More Eco scaremongering crap.

I was on facebook and one of my liberal friends posted the link for this article from the houston chronicle:
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/7261371.html

I got finished with it and the first thought that came to mind was a sarcastic one "nigga, please!"[and if you start that political correctness crap and say I'm racist I will smack the crap out of you. *I* am color blind]
Just for sheer entertainment and aggravation value..lets play the cut and paste game...my response will be in italics this time boys and girls:

Q. Do you still feel like humans are close to triggering another great extinction?

A. I'm afraid so. I will talk a little bit about that in Houston. I'm also, at the moment, talking with various colleagues about the possibility of doing a big film like Al Gore's film, An Inconvenient Truth. It would be on this extinction and dealing with the whole human population and what we're just doing to the habitat because of our numbers.

Oh really? Because we're doing what [if you believe in the bible] the lord told us to do? "Be fruitful and multiply" Hmmm..yep that was what he done told us to do and that's what we've BEEN doing. Now if your not into religion here's a newsflash..we're following a natural progression..we're made to procreate, to multiply. So denying our NATURE, our genetic predispostion, the genetic imperative[not to mention the genetic imperative of EVERY, SINGLE LIVING THING on this planet] to multiply, to spread our genes..is the answer? Really doc? you are a conceited ass.

Q. Al Gore's film had a policy objective, capping carbon dioxide emissions. If you were to do a similar film for conservation efforts, what would your policy objective be?

A. It's hard to say because the film isn't written, but waste is an important aspect people can address, wasting of resources. I think also smaller families to address population. I think population size is something we've got to address, and I think people have got to be persuaded this is a serious issue. We have had mega-extinctions before, where 70 to 80 percent of the population has disappeared, and there's no reason to suppose we're not into another one. We're not far away from that number today. We're losing species in numbers that simply aren't sustainable.

Al Gore's film didn't just have a *policy* objective, it was a fear mongering, propagandist pile of steaming dogshit. Based on lies and damned lies To think that humans can alter the temperature of so large a thing as our biosphere is the very height of arrogance.The temperature is regulated by water, and that big heat radiating ball of light in our sky. Perhaps you've heard of it? It's called the Sun? Asshat.

Q. How is humanity triggering an extinction?

A. We're reaching a point today where the loss of species today is exceeding the loss of species when the dinosaurs were taken out. This would have catastrophic implications for the loss of life, not necessarily our life, but the life we see on the planet upon which we are dependent for many things — pharmacology, agriculture and things of that kind.

Wrong. If something becomes extinct something ELSE will fill in the gap. It's a function of natural selection.

Q. Some people say, "Well what of it? Humans are on top of the food chain, so does it really matter?"

A. I think that's an arrogant viewpoint, and I think it misrepresents what the food chain really is. We are on the top, but the food chain has a long line behind it, and we haven't figured out things at the end of the food chain, like bacteria and viruses and what they could do if stimulated or if the food chain is shaken up. I think we ought to be a little more reasoned in our consideration of these things.

No doc..YOU are the arrogant one. if the food chain is "shaken up" as you put it, life..WE will adapt. Again..it's happened before. We just adapt better than probably any other organism on the planet.

Q. In the last decade there's been a lot of talk about climate change. Has that message swamped the conservation message, or can the two issues work together?

A. Well I think they're very much two parts of the same thing, and I think maybe the conservation message was prematurely presented on its own and maybe should have been presented as part of a bigger picture. Without habitat conservation, without recognizing the importance of water and ecosystems, no amount of good effort except putting animals behind bars is going to help.

Why yes doctor..they ARE the same thing. A complete crock of shit. Both issues are fear mongering, working, or rather being worked, or milked if you prefer for one purpose. So a certain type/group of people can take complete and total control. Make us other than what we are Make us slaves. thank you..but no thank you.

Q. Can you give me an example or two of conservation issues that really trouble you?

A. Look at the fish stocks. We've basically cleaned out the sea, in relation to commercial species and numbers that would make them commercially viable. In inland waterways we've poisoned them with mercury and other things to the point where we can't eat them. I think we're setting up for a fall with our constant use of antibiotics and antiviral medicines for plants and animals. Sooner or later something's going to get a resistance, and you could wipe out the chickens of the world. Or you could wipe out wheat or rice. Then you're not talking about the United States, you're talking about the globe with 6 or 7 billion people.

Dear Lord I hate this intellectually disingenuous crap. Yes..it's likely pumping all those anti bacterials will backfire eventually. I won't dispute that one because I think it's true. however I want you to think on this one boys and girls. Do you honestly think those antibacterials are for the cow or the chickens benefit? Nope they're for ours. We ingest those and they make our systems stronger. give a boost to our systems. Which in turn and as a by product gives us a longer life span. Something the people like Doc Leakey will fail to mention. Again let me say..yes I think this will backfire on us one day, some super bug will wipe out a good chunk of the population and we'll start over again. But AGAIN it's a function of natural selection. It happens all the time. If the chicken is made extinct by some bug..*shrug* eat more turkey.

Q. Are there any hopeful signs out there in conservation of species or nature?

A. I think minor efforts show that some species can be brought back from the brink. We have certainly, in my lifetime, seen great improvements to environmental management in big cities, particularly in developed countries. But as you know, it's not just the developed countries we have to worry about, and that's the hard

Sigh..by bringing them back from the brink you're jacking with mother nature...mother nature doesn't like her plans pissed on. Keep in mind people..this planet tries to kill us in myriad number of ways. Every. Single. Day. Bacteria, Virii, Earthquakes, Hurricanes, Floods, Mudslides, Heavy Snowfall, Volcanoes, Tsunamis..etc etc ad nauseum. So WHY for crying out loud, does a certain subset of the human species insist on feeling guilty for surviving everything the universe can throw at us? If you people really feel that guilty and want to atone for it...fine go drink your arsenic laced kool-aid, or your strychnine laced food or whatever, drop dead and leave the rest of us to do what we were meant to do. Survive, be fruitful and multiply. To do what every other living organism on this rock floating in space does...to LIVE!!!

Okay it's 2 in the mornin. Da Curly one is gonna go answer morpheus' call now. nighty night Don't let the bed bugs bite.

I now return you to your regularly scheduled inanity and insanity.