|
|
Tell your senators to defeat the Bush-Cheney energy bill
Tell your senators to defeat the Bush-Cheney energy bill President Bush and his Senate allies have vowed to pass their pro-polluter energy bill into law over the next few weeks. If they succeed, this shameless package of corporate welfare will cost us $50 billion over the next decade and prolong our dangerous reliance on fossil fuels and nuclear power. That's why it is so important for you to contact your own senators right away and tell them to block this attack on our pocketbooks, our environment, and our health. Put your fingers to work: http://www.savebiogems.org/takeaction.asp?src=RR0401 it takes 2 seconds to fill out you never know, it might actually change some views. fish on t. |
Tell your senators to defeat the Bush-Cheney energy bill
"Thomas Gnauck" wrote:
If they succeed, this shameless package of corporate welfare will cost us $50 billion over the next decade and prolong our dangerous reliance on fossil fuels and nuclear power. If we're supposed to give up on fossil fuels and nuclear power, what is it you suggest we use to meet the growing energy demands? Should we cut down and burn out forests? Maybe we should go back to hunting whales? I haven't studied the bill in question enough to have an opinion as to whether it's good or bad, but I can see that this note is not well thought out. Chas remove fly fish to reply http://home.comcast.net/~chas.wade/w...ome.html-.html San Juan Pictures at: http://home.comcast.net/~chasepike/wsb/index.html |
Tell your senators to defeat the Bush-Cheney energy bill
Just for grins I checked out the referenced web site.
Unremarkably, it starts with the paragraph posted here to the group. There is no explanation there as to what is in the bill, and no link to any site that tells what is in the bill. Useless spam Chas remove fly fish to reply http://home.comcast.net/~chas.wade/w...ome.html-.html San Juan Pictures at: http://home.comcast.net/~chasepike/wsb/index.html |
Tell your senators to defeat the Bush-Cheney energy bill
Warren wrote:
Ahhhhh, a Muskenberry! ;-) -- Great term Warren, I'll remember it. Since I've been in the habit of kill filing muskie's new addresses as soon as he posts sometj=hing, I might have missed this from long ago. Chas remove fly fish to reply http://home.comcast.net/~chas.wade/w...ome.html-.html San Juan Pictures at: http://home.comcast.net/~chasepike/wsb/index.html |
Tell your senators to defeat the Bush-Cheney energy bill
net wrote...
Great term Warren, I'll remember it. Since I've been in the habit of kill filing muskie's new addresses as soon as he posts sometj=hing, I might have missed this from long ago. Actually, I see very little of Ken and none of Muskie no matter what name he uses. I created these rules with my news reader so that any posts that are cross posted to more than two groups are ignored and threads with OT in the subject that have Forty as the author are marked as ignored. Works freaking great. Thankfully Ken is kind enough to put OT in his subject line so I don't have to plonk him completely. With these two rules and one person in the "Bozo Bin," ROFF has become much more enjoyable for me. Your really should check out MicroPlanet Gravity. It's free and has some pretty damn good features and rule making capabilities. -- Warren (use troutbum_mt (at) yahoo to reply via email) For Conclave Info: http://www.geocities.com/troutbum_mt...nConclave.html |
Tell your senators to defeat the Bush-Cheney energy bill
Warren wrote:
snip Your really should check out MicroPlanet Gravity. It's free and has some pretty damn good features and rule making capabilities. Did you know that Gravity is still maintained, despite the fact that Microplanet stopped supporting it? Look at http://gravity.tbates.org/ for some fresh updates. -- Cheers, Herman |
Tell your senators to defeat the Bush-Cheney energy bill
"Warren" wrote in message ... net wrote... Great term Warren, I'll remember it. Since I've been in the habit of kill filing muskie's new addresses as soon as he posts sometj=hing, I might have missed this from long ago. Actually, I see very little of Ken and none of Muskie no matter what name he uses. I created these rules with my news reader so that any posts that are cross posted to more than two groups are ignored and threads with OT in the subject that have Forty as the author are marked as ignored. Works freaking great. Thankfully Ken is kind enough to put OT in his subject line so I don't have to plonk him completely. With these two rules and one person in the "Bozo Bin," ROFF has become much more enjoyable for me. Your really should check out MicroPlanet Gravity. It's free and has some pretty damn good features and rule making capabilities. Peekaboo, I see you! :) Wolfgang who remains unconvinced that keeping your eyes tightly closed while eating boogers is an effective method for convincing a room full of observers that you don't eat boogers. |
Tell your senators to defeat the Bush-Cheney energy bill
Don't like the pressure on our natural resourse? Then write and demand
immigratiion reform. Not Bushes either. "Thomas Gnauck" wrote in message ... Tell your senators to defeat the Bush-Cheney energy bill President Bush and his Senate allies have vowed to pass their pro-polluter energy bill into law over the next few weeks. If they succeed, this shameless package of corporate welfare will cost us $50 billion over the next decade and prolong our dangerous reliance on fossil fuels and nuclear power. That's why it is so important for you to contact your own senators right away and tell them to block this attack on our pocketbooks, our environment, and our health. Put your fingers to work: http://www.savebiogems.org/takeaction.asp?src=RR0401 it takes 2 seconds to fill out you never know, it might actually change some views. fish on t. |
Tell your senators to defeat the Bush-Cheney energy bill
gary wrote [sic]:
Don't like the pressure on our natural resourse? Then write and demand immigratiion reform. Not Bushes either. Thanks, Gary, but I've already written and demanded that troglodyte racist ****heads not be allowed to fish, hunt, pick their noses, defecate, or breathe anywhere near any of our natural resources. I figure that should leave LOTS of room for the rest of us. JR |
Tell your senators to defeat the Bush-Cheney energy bill
JR wrote:
gary wrote [sic]: Don't like the pressure on our natural resourse? Then write and demand immigratiion reform. Not Bushes either. Thanks, Gary, but I've already written and demanded that troglodyte racist ****heads not be allowed to fish, hunt, pick their noses, defecate, or breathe anywhere near any of our natural resources. I figure that should leave LOTS of room for the rest of us. Wouldn't it be pretty to think so, but I'm afraid there are more racist scum like gary than you'd imagine. They don't crawl out from under their rocks very often, but still they lie buried in the filth of the American psyche festering and oozing in the pus of their hate-filled ignorance. -- Ken Fortenberry |
Tell your senators to defeat the Bush-Cheney energy bill
"Wolfgang" wrote... "Warren" wrote... net wrote... Great term Warren, I'll remember it. Since I've been in the habit of kill filing muskie's new addresses as soon as he posts sometj=hing, I might have missed this from long ago. Actually, I see very little of Ken and none of Muskie no matter what name he uses. I created these rules with my news reader so that any posts that are cross posted to more than two groups are ignored and threads with OT in the subject that have Forty as the author are marked as ignored. Works freaking great. Thankfully Ken is kind enough to put OT in his subject line so I don't have to plonk him completely. With these two rules and one person in the "Bozo Bin," ROFF has become much more enjoyable for me. Your really should check out MicroPlanet Gravity. It's free and has some pretty damn good features and rule making capabilities. Peekaboo, I see you! :) Wolfgang who remains unconvinced that keeping your eyes tightly closed while eating boogers is an effective method for convincing a room full of observers that you don't eat boogers. I really don't have anything to add, but I thought Warren should read this. :))) -- TL, Tim ------------------------ http://css.sbcma.com/timj |
Tell your senators to defeat the Bush-Cheney energy bill
On Fri, 30 Jan 2004 16:05:58 GMT, Ken Fortenberry
wrote: JR wrote: gary wrote [sic]: Don't like the pressure on our natural resourse? Then write and demand immigratiion reform. Not Bushes either. Thanks, Gary, but I've already written and demanded that troglodyte racist ****heads not be allowed to fish, hunt, pick their noses, defecate, or breathe anywhere near any of our natural resources. I figure that should leave LOTS of room for the rest of us. Wouldn't it be pretty to think so, but I'm afraid there are more racist scum like gary than you'd imagine. They don't crawl out from under their rocks very often, but still they lie buried in the filth of the American psyche festering and oozing in the pus of their hate-filled ignorance. how is asking for immgration reform racist? |
Tell your senators to defeat the Bush-Cheney energy bill
bones wrote in news:2e2l10ll45ul0tc3m0d957hf0thsu2ti12@
4ax.com: On Fri, 30 Jan 2004 16:05:58 GMT, Ken Fortenberry wrote: JR wrote: gary wrote [sic]: Don't like the pressure on our natural resourse? Then write and demand immigratiion reform. Not Bushes either. Thanks, Gary, but I've already written and demanded that troglodyte racist ****heads not be allowed to fish, hunt, pick their noses, defecate, or breathe anywhere near any of our natural resources. I figure that should leave LOTS of room for the rest of us. Wouldn't it be pretty to think so, but I'm afraid there are more racist scum like gary than you'd imagine. They don't crawl out from under their rocks very often, but still they lie buried in the filth of the American psyche festering and oozing in the pus of their hate-filled ignorance. how is asking for immgration reform racist? Asking for immigration reform is not, in itself, racists. Linking it to natural resource use, though, is an interesting link. The more problems a person tends to blame on "them", the more questionable the motivation Scott |
Tell your senators to defeat the Bush-Cheney energy bill
Scott Seidman wrote:
bones wrote in news:2e2l10ll45ul0tc3m0d957hf0thsu2ti12@ 4ax.com: Asking for immigration reform is not, in itself, racists. Linking it to natural resource use, though, is an interesting link. It's a natural and appropriate link. Natural resource use is directly related to population growth. Immigration (legal and illegal) is the major source of population growth in the US. The more problems a person tends to blame on "them", the more questionable the motivation My opinion, FWIW, is that our population (meaning the US, in this case) is large enough. In fact, it's too large already. If that makes me a racist in anyone's opinion, **** them. -- Cut "to the chase" for my email address. |
Tell your senators to defeat the Bush-Cheney energy bill
bones wrote:
On Fri, 30 Jan 2004 16:05:58 GMT, Ken Fortenberry wrote: JR wrote: gary wrote [sic]: Don't like the pressure on our natural resourse? Then write and demand immigratiion reform. Not Bushes either. Thanks, Gary, but I've already written and demanded that troglodyte racist ****heads not be allowed to fish, hunt, pick their noses, defecate, or breathe anywhere near any of our natural resources. I figure that should leave LOTS of room for the rest of us. Wouldn't it be pretty to think so, but I'm afraid there are more racist scum like gary than you'd imagine. They don't crawl out from under their rocks very often, but still they lie buried in the filth of the American psyche festering and oozing in the pus of their hate-filled ignorance. how is asking for immgration reform racist? "Immigration Reform" on the face of it, is no more racist than "State's Rights" but both are codewords for a racist agenda and I don't make a distinction between those who espouse a racist agenda and racists. When you conflate "Immigration Reform" with overpopulation, you're a racist. Period, end of paragraph. There's gonna be a hell of fight in the Sierra Club over this. If you're a member of the Sierra Club, and not a racist or a misguided fool pursuing a racist agenda, please, PLEASE vote in the April elections. -- Ken Fortenberry |
Tell your senators to defeat the Bush-Cheney energy bill
On 30 Jan 2004 16:53:54 GMT, Scott Seidman
wrote: bones wrote in news:2e2l10ll45ul0tc3m0d957hf0thsu2ti12@ 4ax.com: On Fri, 30 Jan 2004 16:05:58 GMT, Ken Fortenberry wrote: JR wrote: gary wrote [sic]: Don't like the pressure on our natural resourse? Then write and demand immigratiion reform. Not Bushes either. Thanks, Gary, but I've already written and demanded that troglodyte racist ****heads not be allowed to fish, hunt, pick their noses, defecate, or breathe anywhere near any of our natural resources. I figure that should leave LOTS of room for the rest of us. Wouldn't it be pretty to think so, but I'm afraid there are more racist scum like gary than you'd imagine. They don't crawl out from under their rocks very often, but still they lie buried in the filth of the American psyche festering and oozing in the pus of their hate-filled ignorance. how is asking for immgration reform racist? Asking for immigration reform is not, in itself, racists. Linking it to natural resource use, though, is an interesting link. The more problems a person tends to blame on "them", the more questionable the motivation Scott Of what "race" are "them"? |
Tell your senators to defeat the Bush-Cheney energy bill
On Fri, 30 Jan 2004 10:10:24 -0700, rw
wrote: It's a natural and appropriate link. Natural resource use is directly related to population growth. Immigration (legal and illegal) is the major source of population growth in the US. The third rail for the Sierra Club...... |
Tell your senators to defeat the Bush-Cheney energy bill
bones wrote in
: On 30 Jan 2004 16:53:54 GMT, Scott Seidman wrote: bones wrote in news:2e2l10ll45ul0tc3m0d957hf0thsu2ti12@ 4ax.com: On Fri, 30 Jan 2004 16:05:58 GMT, Ken Fortenberry wrote: JR wrote: gary wrote [sic]: Don't like the pressure on our natural resourse? Then write and demand immigratiion reform. Not Bushes either. Thanks, Gary, but I've already written and demanded that troglodyte racist ****heads not be allowed to fish, hunt, pick their noses, defecate, or breathe anywhere near any of our natural resources. I figure that should leave LOTS of room for the rest of us. Wouldn't it be pretty to think so, but I'm afraid there are more racist scum like gary than you'd imagine. They don't crawl out from under their rocks very often, but still they lie buried in the filth of the American psyche festering and oozing in the pus of their hate-filled ignorance. how is asking for immgration reform racist? Asking for immigration reform is not, in itself, racists. Linking it to natural resource use, though, is an interesting link. The more problems a person tends to blame on "them", the more questionable the motivation Scott Of what "race" are "them"? Pick your favorite. It makes little difference, so long as "them" is not "us". It's just too easy to pass the buck, and blame your situation on others. Scott |
Tell your senators to defeat the Bush-Cheney energy bill
rw wrote in
: Scott Seidman wrote: bones wrote in news:2e2l10ll45ul0tc3m0d957hf0thsu2ti12@ 4ax.com: Asking for immigration reform is not, in itself, racists. Linking it to natural resource use, though, is an interesting link. It's a natural and appropriate link. Natural resource use is directly related to population growth. Immigration (legal and illegal) is the major source of population growth in the US. The more problems a person tends to blame on "them", the more questionable the motivation My opinion, FWIW, is that our population (meaning the US, in this case) is large enough. In fact, it's too large already. If that makes me a racist in anyone's opinion, **** them. Census bureau estimates show that the natural increase (births-deaths) exceeds the net migration by more than 50%, at least between 2000 and 2001. Immigration is certainly a major player, but not --the-- major player. Given the current birth rates, the US tops the list of developed nations at 2.1 births per woman. In addition, I'm not sure that Natural resource use is directly related to population growth in the US in this global economy. Think about how much of our forests get exported. You might be able to better link natural resource use and world population, but it might not make that much of a difference where the people are actually located. I might be able to float the argument that its the rich people and corporations in the world that use much of the resources, and that poor illegals contribute more to food production than food and resource consumption. I think population growth is a problem as well. I have no kids. How many do you have? Scott |
Tell your senators to defeat the Bush-Cheney energy bill
On 30 Jan 2004 17:39:21 GMT, Scott Seidman
wrote: bones wrote in : On 30 Jan 2004 16:53:54 GMT, Scott Seidman wrote: bones wrote in news:2e2l10ll45ul0tc3m0d957hf0thsu2ti12@ 4ax.com: On Fri, 30 Jan 2004 16:05:58 GMT, Ken Fortenberry wrote: JR wrote: gary wrote [sic]: Don't like the pressure on our natural resourse? Then write and demand immigratiion reform. Not Bushes either. Thanks, Gary, but I've already written and demanded that troglodyte racist ****heads not be allowed to fish, hunt, pick their noses, defecate, or breathe anywhere near any of our natural resources. I figure that should leave LOTS of room for the rest of us. Wouldn't it be pretty to think so, but I'm afraid there are more racist scum like gary than you'd imagine. They don't crawl out from under their rocks very often, but still they lie buried in the filth of the American psyche festering and oozing in the pus of their hate-filled ignorance. how is asking for immgration reform racist? Asking for immigration reform is not, in itself, racists. Linking it to natural resource use, though, is an interesting link. The more problems a person tends to blame on "them", the more questionable the motivation Scott Of what "race" are "them"? Pick your favorite. It makes little difference, so long as "them" is not "us". It's just too easy to pass the buck, and blame your situation on others. Scott OK........ all illegal immagrants... how is that racist ? |
Tell your senators to defeat the Bush-Cheney energy bill
rw wrote:
Scott Seidman wrote: Asking for immigration reform is not, in itself, racists. Linking it to natural resource use, though, is an interesting link. It's a natural and appropriate link. Natural resource use is directly related to population growth. Immigration (legal and illegal) is the major source of population growth in the US. Waste and selfishness are directly related to natural resource use too, and immigration is not the only source (or even the only "major" source) of population growth. What's not racist is: "Don't like pressure on natural resources? Combating ignorance, waste, corporate greed, government policies that discourage conservation, and population growth is the answer." "Don't like pressure on natural resources? Write and demand immigration reform!" is code, pure and simple. It means exactly the same thing as: "Don't like crowded classrooms? Demand immigration reform!" "Don't like people using government services but not paying their taxes? Demand immigration reform!" "Don't like crime and drugs? Demand immigration reform!" It's disingenuous BS spewn by those racists who haven't got the balls to speak what's really on their minds. JR |
Tell your senators to defeat the Bush-Cheney energy bill
In article , JR wrote:
gary wrote [sic]: Don't like the pressure on our natural resourse? Then write and demand immigratiion reform. Not Bushes either. Thanks, Gary, but I've already written and demanded that troglodyte racist ****heads not be allowed to fish, hunt, pick their noses, defecate, or breathe anywhere near any of our natural resources. I figure that should leave LOTS of room for the rest of us. Please explain how immigration reform is racist? If you are from mexico and have a green card and are working legally, great. If you are from England and working illegally, you should be sent back to England. I never understand how Mexican oranizations are for illegal immigrants to flagrantly disregard the law. Do you see people against Mexican's who have legally followed the law and have a green card working here? I havent. It all about those who break the law. -- "Those that would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither liberty nor security." T. Jefferson "Those who are ready to sacrifice freedom for security ultimately will lose both" - Abraham Lincoln |
Tell your senators to defeat the Bush-Cheney energy bill
steve sullivan wrote:
Do you see people against Mexican's who have legally followed the law and have a green card working here? I havent. It all about those who break the law. Friend, if you believe there aren't millions of people "against" Mexicans with legal green cards, and even against legal immigrants who are now U.S. citizens, then your grasp on reality is as shaky as your understanding of the use of the apostrophe. JR |
Tell your senators to defeat the Bush-Cheney energy bill
Scott Seidman wrote:
Census bureau estimates show that the natural increase (births-deaths) exceeds the net migration by more than 50%, at least between 2000 and 2001. Immigration is certainly a major player, but not --the-- major player. Given the current birth rates, the US tops the list of developed nations at 2.1 births per woman. U.S. fertility is slightly less than replacement level and has not exceeded replacement level since 1972. In fact, immigration is BY FAR the most important factor in US population growth. This web site presents what I think is a fair and responsible overview of the problem: http://www.susps.org/overview/immigration.html In addition, I'm not sure that Natural resource use is directly related to population growth in the US in this global economy. Think about how much of our forests get exported. You might be able to better link natural resource use and world population, but it might not make that much of a difference where the people are actually located. I might be able to float the argument that its the rich people and corporations in the world that use much of the resources, and that poor illegals contribute more to food production than food and resource consumption. Just because I'm concerned about population growth in the US, that doesn't mean I think that world-wide population growth isn't a problem. I think population growth is a problem as well. I have no kids. How many do you have? I have two children. Does that make me less qualified than you to have an opinion? Clearly, immigration is a hot-button issue. Some racists use "immigration reform" as a code word for a racist agenda. That doesn't mean that everyone who is concerned about immigration policy a racist. It seems like even the mention of immigration as a problem has become an offense to political correctness. That sucks. -- Cut "to the chase" for my email address. |
Tell your senators to defeat the Bush-Cheney energy bill
Wow is there nothing you guys won't bite on?
I posted the link as a little penence for driving my F250 diesel the whopping 1.3 miles to my place of work. like it or not everybody plays on both sides of the energy debate I guess I can take comfort in the fact that you guys are stuck inside typing and not out clogging a river somewhere gone fishin' t. |
Tell your senators to defeat the Bush-Cheney energy bill
rw wrote:
This web site presents what I think is a fair and responsible overview of the problem: http://www.susps.org/overview/immigration.html A fair and responsible (and impartial) overview of the *situation* is more likely to be had--and less likely to be based on skewed "statistics"--from a group that hasn't already decided that the situation, whatever it is, is a *problem* to be labeled (as in their graphic on the site you posted) "Our lost future". JR (who nevertheless admires the fair and responsible color scheme of said graphic) |
Tell your senators to defeat the Bush-Cheney energy bill
rw wrote:
I have two children. Does that make me less qualified than you to have an opinion? Heavens no. But like being a Californian muttering "I got mine" all the way to the Idaho idyll, it's got a certain trout-in-the-milk quality to it. JR |
Tell your senators to defeat the Bush-Cheney energy bill
Ken Fortenberry wrote: "Immigration Reform" on the face of it, is no more racist than "State's Rights" but both are codewords for a racist agenda and I don't make a distinction between those who espouse a racist agenda and racists. When you conflate "Immigration Reform" with overpopulation, you're a racist. Period, end of paragraph. That's an illogical statement. Although racists can and do make statements linking immigration to our population growth, it's illogical to assume the converse - that someone linking immigration to population growth is a racist. Willi |
Tell your senators to defeat the Bush-Cheney energy bill
rw wrote:
... This web site presents what I think is a fair and responsible overview of the problem: http://www.susps.org/overview/immigration.html ... Nobody within twenty miles of a clue has cited the thoroughly discredited Paul Ehrlich for years now. Your "fair and responsible overview" is crap. Try here instead: http://www.overpopulation.com/ -- Ken Fortenberry |
Tell your senators to defeat the Bush-Cheney energy bill
JR wrote:
rw wrote: I have two children. Does that make me less qualified than you to have an opinion? Heavens no. But like being a Californian muttering "I got mine" all the way to the Idaho idyll, it's got a certain trout-in-the-milk quality to it. When someone resorts to ad hominem arguments and cries of "racism," that's a pretty good indication that they have nothing meaningful to say. -- Cut "to the chase" for my email address. |
Tell your senators to defeat the Bush-Cheney energy bill
Willi wrote:
Ken Fortenberry wrote: "Immigration Reform" on the face of it, is no more racist than "State's Rights" but both are codewords for a racist agenda and I don't make a distinction between those who espouse a racist agenda and racists. When you conflate "Immigration Reform" with overpopulation, you're a racist. Period, end of paragraph. That's an illogical statement. Although racists can and do make statements linking immigration to our population growth, it's illogical to assume the converse - that someone linking immigration to population growth is a racist. Don't change the argument. "Overpopulation" does not equal "population growth". If all those icky brown people stay on their side of an imaginary and totally arbitrary line, the world will be neither more nor less "overpopulated". And anybody who tells you different is a racist. -- Ken Fortenberry |
Tell your senators to defeat the Bush-Cheney energy bill
JR wrote:
rw wrote: This web site presents what I think is a fair and responsible overview of the problem: http://www.susps.org/overview/immigration.html A fair and responsible (and impartial) overview of the *situation* is more likely to be had--and less likely to be based on skewed "statistics"--from a group that hasn't already decided that the situation, whatever it is, is a *problem* to be labeled (as in their graphic on the site you posted) "Our lost future". JR (who nevertheless admires the fair and responsible color scheme of said graphic) I never said the web site was impartial. They have a position and they are trying, responsibly IMO, to support it. What statistics that they use are skewed? Are they "skewed" merely because they don't support your position? A mere assertion on your part carries considerably less weight than what appears to me to be a well researched and documented position by the SUSPS. -- Cut "to the chase" for my email address. |
Tell your senators to defeat the Bush-Cheney energy bill
Ken Fortenberry wrote:
Try here instead: http://www.overpopulation.com/ I did. I saw absolutely nothing about immigration and its affect on US population growth. -- Cut "to the chase" for my email address. |
Tell your senators to defeat the Bush-Cheney energy bill
rw wrote in news:401ab0fb$0$165
: Ken Fortenberry wrote: Try here instead: http://www.overpopulation.com/ I did. I saw absolutely nothing about immigration and its affect on US population growth. Then try he http://www.ameristat.org/Content/Nav...Population_Bul letin2/57.4_USPopulationFINAL.pdf |
Tell your senators to defeat the Bush-Cheney energy bill
rw wrote: Ken Fortenberry wrote: Try here instead: http://www.overpopulation.com/ I did. I saw absolutely nothing about immigration and its affect on US population growth. This is the only statement on the site that I could find that addressed this issue: "The United States seems likely to maintain its middle road and continued world dominance. Unlike Europe, the U.S. total fertility rate hovers above 2.1 and it continues to accept more immigrants than any other nation. As a a result, the U.S. population will likely increase by another 100 million people in the 21st century." Maybe Ken interprets that differently than I do? Willi |
Tell your senators to defeat the Bush-Cheney energy bill
rw wrote in news:401ab05f$0$165
: A mere assertion on your part carries considerably less weight than what appears to me to be a well researched and documented position by the SUSPS. -- Cut "to the chase" for my email address. A graph that is almost 2/3 extrapolated data is hardly ever found in a well researched document. Keep in mind that if this graph actually displayed the descendants of immigrants in red, it would be all red. Scott |
Tell your senators to defeat the Bush-Cheney energy bill
Scott Seidman wrote:
rw wrote in news:401ab05f$0$165 : A mere assertion on your part carries considerably less weight than what appears to me to be a well researched and documented position by the SUSPS. -- Cut "to the chase" for my email address. A graph that is almost 2/3 extrapolated data is hardly ever found in a well researched document. Maybe you could explain how it's possible to project population growth up to 2050 without extrapolation. -- Cut "to the chase" for my email address. |
Tell your senators to defeat the Bush-Cheney energy bill
Scott Seidman wrote:
rw wrote in news:401ab0fb$0$165 : Ken Fortenberry wrote: Try here instead: http://www.overpopulation.com/ I did. I saw absolutely nothing about immigration and its affect on US population growth. Then try he http://www.ameristat.org/Content/Nav...Population_Bul letin2/57.4_USPopulationFINAL.pdf Sorry. That URL is too long. :-) -- Cut "to the chase" for my email address. |
Tell your senators to defeat the Bush-Cheney energy bill
"Scott Seidman" wrote in message . 1.4... rw wrote in : SNIP In addition, I'm not sure that Natural resource use is directly related to population growth in the US in this global economy. Think about how much of our forests get exported. You might be able to better link natural resource use and world population, but it might not make that much of a difference where the people are actually located. SNIP Scott Actually we are importing 30-40% of the wood products we use, while exporting less than 8.25% of the wood we harvest, despite the fact that total growth of wood in our forests exceeds our total current usage. -- Bob Weinberger Forest Management Consulting |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:35 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2006 FishingBanter