions than say the UK or Germany!!!!!!!!!!!
enough said i think


Delete

UCOF
SILVER Member since Apr 2002

UCOF

Carpal \'Tunnel
Location: , United Kingdom

Total posts: 15414
Posted:How can you get a Ton of air?

Surely air doesnt weigh anything.

umm


Delete

stickman


World Champ Procrastinator
Location: ||...lost...||

Total posts: 580
Posted:of course air has weight.. it is matter isnt it?? everthing that is defined as matter has weight.. if you had a scale accurate enough you could test it, and a balloon big enough.. weigh the balloon without air in it, then blow it up, has to be huge tho, and weigh it again..
you could even find the weight of smoke: weigh a cigarette before smoked, then smoke it but make sure all the ashes fall onto the scale, and put the butt out on it too.. the difference in weight is the weight of the smoke..


Delete

bluecat


bluecat

geek, level 1
Location: everywhere

Total posts: 5300
Posted:it weighs.

but a ton is VERY LARGE.(spacially)

mwaargh eek (at the map)


Holistic Spinner (I hope)

Delete

vanize
SILVER Member since Aug 2001

vanize

Carpal \'Tunnel
Location: Austin, Texas, USA

Total posts: 3899
Posted:Written by: stickman


well i was gonna copy and paste two pages of statistics.. but instead i think ill post a link..



i think this shows very well what weve been talking about: that the US, compared to most other rich nations(and therefore having the funding to do something about it) is the number one polluting nation in the world.. by far in some cases.. what i also find interesting is that it is one of the worst recyclers in the world too...



well,pls check it out, esp. dantana since you were so sure that my statistics on pollution were incorrect.. well, iwas off by 3%, im so sorry..

heres the link:



http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-pollutioncomparisons.htm






don't get me started on the whole recycling nonsense - because, while europe does collect it's trash neatly sorted by the homeowners into different types of reclycling, and then transports it to recycling centers (at which point it is considered recycled for the sake of the bookkeeping), a good portion of that is never actually recycled - even here in germany, which likes to think of itself as the recycling mecca of the world - that is to some degree an illusion for the sake of the public at large so everyone can feel better.



BTW stickman, the way that webpage is written is highly biased - only occasionally does it list per capita polution or whatever. when you take into account the fact that europe and the united states have roughly the same population in most of the ones they do not use per capita (or combined UE) data, Europe and the US often look rougly equivelent. Again a case of statistics abuse. But I doubt you'll find a single webpage on this subject that doesn't do that in some way or another.



not that I want to provide the anti-green contingent of this discussion with ammo, and for sure north Americans polute more than Europeans. But Europeans are living in the same glass house that Americans are. They are just better at convincing yourself that they are doing something about it, and their system is more than happy to let them believe that. But I do not think it is as true as they like to think.


-v-

Wiederstand ist Zwecklos!

Delete

coleman
SILVER Member since Aug 2002

coleman

big and good and broken
Location: lunn dunn, yoo kay, United Kin...

Total posts: 7330
Posted:Written by: Unsaturated Carpets Of Freedom


How can you get a Ton of air?



Surely air doesnt weigh anything.



umm





nothing doesn't weigh anything.



disclaimer: that's sentence is only correct on one one level, not both.



jonnny, fink abaht it:

if air didn't weigh anything, why would we have an atmosphere?

and what would 'air pressure' mean...?

and how would we explain brownian motion...???


"i see you at 'dis cafe.
i come to 'dis cafe quite a lot myself.
they do porridge."
- tim westwood

Delete

UCOF
SILVER Member since Apr 2002

UCOF

Carpal \'Tunnel
Location: , United Kingdom

Total posts: 15414
Posted:I know that..

but a TON of air??

Thats one *serious* F*ck load of air, let alone 65,000 of them!!!


Delete

vanize
SILVER Member since Aug 2001

vanize

Carpal \'Tunnel
Location: Austin, Texas, USA

Total posts: 3899
Posted:Actually, it really isn't that much - surface level air pressure is 15 lbs per sqaure inch. 2000 lbs is an imperial ton, which is close to a metric ton. that means 140 square inches has a ton of air sitting on it. 144 sqaure inces is one square foot. That means there is more than one ton of air above one sqaure foot. A grown man laying down has more than 10 tons or air directly above him!



that means two soccer field have more than this 65000 tons of air above them.


-v-

Wiederstand ist Zwecklos!

Delete

Page: 1234...10

Similar Topics

Using the keywords [apologie* bush] we found the following similar topics.
1. Forums > apologies for bush [277 replies]
2. Forums > Bush Words [18 replies]
3. Forums > Bush caught redhanded again [28 replies]
4. Forums > Bush and Kerry in Dead Heat [18 replies]
5. Forums > when is the bush gonna burnout [24 replies]

     Show more..