Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Mining Concerns Take Precedence Over a Valuable Natural Resource

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Jutland View Post

    Haha well slapped!!!
    No slap intended. Just information.
    Conservatives in the U.S. won't be happy until Jim Crow returns and "White Heterosexual Only" signs are legalized.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Anthrax View Post
      According to that, a group of different interests who know little or nothing about current mining practice are opposed on the basis of proof of a negative and evidence that's as much as 75 years out of date. Mining practices of the 50's and 60's can hardly be pointed to as what mining practice is now. Citing them, as if nothing in the mining industry has changed in that time, just makes those doing it look stupid.

      The last people I'd listen to on any subject dealing with the environment is environmental interest groups. The fishermen may have an argument, but the environmentalists only have an agenda. Here's a former CEO of Greenpeace and one of it's founders saying so.



      So, mine = bad is nonsense. Mining is a necessity if we want to live in an industrialized and technically advanced world.

      Comment


      • #18
        Its the end of days

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post



          So, mine = bad is nonsense. Mining is a necessity if we want to live in an industrialized and technically advanced world.
          Well known lobbyist.

          He has pretty much no credibility after the fertiliser incident....

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Jutland View Post

            Well known lobbyist.

            He has pretty much no credibility after the fertiliser incident....
            Not much of a rebuttal. An ad hominem. I have no idea what the fertilizer (sic) incident is and you didn't bother to explain doesn't make it any better.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post

              Not much of a rebuttal. An ad hominem. I have no idea what the fertilizer (sic) incident is and you didn't bother to explain doesn't make it any better.
              You should look it up, it's funny.

              Also when you use somebody as a source you really should know their background, potential conficts of interest or if they have already burned their credibility.

              You haven't in this case and nobody here is surprised.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Jutland View Post

                You should look it up, it's funny.

                Also when you use somebody as a source you really should know their background, potential conficts of interest or if they have already burned their credibility.

                You haven't in this case and nobody here is surprised.
                Just doing this quick with wiki:

                According to Greenpeace, Moore is "a paid spokesman for the nuclear industry, the logging industry, and genetic engineering industry"
                I think we need more nuclear power so that's a good thing. If we had more in the US we could reduce CO2 and wouldn't be wasting our time chasing stupidities like solar and wind.

                Logging? Done responsibly and sustainably it's a necessary and useful industry. https://us.fsc.org/en-us

                Genetic engineering? How do you think our ancestors got better and better strains of grains and domesticated animals, by divine providence? They did basic genetic engineering through selective breeding and cross breeding. That labs now can do this far more efficiently doesn't make genetic engineering all some sort of evil.

                When environ mental groups do BS like this (I'm using an example I'm familiar with)



                https://ejatlas.org/conflict/fukushima

                http://ecosocialismcanada.blogspot.c...a-nuclear.html

                Note that the photo is not the Fukushima nuclear plant, has NOTHING to do with it, but is used repeatedly on environmental sites to show the dangers of nuclear power... This is typical of these groups. Their members are mostly scientific illiterates with a political agenda.

                But, what I guess eats at you is he isn't politically aligned the way you'd like. I have no issues with using him as a source. As for the fertilizer incident you mentioned, I can't find anything on that right off, so you need to provide some sourcing for that.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Nichols View Post
                  Whenever the MSM only gives unnamed sources as sources....the validity of the story needs to be called into question.
                  Not just the MSM. I am highly sceptical of any article on any medium with unnamed sources making claims.
                  ScenShare Guidelines:

                  1) Enjoy creating it
                  2) Enjoy playing it
                  3) Enjoy sharing it
                  4) Enjoy helping others create them

                  The PlayersDB - The Harpoon Community's #1 Choice.

                  FAQ http://www.harplonkhq.com/Harpoon/Fr...dQuestions.htm

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post

                    Just doing this quick with wiki:
                    So you didn't check him up first check.


                    Originally posted by T. A. Gardner
                    But, what I guess eats at you is he isn't politically aligned the way you'd like. I have no issues with using him as a source. As for the fertilizer incident you mentioned, I can't find anything on that right off, so you need to provide some sourcing for that.
                    The Fertiliser Incident is reported in the Wikipedia entry you used to get your information on your source....my 7 year old niece can properly read a Wikipedia article blog but you can't.
                    Last edited by Jutland; 11 Aug 19, 11:12.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Nichols View Post

                      You figured wrong again. I asked a simple question regarding due diligence. Whenever the MSM only gives unnamed sources as sources....the validity of the story needs to be called into question.

                      If someone is offended because I question CNN's unnamed 'facts'.....there is nothing that I can do about it.
                      You didn't listen to the report. Many source that were quoted didn't you comprehend?
                      "Ask not what your country can do for you"

                      Left wing, Right Wing same bird that they are killing.

                      you’re entitled to your own opinion but not your own facts.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post

                        Mining is a necessity if we want to live in an industrialized and technically advanced world.
                        No, it isn't. And if the price is the destruction of a natural resource, then it is wrong.

                        We are not now that strength which in old days
                        Moved earth and heaven; that which we are we are; One equal temper of heroic hearts
                        Made weak by time and fate but strong in will
                        To strive to seek to find and not to yield.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Half Pint John View Post

                          You didn't listen to the report. Many source that were quoted didn't you comprehend?
                          I read the report and I comprehend the report. You can't blame me for doubting what CNN reports. Unnamed sources does not make it a fact.
                          "I don't discuss sitting presidents," Mattis tells NPR in an interview. "I believe that you owe a period of quiet."

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Nichols View Post

                            I read the report and I comprehend the report. You can't blame me for doubting what CNN reports. Unnamed sources does not make it a fact.
                            It is quite clear that if Trump wants it, you support it.
                            We are not now that strength which in old days
                            Moved earth and heaven; that which we are we are; One equal temper of heroic hearts
                            Made weak by time and fate but strong in will
                            To strive to seek to find and not to yield.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              A general warning to all posting in this thread:

                              Drop the personal commenting. Address the post and not the poster.

                              Going forwards comments directed against the poster will be removed. Repeat offenders will have their posting privileges curtailed.

                              Thank you

                              ACG Staff

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Jutland View Post

                                So you didn't check him up first check.
                                An irrelevant appeal in the form of an ad hominem. Doesn't matter if I did or not. You brought up objections, and I responded to them. Responding in the way you have amounts to a variant of the Tu Quoque fallacy.

                                The Fertiliser Incident is reported in the Wikipedia entry you used to get your information on your source....my 7 year old niece can properly read a Wikipedia article blog but you can't.
                                No, it's not. I re-read the entry twice to find it. There is nothing about fertiliser (sic) in the entry. And, the gratuitous ad hominem is unnecessary.

                                There's the link:

                                https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrick_Moore_(consultant)

                                Quote the section you claim to refer to.

                                Comment

                                Latest Topics

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X