• We are looking for you!
    Always wanted to join our Supporting Team? We are looking for enthusiastic moderators!
    Take a look at our recruitement page for more information and how you can apply:
    Apply

Georgia Guidstones

DeletedUser

Okay I am back in lol....
Mission success :D We still have a whole four pages of love to share :p%

A christian slur? I was first in line for the boycotts. The money here does not say in Gods we trust. It is in God we trust. It is not one nation under Gods. It is one nation under God. This is just another example of the twisting. Americans, the Ronald Reagan loving, all about freedom, my kind of people Americans are not going to stand for being told how many babies we can have. What kind of cars to drive, how to think, speak, feel, or act. I will be the first one with a gun and torch when the Europe loving, mass transit hugging, it is a liberal planet and you non liberals are just guest here thinking, people try to impose your views.

It was an example and stated as such. If the people will rebel, and the government knows this they will not push it. They know their limits. Look at Obama care lol that is not doing so well. You think they are upset about being told they must have insurance cuz the government said so. Try telling them (us) about how many kids we can have. You will be burned at the stake.... I, me, will not be joining anyone who tries this... as I do not wish to be burned along with them. I will be one of the burners lol and not one of those being burned.
Hehe, it was just a tad ironic you just chose burning at the stake as your imagery around something involving Christianity. I really wasn't sure where you were going with this next one, although your comparison to Obama's health care sold me there. One does not simply force an idea upon America, for the better or worse. Just another reason why good ol' science, and those (generally) smart scientists behind it, are going to need to bail us out :)

lol doing a jarp is not citing things. It is citing the obvious that does not need to be cited. It is being ask for references and proof that 1 + 1 = 2.... And that electric cars do not need to be charged. And that when your batteries in your electric car are out, they can be recharged just as fast as I can fill my gas tank. And to show that an electric car can not pull a boat or camper or U-haul trailer like a gas engine can. And to be asked to prove that an extra load does not drain batteries at an alarming rate and kind of defeats the purpose and argument for having you.

Here is a little experiment you can try at home kids. Take a 2 of the same portable TV/DVD player and watch TV on one and DVDs on the other. Then see which ones drain the batteries first. Enough cited!
Enough cited? You have me in stitches :p

I'm not going to question there is no electric car in mass production today that can recharge faster than a regular car can refuel. I am going to question your preconceived notion that only cars fully powered by internal combustion engines can be practical in every day society. I'm going to take two stabs at proving it:

For me, and many other city dwellers, an average commute is driving through a few back streets, onto the main rood and then several clicks down the main road. Particularly for families fortunate enough to possess at least two cars, it is completely unnecessary both be capable of driving for prolonged periods towing excess load. This study comments that for families with two cars only, the most common pairing was indeed a "full sized pick up truck" but also a standard mid ranged vehicle; as you say, it's 1+1=2 that if the large truck is doing the long hauls then the smaller vehicle will be doing the domestic duties. Numerically the study notes that 31% of households possess two cars only and 35% possess three or more cars. Immediately this means 66%, two thirds, of American households could substitute one of their vehicles for an electric car. That's a minimum of 27%, a quarter, of all cars in America.

Now I return to the point I made in my previous post. We have a wonderful thing known as a hybrid car that combines the internal combustion engine with an electric motor. No idea where I'm getting this part from, Google, Hellstromm or memory elsewhere, but they operate more cleanly than a regular car engine since the ICE is allowed to operate at a smaller, optimal load whilst the electric motor provides the extra grunt. My challenge to you is to prove to me that for the remainder of American cars, a hybrid would be unsuitable. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe Toyota already develops hybrids that hook into the break-pads and axles to convert kinetic energy to electricity and recharge the battery, so much so that it does not require recharging from a power socket. (Hax!) Surely there's a mild-hybrid out there with some towing power, at least enough to move a boat or trailer... mild-hybrid is certainly better than nothing, especially since your other car is already fully electric now ;)
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser

Ok I will call this one a draw. Now if is was just stated (as you did here) what many Americans can do. Well I would let you have this without question. I said "me" and "I". I do not have a wife and 2.3 chillins lol. So when they come out with an electric car for the other 1/3 of America then sign me up. Right now with family many miles away, being and avid outdoor type of guy, and big into DYI construction projects, I need the distance, hauling, towing power of a combustion engine. So when it wears out, I will see what they have out there that can compare (maybe hybrid if it is in the same price range). It is not that they can not compare now, it is do people really need to spend the money now to be trendy?

For the big decisions in life, I always ask the same questions first:

1. Is this good for corporate America? No, then do not do it. If yes then do it.
2. Is this good for the Republican Party? No, then do not do it. If yes then do it.

I get a no answer to both questions about electric and hybrid cars. So you still have to sway me on that tho lol and good luck with that!
 

DeletedUser

For the big decisions in life, I always ask the same questions first:

1. Is this good for corporate America? No, then do not do it. If yes then do it.
2. Is this good for the Republican Party? No, then do not do it. If yes then do it.

I get a no answer to both questions about electric and hybrid cars. So you still have to sway me on that tho lol and good luck with that!
:O

1. Is this good for corporate America? No, then do not do it. If yes then do it.
Buying an electric/hybrid car is absolutely good for corporate America. Above anything, they make a sale, increasing immediate revenue. Long term you conserve crude oil, meaning the plastics industry can continue to manufacture from a cheaper source (compared to biomass) for longer.

2. Is this good for the Republican Party? No, then do not do it. If yes then do it.
Driving your current car isn't good for the Republican Party either, neither is eating cereal or using the bathroom so I demand you stop these activities as well :razz: In all seriousness though, whatever party is in government when we run out of crude oil will be damn thankful if electric/hybrid cars are already prominent. One less aspect of a transition to make, one less reason for society to hate on the government of the day and vote them out in the next election.
 

DeletedUser

Going back to the original OP....


I hadn't heard about the Georgia Guidestones until I read this thread. If wiki is accurate, they were commissioned in 1979 by an anonymous person. To me, they have a hippy feel about them. A nice ideology but a bit too impractical for everyday use.

Except for the first suggestion. "Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature." How do we get down to that population? Kill off six and a half billion people? Perhaps the granite engravers forgot three zeros and nobody bothered proofing the stones before they were erected. And if an entire world population of 500 million were to maintain a perpetual balance with nature, they would have to be confined to, perhaps, Aisa and Europe. If those 500 million were spread throughout the planet, there would be no balance with nature; nature would be kicking ass big time.
 

DeletedUser9708

I would like to hear what your thoughts are on the Georgia Guidestones.?
is this world overpopulated and how long can we support a population of 7 billion?

1.Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature.
2.Guide reproduction wisely — improving fitness and diversity.
3.Unite humanity with a living new language.
4.Rule passion — faith — tradition — and all things with tempered reason.
5.Protect people and nations with fair laws and just courts.
6.Let all nations rule internally resolving external disputes in a world court.
7.Avoid petty laws and useless officials.
8.Balance personal rights with social duties.
9.Prize truth — beauty — love — seeking harmony with the infinite.
10.Be not a cancer on the earth — Leave room for nature — Leave room for nature.



- - - Updated - - -

Sounds like a communist liberal
 
Top