edgar...we all know KG has his finger on the pulse..but sometimes as in this
instant it may have slipped..he's trying too too hard...and is getting dizzy in
the process of his finger work..it requires a steady hand and a strong loving
heart to see ALL..
. KG might be mis interpreting here merely for the sake of winning points..merle
Merle,
Yes, KG seems obsessively attached to this discussion and why destroying the
planet is OK...
:-)
Edgar
On Oct 10, 2012, at 5:56 PM, Merle Lester wrote:
>
>
>
>
> hey hey lads...settle down..calm please!...KG your loosing the pulse..merle
>
>
>
>Yes, yes. That you hold a great many things to be of high importance is
>obvious to all but you. Thus you assume others are are talking about such
>things, and assume they are ignorant of same, when they are only talking about
>your ignorant attachments to these forms of divisive thinking.
>
>KG
>
>On 10/10/2012 11:27 AM, Edgar Owen wrote:
>
>
>>KG,
>>
>>
>>I find it appalling you support the destruction of the planet by humans and
>>attack those who argue against it...
>>
>>
>>The lowest of the low...
>>
>>
>>Edgar
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>On Oct 10, 2012, at 10:52 AM, Kristopher Grey wrote:
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Definitive dependency - in other words you frame this in a self-supporting
>>>way. The way a child argues when trying to sound all grown up. You might as
>>>well just say:
>>>
>>>"You are a stupid baby! Stop being such a stupid
baby!" *L*
>>>
>>>No one is denying 'reality' but you Edgar. You
are perverting others words to fit your
preconceptions. You frame things as being out of
control/needing to be controlled - which is the
very divisive attitude that causes all the shit
you find so wrong in the world.
>>>
>>>Opposition distracts.
>>>
>>>KG
>>>
>>>
>>>On 10/10/2012 6:47 AM, Edgar Owen wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Bill,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>By your perverted logic it is totally OK for man to be destroying the
>>>>planet because that's just a natural process.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Grow up and get real. Zen is not clever sophisms, it's reality...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Edgar
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>On Oct 10, 2012, at 6:20 AM, Bill! wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Edgar,
>>>>>
>>>>>What's REALLY important is that
it's been framed wrong. It's been
framed as humans vs. nature, or as
you put it humans 'interfering' in
nature. As long as humans think
they are not part of nature and
taht all their action are natural
there will be this problem.
>>>>>
>>>>>When a beaver builds a dam is that
interfering with nature? When a
squirrel shits in the woods is
that interfering with nature? When
a human splits an atom is that
interfering with nature? When a
human manipulates DNA is that
interfering with nature?
>>>>>
>>>>>What is the quality that humans
have that other animals don't have
that renders them capable of
interference - IYO? (I just made
that up, IYO = 'in your opinion')
>>>>>
>>>>>...Bill!
>>>>>
>>>>>--- In [email protected], Edgar Owen <edgarowen@...> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Come on Bill.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In human discourse about
Man's impact on nature, that's the
way it's defined, and the whole
issue is framed, as you well
know...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Edgar
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Oct 9, 2012, at 8:45 PM,
Bill! wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> > Edgar,
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > This was a VERY SERIOUS
response.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Why is it that you think
the things that humans do are
'unnatural' or against nature but
the things that other life does is
'natural' and okay? A friend of
mine very wisely (IMO)once
suggested that all ethics should
be applied to humans and other
life forms equally.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > What is the quality that
you believe separates humans from
the rest of nature so that human
activities and artifacts can be
labeled as 'interference'?
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > ...Bill!
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > --- In [email protected], Edgar Owen <edgarowen@> wrote:
>>>>>> > >
>>>>>> > > Joe,
>>>>>> > >
>>>>>> > > Come on, it's a
serious issue...
>>>>>> > >
>>>>>> > > Edgar
>>>>>> > >
>>>>>> > >
>>>>>> > > On Oct 9, 2012, at
11:26 AM, Joe wrote:
>>>>>> > >
>>>>>> > > > Edgar,
>>>>>> > > >
>>>>>> > > > And Humans are
just the tip of the iceberg, too.
>>>>>> > > >
>>>>>> > > > I don't know
why plants and animals insist on
interfering with the way Nature
works.
>>>>>> > > >
>>>>>> > > > For example,
on the early earth there was a
nice atmosphere without oxygen.
But blasted Cyanobacteria evolved
which like to sip the methane and
other gases there were back then,
and started polluting the
atmosphere with ...Oxygen!
>>>>>> > > >
>>>>>> > > > Then --
wouldn't you know -- other
organisms formed which turned CO2
into even MORE Oxygen, with a help
from light from the Sun. The
nerve! They got away with it,
though, because there were no
Police. The rug was pulled out
from under Nature yet again!
>>>>>> > > >
>>>>>> > > > Later, some
animals evolved, which USE the
oxygen.
>>>>>> > > >
>>>>>> > > > Much later,
some of these animals of the
Mammal variety called "Beavers"
began to INSIST that they
interfere with the stately FLOW of
river tributaries and streams, by
...damming them up! Such nerve.
You may be sure that this caused
inundations upstream, and
occasional floods downstream when
the dams burst. Havoc. Bye, bye,
Nature!
>>>>>> > > >
>>>>>> > > > The nerve of
these organisms: Micro-organisms,
Plants, and Animals. Always
interfering with the way Nature
works!
>>>>>> > > >
>>>>>> > > > At least on
the Moon there is no such
interference, there's just a
continual, thin, rain of
meteorites pummeling the surface,
and no atmosphere to make things
rust.
>>>>>> > > >
>>>>>> > > > Oops!, some
exotic Mammals left some
footprints on the Moon, and some
machinery, during the last fifty
years. WHY must there always be
such interference? The Moon had
been Nature's nice, quiet, haven
for rock and dust for so long. Why
must things always go downhill?
>>>>>> > > >
>>>>>> > > > --Joe
>>>>>> > > >
>>>>>> > > > > On
10/7/2012 9:26 PM, Edgar Owen
wrote:
>>>>>> > > >
>>>>>> > > > > > Why
do humans always insist on
interfering with the way nature
works?
>>>>>> > > >
>>>>>> > > >
>>>>>> > >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
