What will we fight about when the oil's gone? by chrisisall

Water.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, March 25, 2006 9:23 PM

THEGREYJEDI

Who gets to kill the liberals. because we are all t3h d00m3d. And when the oil is gone only conservatives will want to fight, but they'll want to fight everyone all the time. And only the liberals will want peace, but they'll be absolute pushovers. Because everyone and everything will be polarized in such a way as to demonize the right so the left can say "I told you so." just as the conservatives nuke the whole planet.

--------------------------------------------------------------
Chief Engineer - USS SereniTREE
http://tomeofgrey.blogspot.com
http://www.cafepress.com/thegreyjedi

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 26, 2006 2:44 AM

The next oil will be oil.

What we haven't sorted out yet, because we're morons, is that burning oil is a horrible waste, it's really far more valueable than that. Pure Fresh Water will always be common because it can be made from ocean saltwater pretty easily.

Oil represents the viable carbon base of the world, and in a ready and usable form. At a time when the world's topsoil is becoming seriously depleted and the human population is going up. The need for land resurection techniques will become critical. Land in places like Iraq and Nigeria, which is reaching a point where it can no longer support life will have to be re-vitalized with a large fluid carbon base, and that will undoubtedly be oil.

When oil stops being burned for fuel, I think there will be a brief dip in the price, and then it will gradually start to soar again as other uses pile up.

ps. conservatives are not more warlike than liberals.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 26, 2006 2:52 AM

CBY

Quote:
Originally posted by Fletch2:
Water.

Exactly. I saw an interesting documentation about it lately. They contrasted Las Vegas with South Mexico for instance. Really something to think about.

°°°°°°°°°°°°
http://www.byond-trax.com - my selfmade ambient/lounge/chillout music
www.botttos.de/mphillips/Packs.htm - mphillips 100 in 1 Packs

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 26, 2006 3:26 AM

INDYBLUES

Haven't any of you seen Spaceballs:The Movie??
We'll be fighting over "air"!!
'Blues

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 26, 2006 3:57 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Dreamtrove:
The next oil will be oil.

Not when there is no oil it won't.

Quote:
ps. conservatives are not more warlike than liberals.

No, they're both as bad as each other.

But by the virtue that your always spouting the nonsense that any war ever and any aggression in the history of Human existance is caused by Liberals (your definition of Liberal being someone who goes to war, again with the bizzare illogical circular arguments of yours) we need someone to lay the blame on Conservatives at every turn in order to maintain balance here.

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No beast so fierce but knows some touch of pity. But I know none, and therefore am no beast.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 26, 2006 5:46 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:
ps. conservatives are not more warlike than liberals.

No, they're both as bad as each other.

Uh-oh. Here goes another definition war between DT and C.

Citizen, don't you find most of DT's observations sound, even if you disagree with his labels?

Liberal, Conservative, Socialist, Facist...if he's in the White House, chances are he's warlike at this point.

Violent Liberal Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 26, 2006 7:30 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!

Water? Nawww. I think the great question which will pit brother against brother and nation against nation is which is better....

Crunchy or smooth peanut butter.

People love a happy ending. So every episode, I will explain once again that I don't like people. And then Mal will shoot someone. Someone we like. And their puppy. - Joss

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 26, 2006 7:42 AM

DT,
another stupid answer from you. In fact desalination is extremely energy intensive, it it were not you would have farms in Saudi Arabia by now. So in a world without cheap energy (which is what a world without oil is likely to be) your ability to clean and distribute water drops dramatically.

We had 10 inches of rain in Dallas last weekend, enough that areas near the Trinity valley were flooded yet we already are behind on last years rainfall level. We ended last year with record lake and reservour lows so unless something changes we will be even lower by this time next year. As the planet warms up paterns of rainfall will shift and places that had water before may not have as much as they once did. That is a problem if you live there.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 26, 2006 8:19 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:

Crunchy or smooth peanut butter.

Smooth will prevail, and crush your nuts.

Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 26, 2006 8:31 AM

Fletch,

Curiously, as usual, you are wrong. It takes no energy at all. For that water to be turned into fresh water all that is needed is for time to pass. Then it will fall from the sky.

Citizen,

I'm not getting into it again, other than to say that you miss the point. Leftist philosophy mandates that other people than themselves change their behavior. This and its inevitale resistance is what causes conflict.

Anyway, there will always be oil. You just have to know where to look. I wrote a very gruesome sf story about this.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 26, 2006 8:38 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:

Anyway, there will always be oil. You just have to know where to look. I wrote a very gruesome sf story about this.

DT, did you even READ the article!!??
(Gee, I've always wanted to say that...

)

There will be oil, but not as much.

Sebaceous Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 26, 2006 8:47 AM

ERIC

Hasn't anyone ever seen Mad Max 3? We'll fight over pig shit.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 26, 2006 8:53 AM

If it doesnt fall from the sky where you are (read my post for once) then you will have to move to places where it does fall. Since the folks already there may not like you doing that it would be a source of conflict. Likewise, as nations upstream take more and more river water for their own use those countries downstream will get less and less, again a recipe for conflict.

As usual you continue to apply your upstate New York liberal bias to every issue. If it doent effect you then it's not a problem right?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 26, 2006 10:01 AM

DT:
Fine:
Liberals or more apt the left at large fight for ideals. That causes conflict.

The Conservatives, or more apt the right at large fight for resources, land, power and money. That causes conflict.

However since you only see the conflict in the world in the terms you want to see it you have relabelled war == liberal and peace == Conservative.

Frankly that is NOT objective and it is you and your agenda of 'the right is right there is no other way' talking. If you don't want to get into it, stop saying it, because I've had enough of holding my 'tongue' and letting you say what you like for the sake of keeping the peace.

You start talking shit; I'll call you on it. You don't like it, stop talking shit.

And as for water falling from the sky:
We have rain, lots in point of fact, in Britain.

Hose pipe ban predicted again this summer.

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No beast so fierce but knows some touch of pity. But I know none, and therefore am no beast.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 26, 2006 11:30 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:

And as for water falling from the sky:
We have rain, lots in point of fact, in Britain.

So, Britan, the Amazon and Seattle will be prime targets for occupation in the Water Wars, hmmmm?

2 molocules of hydrogen Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 26, 2006 11:35 AM

Don't fuck with Britain mate. Have you seen a football riot?

If we can do that with plastic tables and chairs just think what we can do with metal ones!

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No beast so fierce but knows some touch of pity. But I know none, and therefore am no beast.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 26, 2006 12:16 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:
Have you seen a football riot?

'Nuff said. They try to send me to get your water, I'll dive into the Atlantic.

Chrisisallwet

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 26, 2006 12:20 PM

You can't have our water, it's already all leaked out of our victorian pipes...

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No beast so fierce but knows some touch of pity. But I know none, and therefore am no beast.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 26, 2006 2:19 PM

Chris,

Nah, I just mouthed off ignorantly as usual, but in my defense I'm still in bed with pneumonia, as I have been for the last week so I don't feel so good.

Anyway, mine was a reference that people are made out of oil :)

Fletch, "my liberal bias?" I'm sure Citizen would think that's pretty funny.

Citizen,

Quote:
The Conservatives, or more apt the right at large fight for resources, land, power and money. That causes conflict.

This is alas sadly true of late, but I don't credit these people as conservatives. I should specify "non-neocon conservatives"

Finally: You, holding your tongue? This is hardly an accurate portrayal of the situation. You're endlessly mouthing off.

As for me, I'm just disagreeing with your characterization of the right, in general. If you want to characterize neocons that way, go ahead, I won't defend them, geezer or auraptor can do that. Or try.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 26, 2006 3:03 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
I'm still in bed with pneumonia, as I have been for the last week so I don't feel so good.

'Liberal' amounts of alcohol to dry out the phlegm and plenty of water and vitamins as a chaser. It'll be gone in a few days (plus the uncomfortability factor will be signifigantly diminished

)

Viruses hate booze Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 26, 2006 3:39 PM

Hey you redefine words to match your own agenda, so I don't think you can complain if I call it as I see it. You have more crackpot conspiracy theories than a Pirate, you called for the impeachment of a sitting Republican president for.... well for some reason and you campaigned for Howard Dean. I'm surprised Kerry isnt asking you to donate to Dem party funds.

If the (tin foil) hat fits, wear it.

Besides you are happy to call people either liberal or "non conservative" if they don't slavishly agree with your crackpot notions it seems about time you were on the receiving end when you start spouting rubbish.

What do you think Citizen? DT sure looks like a Commie to me.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 26, 2006 3:52 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Fletch2:
DT sure looks like a Commie to me.

I don't agree with his every word (Heck, I don't think I agree with anyone's every word), but he offers a unique perspective that was lacking in these sometimes clearly defined, black and white-sided arguments. I feel he's as necessary here as you, Fletch.

Besides, who would Citizen have to argue labeling semantics with? I'm too wishy-washy with those; call me what you like

.

Liberal(?) Conservative(?) Independent(!) Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 26, 2006 4:41 PM

Fletch. I have no agenda. This a forum in which we spar politically for fun and practice, not a group with any power. If I had an agenda everyone knows what it would be... to pull the GOP back from this lunacy to it's own roots. I redefine no word, I believe that would be you who does that, but it's just a matter of opinion.

I worked for Howard Dean because, well, I was a fool. Dean is an idiot, but I thought we needed some sound opposition to Bush. As a result of that, yes, or course, Kerry asks me for funds daily, or used to. I cancelled the email account and changed because the democrats sent me so much spam. I thought the dems could be saved, now I doubt it. Unless they can nominate Feingold, which I don't think they can do, if only because he's a former republican. I also campaigned for John Buchanan but the GOP '04 primary was a sham. I'm still considering supporting Feingold in '08, or I might go work for Hagel or Romney. Personally, I think party loyalists are always fools. It's people in the middle whose votes are needed. The parties do nothing for you people on the edge, they view you as the willing sheep. We're in the middle are the ones who make the difference, who keep the parties sane. All things being equal, I'd always support the republican candidate too, but they're not equal, and bad republicans need to be taught a lesson.

Actually Fletch, almost nothing you say has any merit. I think you're the one who stood up in defense of socialism like a wounded puppy. Everything you say is pure spin and lies. I think you as a straight shooter is a rediculous idea.

The idea that neocons aren't conservative isn't my spin, it's a historical fact.

Even the concept is absurd. Neo-conservative. Why would 'conservative' need to be re-invented? That would be an extremely un-conservative thing to do.

Whatever your whacked theory of the world, please leave me out of it.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 26, 2006 4:46 PM

Chris,

Well said with much more tact than I have. You're in the middle politically, like me limi sygnym and a few others. I think finn should wake up and join us. I think there are a couple others. I define the middle thusly: you don't know which party you're voting for in '08. I think it is the only sensible position to be in. As I said in my angry rant just now, when I look at the party platforms of the GOP and the democrats, it's no comparison, I pick the republicans, but if you're so far on one side or the other that you can't reach over to the other side of the aisle, you end up with no power and no allies.

I know a guy in England who always runs in the elections and gets like 3000 votes. He calls himself "The voice of the radical center."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 26, 2006 5:31 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:

I know a guy in England who always runs in the elections and gets like 3000 votes. He calls himself "The voice of the radical center."

LOLROTFL!

Radical Centerist Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 26, 2006 11:17 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Dreamtrove:
This is alas sadly true of late, but I don't credit these people as conservatives. I should specify "non-neocon conservatives"

No it's always been true, but since it doesn't fit your world view you can't even see it, let alone recognise it. The British Empire, as a for instance, was a conservative endeavour.

Quote:
Finally: You, holding your tongue? This is hardly an accurate portrayal of the situation. You're endlessly mouthing off.

I wasn't aware you'd been looking over my shoulder all this time so that you know the number of your posts that I didn't reply to despite your obviously biased baseless rhetoric as I knew where replying would lead, here in fact. Frankly you don't have any basis for making that assertion, since you don't live in my head.

As for mouthing off I sure as hell don’t do it anymore than you do and by and large when I do it it’s based in reality.

Quote:
As for me, I'm just disagreeing with your characterization of the right, in general.

And I'm disagreeing with your continued spiel about how anything bad done ever is down to the left no matter who perpetrated it or what it maybe. Circular arguments, I'd hazard a guess that your dictionary would read like this:
Evil: See Liberal.
Liberal: See Evil.

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No beast so fierce but knows some touch of pity. But I know none, and therefore am no beast.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, March 27, 2006 3:39 AM

Citizen,

Stop picking a fight. Not only am I lying in bed coughing up blood right now and don't want to deal with it, but it serves no purpose.

The left isn't evil, it's misguided. When it learns to apply its ideas locally rather than trying to apply them globally, it won't be such an issue for the rest of us.

When I was your age I pretty much thought as you do. Since then I've decided that the left is just pretty much wrong, so I joined the right, and I'm not unhappy about the decision. The right is sometimes wrong, nobody's perfect. What saddens me is that these sheep on my side want to find good in Bush so they can follow him rather than doing what they should which is to strike him down with a fiery vengeance and replace him with a better conservative.

But none of this is going to make me vote for a democrat. If a democrat wants my vote, as I said, it has to move. John Kerry, Al Gore, Bill Clinton, are all very wrong-headed about the direction this country needs to move in. The whole or majority of the democratic party, for a start, needs to move over to where Russ Feingold and Barbara Boxer are, and let go of this pro-govt world cop mentality.

I think the GOP needs to also pull away from that position which it has headed towards under Bush. But there's a difference. If the Democrats continue to push for their pro-govt, world cop mentality, 90% of their constituents will not object, and they will continue to pull in numbers in the 40s in general elections. What the left has to do is force the democrats to move in a more sane, individualist, direction by voting in primaries and by taking their own leaders to task.

By contrast, if republcans fail to pull back, about 1/2 to 2/3 of their constituents will mindlessly follow them, and there will be a very large 3rd party splitter vote, which will make Hillary Clinton very happy. Since I think Bush is Clinton, I think that's pretty much the plan.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, March 27, 2006 3:43 AM

RUSSELL

I think the fighting will be long over by the time the oil runs out. But towards the end the countries that DO still have oil will be the only ones capable of waging large scale war (it takes oil ya know) and they will take over the earth. Then they will just fight for power and kill infidels in there spare time.

If wishes were horses we'd all be eatin steaks.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, March 27, 2006 7:56 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

It won't matter. Look at Rwanda or Somalia - what were they fighting about? Nothing and everything. Once social catastrophe happens it devolves to anarchy.

Nearly everything I know I learned by the grace of others.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 30, 2006 8:46 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Dreamtrove:
Stop picking a fight. Not only am I lying in bed coughing up blood right now and don't want to deal with it, but it serves no purpose.

Dreamtrove, stop picking a fight. Your the one stating baseless rhetoric which you've never satisfactorily backed up, your the one replying despite the fact you apparently don't want a fight (which maybe true, you want everyone to recognise your right, about everything). How about some of this rightwing responsibility for your own actions (something I only see the Right calling for when it's someone else and there actions).

I'm sorry you’re not feeling well, but don't try and make me the bad guy because I'm attacking the sick guy, you can stop this any time as well, don't make out like I'm the only one perpetuating it.

Quote:
When it learns to apply its ideas locally rather than trying to apply them globally, it won't be such an issue for the rest of us.

Because the right (you know like the Bush Administration, British Empire etc) don't do this. Oh no wait they do, it's just you've decided that makes them the left because only the left do those things and we know only the left do those things because they're the left and they do them. See circular argument.

Quote:
When I was your age I pretty much thought as you do.

The obligatory attack on my age, which has nothing to do with it.

Quote:
I think the GOP needs to also pull away from that position which it has headed towards under Bush. But there's a difference. If the Democrats continue to push for their pro-govt, world cop mentality, 90% of their constituents will not object, and they will continue to pull in numbers in the 40s in general elections. What the left has to do is force the democrats to move in a more sane, individualist, direction by voting in primaries and by taking their own leaders to task.

Like I said, Left fights wars for ideals; the Right fights wars for money power and resources. Different motivations, same result.

You only state and see the half that fits your world view.

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No beast so fierce but knows some touch of pity. But I know none, and therefore am no beast.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 30, 2006 10:24 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

What will we fight about when the oil's gone?

Not much time... ... lunch almost over.... ... managment will cut me off soon...

So the one-word answer is: WATER.

---------------------------------
Free as in freedom, not beer.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, June 9, 2006 2:46 AM

JAYNEZTOWN

They'll fight over uranaium, water, coal, ideology, technology, politics, ores.....whatever

angry imperial humans another invasion another land grab another tyrant

but most importantly as sea-levels continue to rise and hurricanes and floods occure more often, we will fight over acquiring fertile lands

more preachers and crazy religions...or will the future evolve and not use war but do something positive and use tech to improve lives

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, June 9, 2006 3:52 AM

DEEPGIRL187

Skin color, gender equality, sexual preference, money, etc.

**************************************************

It's just an object. It doesn't mean what you think.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, June 9, 2006 3:57 AM

FREMDFIRMA

We have a 'radical center' here too, lol.

We call em "Militant Moderates".. seems to be a michigan thing, I dunno...

As for Oil, one think y'all need to take into account about petroleum shortage is this simple fact.

Nearly all plastic is made from petroleum.

That's likely to impact us harder and faster than scarity of fuel, the inability to create plastic, since our society uses and consumes a great deal of it.

Just a thought on the matter.

-Frem

PS - Interesting bit of trivia, in the movie Alien, the cargo of the ship was petroleum being brought to earth (earth having depleted their supply) in order to make plastics, since alternative fuels had become a necessary reality, but no one had yet figured any other way to make plastic.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, June 9, 2006 4:10 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:

PS - Interesting bit of trivia, in the movie Alien, the cargo of the ship was petroleum being brought to earth (earth having depleted their supply) in order to make plastics, since alternative fuels had become a necessary reality, but no one had yet figured any other way to make plastic.

Nostromo was towing a mobile refinery refining mineral ore (not oil but it did tow that at times).

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
"I had a rose named after me and I was very flattered. But I was not pleased to read the description in the catalog: 'No good in a bed, but fine against a wall'." -- Eleanor Roosevelt.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, June 9, 2006 11:57 AM

SASSALICIOUS

Fletch-

I agree with you on the "where it falls" concept of clean water. Reminds me of a situation awhile back when some southernish states wanted to run a pipeline to the Great Lakes (Lake Michigan in particular, I think) to get fresh water. Those of us near the Great Lakes wouldn't hear of it and the pipe was never built.

After easy access to fresh water, I think the next thing that we'll fight over will be livable land. When sea levels rise, most of Bangladesh will be underwater. These people will then flee to Burma and India, two countries that won't be able to handle the influx. It will happen all over the world in the low lying areas. Quite possibly most of Canada will become livable when temperatures rise, the ice melts, and currents change.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I am on The List. We are The Forsaken and we aim to burn!
"We don't fear the reaper"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, June 9, 2006 12:17 PM

BIGDAMNNOBODY

Quote:

Originally posted by Sassalicious:

Quite possibly most of Canada will become livable when temperatures rise, the ice melts, and currents change.

Psssst, most of Canada is already livable. Pass it on.

De-lurking to stir stuff up.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, June 9, 2006 1:05 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:
Psssst, most of Canada is already livable. Pass it on.

It's my understanding that many areas drop well below freezing in the winter, I think thats what Sass was talking about.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, June 9, 2006 1:25 PM

BIGDAMNNOBODY

Quote:

Originally posted by citizen:
It's my understanding that many areas drop well below freezing in the winter, I think thats what Sass was talking about.

Hey Citizen. Did you post this before or after you responded to me in the other thread. I will have to do some checking.

I responded, mostly tounge in cheek, because of the perception that Canada is a frozen wasteland where we all huddle together in igloos.

To me livable means able to sustain life. I have heard that there is all manner of life in the frozen north.

Perhaps Sass was talking about ability to support agriculture. But I would never be so bold as to assume what someone else was talking about.

De-lurking to stir stuff up.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, June 9, 2006 1:40 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:
Hey Citizen. Did you post this before or after you responded to me in the other thread. I will have to do some checking.

After.

Quote:
I responded, mostly tounge in cheek, because of the perception that Canada is a frozen wasteland where we all huddle together in igloos.

I have a completely different view. When I first started learning about Canada in geography so many years ago I found it hard to believe that some places got below -20c and there were public cold warnings. And they have actual cities here? I thought.

Quote:
To me livable means able to sustain life. I have heard that there is all manner of life in the frozen north.

There's also all sorts of life around deep ocean thermal vents

Quote:
Perhaps Sass was talking about ability to support agriculture. But I would never be so bold as to assume what someone else was talking about.

Whenever you read someone else’s text, or listen to what they have to say you are doing exactly what you say you'd never be so bold to do.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, June 9, 2006 1:51 PM

BIGDAMNNOBODY

Quote:

Originally posted by citizen:
There's also all sorts of life around deep ocean thermal vents .

So all we have to do is grow gills now right?

I was refering to the Inuit who seem to do quite well up North.

Quote:

Whenever you read someone else’s text, or listen to what they have to say you are doing exactly what you say you'd never be so bold to do.

Sorry mate, you lost me there.

De-lurking to stir stuff up.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, June 9, 2006 2:02 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:
I was refering to the Inuit who seem to do quite well up North.

But they can't survive without technology and careful culture based rituals. With the appropriate technology people can survive.

Quote:
Sorry mate, you lost me there.

You said you'd never be so bold as to assume what someone else is talking about but by merely interpreting what someone else is saying, which is part of the normal process of reading, this is exactly what you are doing

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, June 9, 2006 3:29 PM

NEEDLESEYE

I think it will be over Spice!

Quote:
He who controls the Spice, controls the universe!

No, I think it will be Water (which maybe could also follow in a Dune story arc or maybe Tank Girl, hmmm.)
We will fight over it, and try to contain it because we will treat it like a possession, not like the gift of the Earth.
Once it is contained, we'll be too busy fighting over who it belongs to to notice the plants and trees are dying. Then without the trees to keep the air clean, we will begin to fight over clean air.

Well, maybe any air will do, as we all gasp like fish out of water.

Keeper of Jayne's goggles. 8)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, June 12, 2006 5:03 PM