moonbattery logo

Aug 10 2011

Deep Green Psychosis

Anyone doubting that leftists are evil totalitarians devoted to the deliberate destruction of civilization are referred to a report by The Blaze on three moonbats — Derrick Jensen, Lierre Keith, and Aric McBay — who have launched the “Deep Green Resistance”:

According to the far-left triumvirate, humanity must devolve into living primitive, “indigenous” lifestyles. To this end, Keith targeted a litany of ills that must be stopped, declaring: “We need a culture that is self-consciously oppositional to things like corporate power, capitalism, industrialization and ultimately civilization, because that is the arrangement of power on this planet right now.”

The group explicitly calls for the “fall of industrial civilization,” which they plan to impose through Decisive Ecological Warfare. This includes “direct militant actions against industrial infrastructure, especially energy infrastructure” — i.e., terrorism — as well as participation in “ongoing social and ecological justice struggles” — i.e., the politics shoved down our throats by the liberal media and the Democrat Party.

The group also wants to put an end to agriculture. In progressive utopia, we will shuffle around naked, searching for roots and berries. While this goal may take a few years to achieve, in the meantime Jensen would like to have people executed by the government for crimes against the environment — for example, anyone associated with the Gulf oil spill should be killed.

When true believer leftists take over countries — and they have — the innocent die by the tens of millions, and any survivors are enslaved. But they mean well, right liberals?

Deep-Green-Resistance
The Left’s agenda: antihuman.

On a tip from Leslie. Hat tip: Anthony Martin.

Tweet about this on TwitterEmail this to someonePin on PinterestShare on Google+Share on Facebook


  • Dookiestain LaFlair

    These troglodytes seek to chain us to the earth! We must always develop new technology and faster methods of space travel. Anything that opposes the progress of humanity must be stamped out, be it religion or luddites like these.

  • Chris

    Anti-human drivel from a sub-huma sub-culture. Is Van Jones on the board of directors of DGR? Expect a stimulus check from BHO, he’s trying to fix the economy,ya’know, and this might just work!

  • AC

    Let’s ask the people of the Ukraine about foraging for roots and berries. They have actual experience with far-left agriculture policy.

  • AC

    These troglodytes seek to chain us to the earth! We must always develop new technology and faster methods of space travel. Anything that opposes the progress of humanity must be stamped out, be it religion or luddites like these.

    I hate to burst your bubble, but it won’t be humans traveling the stars. The human body is not built for interstellar travel, neither in lifecycle duration nor endurance in closed conditions, even if you could solve the shielding issue and apply relatively generous time dilation factor.

    By the time the environmental and biological issues have been solved technology will already have progressed to a point where the need for humans in such craft has been made obsolete entirely, making any sort of biological payload the engineering equivalent of a boat anchor on an aircraft.

    Sufficiently advanced robots may travel the stars.

    We won’t.

  • Joe

    Ten bucks says these three wack jobs all drive cars, live in big houses, have big screen TV’s, consume large amounts of electricity, eat real food bought at a grocery store, and even eat at restaurants once in a while.
    Twenty bucks says they’re all dope smokers too. Any takers?

  • Dookiestain LaFlair

    AC, we will develop technology to modify our bodies to be fit for interstellar travel. It will be more efficient to use robots as exploration probes, but at some point we will have to colonize other planets, and thus have to move people. The point being we have to develop the technology, and it can’t be developed when these idiots want to stop technological advancement and have us live in thatch huts.

  • Spider

    This is why we need to reinstate public hangings.

  • Dookiestain LaFlair

    Furthermore, we will develop technology to stop aging given enough time.

  • http://dad29.blogspot.com dad29

    In progressive utopia, we will shuffle around naked, searching for roots and berries. While this goal may take a few years to achieve,…

    It’s a lot nearer with the ObamaEconomy.

  • Chris in N.Va.

    Since the usual Lib/Prog/Utopian course of action is unilateral suicide (disarmament, Kyoto-Kool-Aid or the like), these three Mousie-kateers are invited – nay, implored! – to demonstrate by example their professed simple lifestyles, thereby self-righteously shaming all we evil planet-consumers to repent of our deadly ways and join their happy (if not starving and naked-freezing-to-death) merry band.

    What say ye, O intrepid souls and planetary saviors? Are you up for the sacrificial challenge?

    Yeah, I rather thought not!

  • Joe

    AC says:
    All of our exploration beyond the moon has been by spacecraft without humans on board. Any reasonable person can see the future is more of the same. Why waste boatloads of money we don’t have on designing spacecraft able to support life when the same mission can be accomplished without them. Boat anchor on an aircraft is a great analogy

  • AC

    AC, we will develop technology to modify our bodies to be fit for interstellar travel. It will be more efficient to use robots as exploration probes, but at some point we will have to colonize other planets, and thus have to move people. The point being we have to develop the technology, and it can’t be developed when these idiots want to stop technological advancement and have us live in thatch huts.

    Then that will be cyborgs traveling the stars, not humans. Biological organisms are not suited to interstellar travel.

    We do not need to run out of space here if the population were to stabilize and the mathematical incompetents would abandon their infinite growth paradigm.

    Eliminating welfare payments for more kids is a good start.

    I am not against technological advancement. Right now, we have real problems down here on Earth and in its orbit, and that is where we should stay until those problems have been fully solved.

    Including even Mars as this point is a pipe dream.

    Obama missed the point. He’s overreacting in the wrong direction, slashing funding for NASA and its shuttle programs, which did impact life on Earth and create enormous utility for mankind via the satellites which serve it from their Earth orbits.

  • AC

    Voyager 1 is the furthest manmade object from Earth.

    It is traveling at 61,400 km/h and has been doing so for 33 years and 11 months.

    At that rate, it would require 73,600 years to reach the nearest star (which has no planets), if it were traveling in that direction.

    Perhaps if the speed of Bernanke’s printing press could be redirected to interstellar travel then we might have a shot.

    Not really; the limits of acceleration on the body place serious constraints on the craft, even if some advanced thruster could be devised.

  • KHarn

    “AC says: August 10, 2011 at 12:54 pm”

    Artificial gravity will make long space flights a reality. A Little more than a hundred years ago, scientists could “proove” that flying machines were impossible.

    The TOP picture on that cover will be the most likely result of those idiots’ efforts.

  • TED
  • Mickey Shea

    Yeah, yeah, yeah…the minute these trolls run out of power to charge their little digital toys and smartphones, they’ll start crying like the little bitches they are.

  • Michelle

    Ok soo all “tech” is evil and needs to be wiped out??

    M’kay….

    Just as soon as these commies start “living the dream” I’ll believe they are serious….

    I can’t wait for them to just start executing people, or casting off their clothes and all possessions, and refusing to eat anything but marsh grass….

  • Pete

    And yet they all look very clean and shaven, sure they need the industrialized world to spread the message but they could do it without using soap or razor blades. At least the Unabomber tried his best to walk the talk, Ted was no wuss.

    They wont convert any significant numbers of moonbats since they are generally consumerist and materialist to the core, but imagine a “higher power” putting this people in a position of power and influence. Soviet defector Yuri Bezmenov said that a major part of their strategy was to put this kind of loonies in positions of power.

  • Spurwing Plover

    A whole bunch of backward sub-human wackotards who thinks tecnology is offensive to gaia their pagan deity they worship while sitting lotus style around a tree going OOOOOMMMMM OOOOOMMMMM OOOOMMMMM and praying to tree spirits if they wernt already watching that crap AVATAR or FERNGULLY. Maybe they should all go live on some island somewhere and become unsufisticated wackotards

  • Joe

    Derrick Jensen lives in Crescent City, CA. He writes books and (gasp) SELLS them. For money!!!!! Evil capitalist pig!!! Same thing for Aric McBay. I can’t find where he lives, but one thing is for sure. EVIL capitalist pig!!!!! You’re killing the forests by printing all those BOOKS!!!!!! Lierre Keith is a radical feminist (surprise), radical evironmentalist, vegan (another surprise) and (gasp) an EVIL capitalist pig!!!!! No doubt a baby killer too. It looks like none of these people has ever had a real job. Check out their wikipedia bios. Good for a laugh.

  • TonyD95B

    At the root of this is the Loopy Loony Liberal fallacy that somehow man is an interloper here that does not really belong.

    Bulls#it. Man is a part of the Earth, and at present the dominant species. This planet is pretty much ours to use as we need to.

    Being a “Conservative”, I naturally beleive in conservation, and I recognize that the Earth is a wonderful and beautiful gift that we were blessed with (either by God or by fate, depending upon your inclination). We should take care of it as best we can.

  • TED
  • Man of few words

    Is Avatar really that bad? I kind of want to see it, mostly because while I was working on a film with the actor Wes Studi, he was also doing the Avatar project. It sounded interesting, but since it came out and all the hype started, I haven’t been able to see it. I certainly don’t want to spend any money on it, but when it’s available free, is it worth a couple hours of time?

  • AC

    Artificial gravity will make long space flights a reality. A Little more than a hundred years ago, scientists could “proove” that flying machines were impossible.

    Full Earth weight is provided by an acceleration of 1g (9.81 m/s^2).

    Acceleration to and deceleration from relativistic speeds is a huge problem. Substantial fractions of the speed of light would be required just to fit an interstellar journey to a nearby system into one human life.

  • Jimbo

    All the bums have to do is turn off their electricity, turn off the natural gas, park their cars, knock down their houses and go compete with the bears, rabbits, rats, feral pigs, and coyotes for food. Take off, bums! Set an example! Who’s stopping you? Go for it! You have my blessing! You’re outa here!!!

    And when Al ‘the rapist’ Gore downgrades to a 1,000 sf bungalow with a sod roof; so will I.

    I want to see some examples being set by the “mouths” of the world. Until they begin to set examples – they are only what they are: stupid lying hypocrites not to be taken seriously.

  • Jimbo

    I forgot to mention – the bums don’t get any toilet paper, mosquito repellant, or sun screen. Life sucks worse when you make life suck on purpose. The idiots.

  • Jess

    “Just as soon as these commies start “living the dream” I’ll believe they are serious”

    Or, as the great Insty says, “I’ll believe there’s a crisis when the people who say there’s a crisis act like there’s a crisis”

  • Tom UK

    What gets me about these people is they are perfectly willing to criticise the Stalins and Hitlers who went around slaughtering millions and enslaving millions more, but their plans go beyond genocide to “anthropocide”- the killing or enslavement of all humanity. Mao looks like an absolute amateur compared to the ruin these headcases wish for.

  • Tom UK

    AC- I think Al “the science is settled” Gore would make an excellent passenger on a rocket headed out of the solar system. On the way, he can lecture all the other planets about how their greenhouse gas emissions are causing atmospheric heating- it’s certainly not the sun warming the whole solar system, no sir.

  • RICH

    MMM-MMM-MMM, CLAP-CLAP-CLAP

    We must control the world’s consumption,
    if we don’t, it will bring destruction.

    MMM-MMM-MMM, CLAP-CLAP-CLAP

    Global warming is the greatest threat,
    a nuclear Iran is not a sweat.

    MMM-MMM-MMM, CLAP-CLAP-CLAP

    Barack Obama will walk on water,
    then feed the world with moonbat fodder.

    MMM-MMM-MMM, CLAP-CLAP-CLAP

  • FreedomFox

    “Right now, we have real problems down here on Earth and in its orbit, and that is where we should stay until those problems have been fully solved.”–AC August 10, 2011 at 2:01 pm

    I’m sorry, but this is one of the worst arguments against space exploration. “Let’s get Utopia here, then we’ll expand.” No. Utopia will never happen, we will always have problems on Earth, for so long as Earth exists. You can argue cost and immediate feasibility, perhaps set some standard like “if we could get there on this amount of money, I’d consider that affordable” or “if we had an engine that could traverse the distance in this timeframe, I’d consider it practical.” But to demand Utopia on Earth before space is even put on the table is completely irrational.

    We should certainly try to get to Mars. Even if initial attempts fail, or are little more than research stations, we will be able to learn more in a decade of trial and error than a century of theory. People will die, of course, space is a dangerous place. But while we can do everything in our power to preserve the lives of our explorers, at some point we have to take some risks, or we will be left in the dusts by whoever is willing to take them in our stead.

    Though since you seem to be a Malthusian, look on the bright side: if we take massive losses from an aggressive Australia-style colonization effort (round “colonists” that we don’t like up and ship them off to the death world of Mars) it will help you meet your population target. (disclaimer: this is known as “dark humor”)

  • Brian_Boru

    The lines have been drawn
    Blows will decide this fate
    Sleeping for so long
    Damned if we’re now too late

    Open our eyes to embrace common sense
    These are the times that try men
    Intoxicate us with the concept of freedom
    We children of God and disciples of Jefferson

  • WoofWoof

    It was about 1936 and I was 12 years old, when Dad got several hound
    dogs for Fox Chasing, a sport that he loved. We had moved to the farm
    about two years earlier from in-down, and it was about the first time it
    was possible for Dad to have several big dogs.

    Dad of course named all the dogs; some were female, some were male.
    One big male dog he named Jack. Jack was about 3 feet high at the shoulders
    and weighed about 100 pounds. All the dogs ran loose in the barn yard and
    slept in the barn. Jack was bad about jumping up on your leg and humping
    it. He did on me all the time.

    One day when Mom and Dad had gone to town, I was in the barn doing
    some work that Dad had told me to do. I was down on my knees when Jack
    came up and started himping my butt. It felt sorta good even with my
    clothes on. He would sniff my groin and give a soft growl. I decided I’d
    pull my pants down and see what Jack would do. I got to my feet and undid
    my overalls and let them fall to the dirt floor of the barn. I then kicked
    them off completely. I left my shirt on. Jack immediately came up and
    started sniffing my cock and balls. My cock was hard as a rock. He
    started licking by cock and balls and all around my ass as well. It really
    felt good. It had never happened to me before. I’d jacked off many times,
    but this felt even better. It wasn’t long before I felt him jump up on my
    back with his front feet and felt something wet probing at my ass hole. I
    moved around a little bit and suddenly felt the tip enter my ass — first
    time anything had been up there. He started hunching and pushing his cock
    deeper and deeper into my ass. It was a big dick but it felt so goooooood.
    Suddenly he gave a hard lunge and I felt that big knot on his dick enter my
    ass. He shoved harder and it popped past my ass ring. The knot must have
    been a good 6-7 inches around, and his dick probably nearly 10 when he had
    it all in me, with the sheath pushed back to his balls. We were locked
    together like 2 dogs get sometimes when having sex. Jack kept humping me
    harder and harder and then when his dick was in as far as it would go, he
    stopped and I felt his cock contract and unload all that cum deep in my
    ass. We stayed in that position for a while and then Jack turned sideways
    and fell off my back, but his dick was still deep in my ass with the knot
    tieing up together until it went down. I was scared bad. I could see Dad
    coming back and finding us in he barn tied together. I started wriggling
    around and suddenly his dick popped out of my ass. At no time did it hurt,
    which some guys find hard to believe. But his dick was well lubricated
    with pre-cum and other bodliy fluids and my ass was covered with it too.
    It went in and came out with no pain whatsoever.

    After Jack’s dick popped out, he turned around and licked my ass
    and publc area, cleaning up all evidence of the fun we had just had. He
    took my dick in his mouth and was basically sucking it without any biting.
    It didn’t take long for me to cum in his mouth, and again there was no
    evidence the pleasure he had given me.

    Subsequently, every chance Jack and I had to be together we took
    advantage of it. I would even take him on walks in the woods near our house
    and we would get with it there as well. He would suck my cock with me
    holding his jaws tight against my dick, either before mounting me or
    afterwards. It even became possible for him to let me fuck him as well.
    At first, he was hesitant and woluldn’t stand still for me to put my dick
    in his ass, but after a few times trying, I guess he learned what I wanted
    to do and would stand still while I fucked him. I’d take hold of his hips
    and hold him tight against my groin and pump my dick and cum into his ass.
    Jack and I were best lovers and buddies.

    It really pained me when Jack failed to come back one night when
    Dad had taken him for a Fox Hunt. The dogs would roam all over the country
    side chasing the fox (never caught him) barking and baying as they ran.
    Dad and his neighbor would listen to the barking and say “That’s dog
    so-and-so, he’s in the lead. Dad said apparently Jack had been caught in a
    fence someplace and never did get loose, and died there.

  • Pete

    “We must always develop new technology and faster methods of space travel.”

    Marxist-technocratic delusions, let me guess LaFag, you are into this whole boring, robotic, predictable, moronic, pseudo-intellectual freethinking/scientism/richard dorkins/star trek thing right?

    Technology will not save us from ourselfs (or from imbeciles like you) and when it comes to “space” we are stuck with turbopumps injecting insanely expensive liquid fuel in some combustion chamber…and it will remain that way for many more centuries. However, there is sufficient technology to send dumbass technocratic-marxist Trekkies to the moon.

  • Adam

    WARNING! LONG POST AHEAD! However, unlike Woof the troll’s vile and disgusting post, this actually has merit, as it’s a response to another poster’s question:

    “Is Avatar really that bad? I kind of want to see it, mostly because while I was working on a film with the actor Wes Studi, he was also doing the Avatar project. It sounded interesting, but since it came out and all the hype started, I haven’t been able to see it. I certainly don’t want to spend any money on it, but when it’s available free, is it worth a couple hours of time?”
    No, it’s not worth the time or money at all, it’s easily the worst movie I saw in 2009. I saw it in theaters, and can’t for the life of me think of any other film that had me so earnestly desire a refund.
    While Wes Studi is a good actor (I loved him in ‘Last of the Mohicans’) and the visuals in ‘Avatar’ are nice and pretty, the story is absolute garbage (A condition made even worse by its 3- hour run time). Several reasons for this:
    1. It quite blatantly rips off several better movies, most notably ‘Dances with Wolves,’ ‘Ferngully,’ ‘Pocahontas,’ and ‘The Last Samurai.’
    2. The plot is incredibly predictable, everything you can see coming almost right from the beginning of the movie.
    3. The film was unbelievably preachy. Its message had all the subtlety of a sledgehammer, I’ve seen Christian evangelism films that were less preachy than ‘Avatar.’
    4. The characters in ‘Avatar’ are all completely unoriginal, dime- a- dozen stock characters. This is especially true of the film’s villains, all of whom are flat, 1- dimensional stereotypes of the sorts of people/ boogeymen that ultra- liberals view as evil incarnate (i.e. a greedy corporate guy destroying the environment for profit like a live- action ‘Captain Planet’ baddie, a cruel and racist military commander, and his sadistic redneck troops; All that was missing was a psycho Christian fanatic who spouted Bible verses while slaughtering innocent creatures for the fun of it, but maybe that’ll be the villain for the sequel).
    5. I found ‘Avatar’ massively offensive, for several reasons. As a conservative American who supports our troops overseas, I was offended at the way the US military were all portrayed as evil, bloodthirsty redneck monsters that just love butchering defenseless creatures while grinning ear to ear. As a Christian, I was offended at how blatantly the movie promoted neo- paganism (The religion practiced by the Na’vi in it was an obvious reference to pagan Gaia worship, and portrayed as beautiful and enlightening). One scene in particular where they hold a religious ceremony to try and help one of the heroes made me feel like I was sitting in on a cult meeting.
    To further show how bad ‘Avatar’ was, let’s compare it to a good movie from last year: the animated film ‘How to Train Your Dragon.’ That movie, like ‘Avatar,’ had very impressive CGI visuals. However, unlike ‘Avatar,’ ‘HTTYD’ also had an original and interesting storyline, well- developed and quite likable characters, a much more subtle message, a better ending, and even a better musical score (What little of ‘Avatar”s score I could remember was mostly heavy and plodding, while ‘HTTYD”s score was lively and catchy). In summary, ‘Avatar’ is all style and no substance, while ‘How to Train Your Dragon’ has an abundance of both.

  • AC

    FreedomFox says:

    I didn’t say we should wait on utopia, however I have to question using public money for a flag-planting mission when we have serious problems, like deadly disease and crop vulnerability.

    How do we tell the grieving family of a cancer victim that a photo-op on Mars was more important than the life of their loved one?

    With the budget so tight, whatever we do commit to spend must produce quality of life results for taxpayers. Much of NASA space science does exactly that.

    In the 1960′s, putting a man on the moon was vital in developing rocket technology and demonstrating superiority to keep the Soviets at bay.

    I can’t articulate why human footprints on Mars would be better that sorely-needed biotech research.

    As disbeliever in Malthusianism you rely on a technological progress argument. That being the case, you should be in favor of using the already allocated public money towards the research challenges which directly impact the limits to growth.

  • Rogertheshrubber

    I see that Bawney Fwank is now posting under the name of “woof-woof” and revealing his first trip down/up the hershey highway, a road he has not left since.

    And as for the “Deep Green” whatever fags, who I’m sure have two toothpicks for arms and a stack of dimes for a neck, don’t they realize that if they got what they wanted they would be at the BOTTOM of the food chain?

    I mean what with all the red-necks and bitter-clingers with our guns and all….

    RTS

  • Man of few words

    Thanks Adam. You should do movie reviews for a living.

  • Lgbpop

    They want to kill that many people? I think we’d be kinder to Gaia if we just killed those three, then see who wanted to go next. I bet the number of rotting bodies would be minimal, our way.

  • Bob Roberts

    Dookiestain LaFlair says: August 10, 2011 at 12:49 pm

    Anything that opposes the progress of humanity must be stamped out, be it religion or luddites like these.

    ————-
    Religion does not “oppose the progress of humanity”. From time to time people who claim to be religious do attempt to impose their ideas on other people but that was not religion, that was people using religion falsely to control others. Religion itself is not to blame.

    This is a classic false logic argument that “atheists” use – blaming religion when it is the person claiming to be religious who is abusing religion that is the problem. The best examples of this are those who claim to be muslims but engage in terrorism. I’ll grant that Islam is particularly suited to being abused in this way, but even that just underlines it’s the people who abuse the religion that are the ultimate cause.

    AC says: August 10, 2011 at 12:54 pm

    By the time the environmental and biological issues have been solved technology will already have progressed to a point where the need for humans in such craft has been made obsolete entirely.

    ——————
    While you are correct that many missions will wind up being unmanned ones, you are dead wrong that humans will not be a necessary part of space exploration as long as we are exploring space. By the way, you sound a lot like that one troll who thinks that technologically correct socialism is the answer to everything – could you be him posting under yet another name?

    AC returns to say:

    Right now, we have real problems down here on Earth and in its orbit, and that is where we should stay until those problems have been fully solved.

    —————-

    Wrong. You can’t run until you learn to walk and you can’t walk until you learn to crawl. What if the ultimate solutions to our problems here on Earth depend on the techniques and technologies that are developed due to the challenges of human spaceflight. You’re using a computer, for instance – you can thank the Gemini and Apollo programs for that.

    Man of few words says: August 10, 2011 at 1:50 pm

    Were it not for the anti-military, anti-corporate, anti-human messages completely interwoven in AVITAR I would recommend seeing it. However, because it’s such a completely obvious propaganda piece I simply cannot. Don’t waste your time.

    As an example, in the movie, the magical substance the “evil corporation” is trying to get at any cost (including genocide) with the full cooperation of the “evil military” is “UNOBTANIUM”. Typical moonbat nonsense! Only moonbats think of plots like this because only in their minds is it possible to contemplate genocide as a legitimate means toward a desired end.

    IN any case, as several people have hinted that they’ve observed, these eco-freak extremists claim technology is the problem yet they’re wedded to the stuff. I challenge any of them to move into a small cabin (that they’ve built completely from scratch themselves without relying on or using any modern tools) in the woods and stop using ANY modern convenience in their daily existence. That includes that they have to fashion ALL of their own tools FROM SCRATCH and avoid ANY use of ANYTHING that in any way comes from a corporation or small business. They need to gather their own seeds for their crops (and no fair going to someone else’s farm to do it), make their own crude weapons and/or traps from things they find in the wild that are of 100% natural origin if they choose to supplement their diet with meat or other animal products. They need to fashion their own buckets (for bringing in their water and taking out their wastes) from whatever they can find, start their fires without matches (it’s pretty easy, really), and in every way avoid using ANYTHING that involves ANY use of technology. Do this for five years, or even one, and I’ll respect you. Until then, sorry, no.

  • SPURWING PLOVER

    Im all for sending them to the AVATAR planet to live and maybe the big big birdies will eat them so we dont have to put up with their tommy rot

  • Joek Loth

    TED says:
    August 10, 2011 at 1:47 pm

    Classic example Ted, of their mentality. How many whackjobs proof read this?

    I forgot these turds in in my last post.

    The truth is that back in the fifties/sixties (thank to c. jung, a. kinsey et al) they DISARMED the QUALIFICATIONS for what is CLINICLY INSANE, and/or the line for being CRAZY was BLURRED BADLY.
    Hence we have insanity at/in every level of our government. City govn. , school boards, school teachers, prosecuting govn., states govn., federal govn.(see WHITE HOUSE OCCUPANTS and CONGRESS) even religious orgs. Black is WHITE, up is down and regressing to a waaaay shittier life style WILL SAVE THIS PLANET. A F U C K I N G P L A N E T ! ! ! ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME? algore needs to be eliminated as is anyturd who spouts off that we’re not doing enough to SAVE THE PLANET.

    Ahhhh Fuckit, who cares?

    The parallel between ignorance and apathy it
    I don’t know and I don’t care!!!

  • Joek Loth

    “and apathy it I don’t know” CORRECTION==”and apathy IS I don’t know AND I DON’T GIVE A FLYING FUCK FUCKTARD”!~!!

  • Sgt Stadenko

    One thing these blinkered eco-Luddites do not understand, or simply refuse to accept, is that life for the vast majority of the pre-technology, pre-industrial world’s population was nasty, brutish and short.

    Think “Somalia” on a global scale…

  • Bob Roberts

    JENSEN QUOTES:

    “indigenous peoples have had the only sustainable human social organizations, and… we need to recognize that we (colonizers) are all living on stolen land.”

    [What Jensen misses is that, by his definition, EVERYONE is living on "stolen land" because EVERYONE, at one time or another, came to a place that was previously uninhabited and "colonized" it. Furthermore, "indigenous" peoples practiced genocide, slavery and were fond of very ecologically unsound practices. You learn that if you bother to study them. But since HE admits HE is living on stolen land I invite him to LEAVE and go somewhere where the land IS NOT stolen, if by his definition he can find such a place. Until he does that he needs to SIT DOWN AND STFU!]

    “Every morning when I awake I ask myself whether I should write or blow up a dam. I tell myself I should keep writing, though I’m not sure that’s right”.

    [In other words he has everything in common with radical muslim terrorist organizers who exhort others to go out and do terrible things because he does not have the courage of his own convictions. His idea of making the world a better place is to destroy, to harm, to make life harder for not just himself but for EVERYONE.]

    “As is true for most people I know, I’ve always loved learning. As is also true for most people I know, I always hated school. Why is that?”

    [Because he's lying to himself and to us. School, as I recall, was the last time anyone ever offered me a wealth of anything for free (well, free to me, anyway) and all I had to do was accept it. I did, gladly, which is no doubt why I turned out arguably superior to this lunatic moonbat!]

    “Do you believe that this culture will undergo a voluntary transformation to a sane and sustainable way of living?”

    [Not if we listen to idiots like you - no, not at all, ever!]

    As for Lierre Keith and Aric McBay, apparently their writings and statements are so completely ridiculous that WIKIPEDIA won’t touch them.

    Lierre Keith’s scribblings are so offensive even the vegans attack her for them.

    Aric McBay is a “peak oil” promoter who hasn’t heard that in multiple places here in America we’ve now found reserves that far outweigh all the fossil fuels humans have used to date. “Peak oil” has to do with the FACT that political methods were used to cause the production of domestic energy sources to peak and decline and has nothing to do with how much we actually have or can recover but rather how much foolish energy plans from government have caused us to be able to produce and use.

  • Bob Roberts

    AC says: August 10, 2011 at 5:12 pm

    How do we tell the grieving family of a cancer victim that a photo-op on Mars was more important than the life of their loved one?

    ——
    Who says we have to? I understand they’re hot on the trail of a cure for certain types of leukemia now, a disease that, in the past decade or two, took two people who I cared about. We don’t have to NOT do one thing in order to do another – well maybe YOU do, but most of us are capable of doing more than one thing well.

    We certainly need to beat Russia and China to the goal of establishing any sort of ongoing operations on the moon or we’ll be sorry – mark my words.

  • AC

    While you are correct that many missions will wind up being unmanned ones, you are dead wrong that humans will not be a necessary part of space exploration as long as we are exploring space. By the way, you sound a lot like that one troll who thinks that technologically correct socialism is the answer to everything – could you be him posting under yet another name?

    First of all, I’m no fucking troll. I’ve been posting here constructively for at least two years.

    Now back to the topic.

    The possibility of the development of unmanned probes needing no human is nothing fringe. Technology is advancing at an astounding rate.

    One of my professors put it like this:

    Currently, the Voyager 1 probe is the furthest manmade object from Earth. We have already launched probes on interstellar trajectories which will overtake Voyager 1, and several of the later probes will even overtake the earlier ones.

    If we launched another probe in the future, it would likely overtake all the others.

    Here, priority of launch is no benefit to shortening arrival time.

    There is an inflection point on the research curve before which yields no benefit from transition to the practical.

    Now suppose we launched a colony of humans on a 1000 year (Earth reference frame) journey to a planet outside our solar system.

    Is it possible this ship of pioneers would arrive to find humans or robots already there, owing to the massive technological advancements since their craft was launched?

    Christopher Columbus would never have set sail for the Americas if the 747 were going to be making its first flight a month later.

    This problem also manifests in inefficient solar panels and windmills, neither of which are profitable for deployment outside certain areas with high energy densities. Liberals want to build out these inefficient panels even though we haven’t reached the point where it makes sense to do so.

    The point here is focus on the pure research first.

    We don’t have to actually incur the expense of planting a flag on Mars with the first generation of interplanetary equipment to necessarily be able to use what was learned in its development for designing the second generation, and so forth.

    Let scientists make the call of when it makes sense to run a practical experiment.

    Politicians should not be demanding photo ops as soon as possible.

    How you connect that to a moonbat troll is beyond me.

    As I said, programs like Gemini and Apollo were worthwhile and produced practical and immediate benefits. We held the Soviets at bay, developed our launch technology, and extended our dominion over Earth orbit, which became immediately useful for the boom in commercial and military satellites.

    Right now, what is the point of having a human walk on Mars? Mars won’t assist in our communications, it won’t help with our dominion over this planet, and there are no resources there worth the cost of the return journey.

    NASA would better spend its money on solving practical problems, such as how to bend the cost curve down for fractional orbital travel here on Earth.

    Richard Branson and other space entrepreneurs are doing what a red tape laden NASA cannot.

    Can you imagine the benefit to humanity of NY to HK in an hour and a half, at a price point agreeable to first class passengers and valuable cargo?

    Earth to Mars and back in a few months at a cost in the billions in not helping us here on Earth.

  • AC

    Who says we have to? I understand they’re hot on the trail of a cure for certain types of leukemia now, a disease that, in the past decade or two, took two people who I cared about. We don’t have to NOT do one thing in order to do another – well maybe YOU do, but most of us are capable of doing more than one thing well.

    Money is finite, and ions about what is most important.

    We suffer from so many potentially curable deadly diseases that I cannot in good conscience stand for public money being spent to make politicians look good with science photo ops. Public funds should produce transformative progress for the taxpayers forced to fund such projects.

    The next penicillin or the next Internet might get shelved if funds are prioritized to send a man to Mars and back just to say we’ve done it.

    Until we have infinite resources it will always be true that a dollar spent on any unwise project is a dollar not available for a worthy project. This is true whether we’re discussing the shuttle vs. Mars, or a border fence vs. the bridge to nowhere.

    We certainly need to beat Russia and China to the goal of establishing any sort of ongoing operations on the moon or we’ll be sorry – mark my words.

    Sorry about what? The only potentially useful resource on the moon is helium-3, and we haven’t even demonstrated it would be worth the effort.

    A Chinese or Russian moon base does not hurt this country unless we have a pressing need for economic activity on the moon, which at present, is zero. No matter how many moon bases they have we still have the ability to push the reset button on all of their Earthbound activities. That alone is enough to keep them in line.

  • AC

    My first paragraph got shredded somehow.

    It was supposed to read:

    Money is finite, and right now, our budget is forcing us to make tough decisions about what is most important.

  • Winston Smith

    The only way man will travel to the stars is if there a breakthru in technology along the lines of Hyperspace Jump Drives, Warp Drives or some other shortcut across the vast distances of space.

    Of course eveything we see and hear may be nothing but an simulation and all the intelligence running our universe need do is turn us OFF.

    http://www.exitmundi.nl/exitmundi.htm

    “Could someone or something switch us off? Could it possibly be true that our world is just a computer program, or a hologram, or a dream? Although it’s about the weirdest thing you could think of, there are some tantalizing clues this might indeed be the case. The stuff we call ‘reality’ simply isn’t very real after all.

    Welcome to the outskirts of reality. Welcome to the place where theoretical physics and philosophy meet, and where religion and science loose their meaning. Better fasten your mental seatbelts. What we’re about to tell you is just too weird. Too mind-boggling. And quite disturbing, really.”

  • Adam

    “Thanks Adam. You should do movie reviews for a living.”
    You’re welcome, and thanks for the compliment. Becoming a film critic, perhaps for a Christian magazine/ website or something, would be one of my ideas for a dream job. The only problem to that might be, with the exception of ‘Avatar’ and a few other films, there aren’t many current movies I’ve seen that I would consider bad, I like a lot of movies that the majority of people don’t like (i.e. I consider ‘The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen’ to be one of the most underrated films in recent history). Still, I can have a bit of an eye for examining them, as my ‘Avatar’ post shows.
    “Religion does not “oppose the progress of humanity”. From time to time people who claim to be religious do attempt to impose their ideas on other people but that was not religion, that was people using religion falsely to control others. Religion itself is not to blame.

    This is a classic false logic argument that “atheists” use – blaming religion when it is the person claiming to be religious who is abusing religion that is the problem. The best examples of this are those who claim to be muslims but engage in terrorism. I’ll grant that Islam is particularly suited to being abused in this way, but even that just underlines it’s the people who abuse the religion that are the ultimate cause.”
    Very well- put, Bob. I couldn’t have said it better myself.

  • Mr Galt

    Ahh. Wasn’t this the same philosophy espoused by Pol Pot?

  • SPURWING PLOVER

    Hitler himself would have approved of the ideas these -eco-wackos have come out with since hitler was also a enviromentalists

  • Karin

    From the FAQ on their website: “If we dismantle civilization, won’t millions be killed?” The answer that follows is a big long blah blah blah, but basically says, “so be it.”

    What replaces the grocery store? Local edible plants.

    The headline Deep Green Psychosis, is spot-on.

  • FreedomFox

    Actually, there is one other confirmed military resource on the moon: Earth’s gravity well, and a large supply of rocks of various sizes. Additionally the long travel time to the moon provides a good window for intercepting missiles from Earth, meaning the moon could potentially be used to ensure continuity of operations in the event of nuclear war.

    Additionally, depending on developments in launch and propulsion technology the moon could become a valuable refueling point for longer journeys in the future.

    At its most expensive, the space program has only had an annual budget of $16 billion. Compared to the roughly $1.5 trillion per year and growing allocated to the failed Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid programs, I would say that, historically at least, NASA has been giving us a much better return on investment. Cutting out welfare and wealth redistribution would balance the budget (something that cutting NASA could not possibly do) and provide significantly more money for those other projects you would want to prioritize. If you insist on a Malthusian perspective, doing so would also significantly diminish the growth of useless eaters, thus allowing the equilibrium population to be higher as a result of higher total productivity. You can at least feel better about not having to kill so many people, then.

  • AC

    Actually, there is one other confirmed military resource on the moon: Earth’s gravity well, and a large supply of rocks of various sizes. Additionally the long travel time to the moon provides a good window for intercepting missiles from Earth, meaning the moon could potentially be used to ensure continuity of operations in the event of nuclear war.

    The Moon’s gravity is still 1/6th that of Earth’s, making the lifting of enormous rocks a problem. The best you could get would be a 6:1 energy multiplier.

    Any military building an impact weapon would need only slightly nudge the path of short period asteroids or comets.

    Dropping rocks from space is imprecise, extremely slow (compared to a 45 minute ICBM or 15 minute SLBM), and only generally useful in a doomsday context.

    We already have that capability, and don’t need a pork program to find a new way to end the world.

    Moon bases are not an answer to nuclear war.

    Moon bases might make nuclear war survivable, which is exactly what we don’t want. What holds the ICBMs back is MAD – as soon as the D is no longer MA then such a war becomes winnable.

    For the sake of humanity we need that sort of war to be unwinnable, so that no rational state would ever ignite one.

    Additionally, depending on developments in launch and propulsion technology the moon could become a valuable refueling point for longer journeys in the future.

    Journey to what? If we need a refueling station for a later project then we build it when that project comes of age.

    At its most expensive, the space program has only had an annual budget of $16 billion. Compared to the roughly $1.5 trillion per year and growing allocated to the failed Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid programs, I would say that, historically at least, NASA has been giving us a much better return on investment. Cutting out welfare and wealth redistribution would balance the budget (something that cutting NASA could not possibly do) and provide significantly more money for those other projects you would want to prioritize. If you insist on a Malthusian perspective, doing so would also significantly diminish the growth of useless eaters, thus allowing the equilibrium population to be higher as a result of higher total productivity. You can at least feel better about not having to kill so many people, then.

    I’m not arguing against the space program. I support NASA and I support the shuttle program. I supported the historical role of the other launch programs.

    All of these programs served both pure and applied purposes.

    Mars serves no applied purpose at this point in time. It is a photo op and testament to engineering prowess; the modern equivalent of building the Great Pyramid of Giza. It might look impressive, and demonstrate certain capabilities, but at the end of the day it is a destroyer of capital.

    NASA has a much better ROI than welfare. We should cut welfare and redirect a portion of the money to useful science.

    Just because I support NASA does not mean I support the hijacked climate science divisions; just because I don’t support those hijacked climate science divisions does not mean I do not support NASA.

    I do believe we need to stop subsidizing welfare children. We have far too many. Irresponsible breeding is raising the marginal costs of agricultural production and resource extraction and producing enormous social burdens in dealing with the poverty and the crime.

    There should be no financial incentive to have children.

  • FreedomFox

    Agreed on the climate “science” divisions, generating AGW propaganda has absolutely nothing to do with exploration and expansion.

    Of course, admittedly one thing that certainly helps NASA’s budget is that they charge quite a bit for commercial satellite launches. With new commercial space companies emerging, eventually NASA is going to have to take a hard look at its priorities as they go the way of the USPS. At that point though, we’ll already have the commercial companies to continue in their stead and NASA can be folded into a branch of the DoD with a smaller, Defense-oriented mission scope.

    However, that transition will happen naturally as the new companies emerge so long as there is no interference in the market. Until then, there’s no harm in NASA striving to remain at the forefront of space exploration so long as they are the best at it, and NASA’s work will give American companies a bigger head start breaking into the emerging industry.

    The Postal service is actually quite a good parallel to NASA, for a long time only the Government had the resources to provide the service in a practical manner, but as technology advances the private sector is able to increasingly take over. But it’s a transition that has to be allowed to happen over time, in accordance with free market principles.

  • Had it up to here :/

    Set the example…You first!

Alibi3col theme by Themocracy