Frosty Wooldridge

CONNECTING THE DOTS

More About: Environment

Call me Noah! Hancock vs Wooldridge Radio Debate: Readers React

Many times, as a teacher in classrooms across this country, I shook my head and gnashed my teeth when students failed to understand simple mathematical equations.  They just couldn’t work the problems.  At first, I thought I had failed to teach correctly.  But, over the years, I learned that some students did not possess the IQs to understand mathematics.  Not their faults, but their conditions.

After writing a column on the Hancock versus Wooldridge radio debate, several of my ‘students’ argued against me, and in fact, put words and thoughts into my presentation—from their biased grids.  I’ll share a few with you below.

Dechivo said, “Frosty, I am responding to your angry comment below. I think you are just a plain angry crusader of population control. You are so angry because nobody listens to you. I am with you with regards to the problem you see of population explosion, especially when the government seems indifferent to the danger it presents to the nation that is bursting with censal headcounts in its seams. However, your arguments are full of holes. Let's look at what you are saying: We cannot, and I repeat, we cannot add 100 million people to this country without degrading quality of life, standard of living and destruction of our environment. What about the millions we SUBTRACT when they leave your company and transfer their residence to the Great Blue Beyond, giving the funeral industry a great boast in time of economic recession?

“Having said that, it dawns to me that you are still thinking in terms of Malthusian Theory in your long-winded writings, a theory that had been discarded long, long time ago. With advance technology and new scientific discoveries this theory had become so stale that not even students of social science in schools, colleges and universities would think that the threat of the end of world through overpopulation that you repeatedly harped on in your writings is sane enough to merit attention.”

This individual failed to compute 2+2=4.  This person failed to understand the term ‘net gain of population’ over and above deaths.  No way this individual can understand the ramifications of adding 100, 200 and 300 million to this country!   It’s not my fault that he/she fails understanding exponential growth so well documented at www.albartlett.orgwww.postcarboninstitute.org  ; www.capsweb.org and www.thesocialcontract.com .  Instead, this individual argues for his or her own lack of educational ability. And, no, I am not angry or sad. Like any math teacher, I present the reality via numbers.  This individual turned it into something emotional.  That won’t work in the overpopulation equation. And, Malthus’ Theory is right on the money, just the timing is off.  As Ehrlich reported, since he wrote the Population Explosion over 300 million humans starved to death.  With 18 million human deaths annually globally, I’d say Malthus hit it dead on the money.  But this responder cannot comprehend it.

Second responder said, “Control, kidnap, kill and steal from others to avoid degrading your quality of life? My goodness, sounds like a great motto for rapists, looters and thieves as to not degrade THEIR quality of life or standard of living. I guess I am just done bowing down before the control freaks that gain power with each new boogie man they present. If that means it is left in God's hands or in Frosty's world, Darwin's and Mother Nature's hands then so be it. Mother Nature and Darwin have never directly threatened me with lethal force and imprisonment if I do not allow them to control my life and steal my resources. If one feels so strongly about Zero Population why not form a self-subscribed  group of vasectomies, hysterectomies and abortion just like the Zeitgeist group does for like minded people or like the Vegans that VOLUNTARILY do not participate in the killing of animals or eating animal products. The problem is, it always comes down to force and control and most of us are tired of it.”

Again, this individual fails to understand the exponential equation, also. “Let Nature take its course,” this person responded. Maybe for lemmings, but we humans may choose another path!   Actually, I have been a vegan for 40 years!  Also, again, use of emotions rather than logic when it comes to Mother Nature or Darwin—simply won’t work!  Refer to Bangladesh, India and China!

 
Bakadude said, “I would have loved to listen to this radio debate if not in conflict with my TV sci-fi programs. Here is Ernest Hancock on one hand who according to Frosty is a NARROW-MINDED libertarian revolutionary that "does not understand the big picture", and on the other here is Frosty Wooldridge, a BROAD-MINDED Jeffersonian whose mind is so broad that in a distance you could no longer see the dot of what he is saying. It is hard to find it in a mountain of words, just as it is hard to see the trees in the forest when you are spaced out by too much lapsus linguae in-between coming from a non-stop ligulae of a narrator who bicycled the world to tell Ernest of what he thinks he saw along the way. What’s interesting is what Ernest thinks of Frosty as an illusionist.”

This individual again, used emotions and conjecture. I never said anything of any derogatory words toward Ernie. I respect him to the highest degree. 

Michele said, “I’m not buying what you’re selling, Frosty.  I listened to the show the other day and got a sick feeling in my stomach.  What exactly do you propose?  Should we sterilize people at birth?  Set a limit on babies?  Who is going to enforce that?  Our water is poisoned, our food is toxic, and so is the air we breathe.  I’ve heard statistics that say 1 out of 5 people in America get cancer.  What more do you want?  You remind me of the bully on the playground who wanted all the school’s basketballs for just you and your friends.  People are resilient and resourceful and I believe our earth was made to hold us all.  They’ve already found that oil is a renewable resource.”

Again, Michele espoused ‘ideas’ that I never uttered.  I never spoke about sterilizing people at birth, forced birth control, eugenics or anything about extreme anything! I simply said that since American women have been averaging 2.03 children since 1970, we need to reduce immigration down to 100,000 or less annually. Simple, rational, logical and sane! Then, she thinks oil is renewable!  Pahleeeze! 

Again, I bring a rational, logical and educational message, but my classroom must harbor a few ‘innumerates’ (innumeracy is the mathematical equivalent of illiteracy) , and you know who you are, because you simply cannot think past your own limitations. As Paul Ehrlich said, “Every cause is a lost cause without limiting human population.”

And, remember Jacque Cousteau when he said, ““We must alert and organize the world's people to pressure world leaders to take specific steps to solve the two root causes of our environmental crises - exploding population growth and wasteful consumption of irreplaceable resources. Over-consumption and overpopulation underlie every environmental problem we face today.”  

I remain your patient teacher, if not Noah constructing a boat for you to grab onto for your life!

##

 


Feature Article
Declare Your Independence with Ernest Hancock Afternoon September 8th 2010
Ernest Hancock
   1st Hour - Jet Lacey - The Revolution Continues with Jet Lacey / 2nd and 3rd Hour - Frosty Wooldridge - joins Ernest to talk about Immigration & Population Control

12 Comments in Response to

Comment by Judy Staab
Entered on:

Frosty, you remind me of the school teacher(s) who instructed us to get under our desks at school and hold our heads just in case we were bombed and blown to bits! We complied, it worked and we lived in fear growing up in case of a bomb! It continues! Our government's made sure we continue to live in fear. And then there's the environmentalists who do the same with the ridiculous CO's-our-doom message! Good golly, Frosty. We still have our minds and what's more . . we use them to resist crap we used to accept as gospel! When I was 6 . . some 62 years ago, I remember being told our world was overpopulated. It scared me thinking we wouldn't have enough room to even breath someday. Then I flew, with my mom, over hundreds of miles and didn't see a car, a community or a living sole and was told people only lived in large cities where the jobs are after remarking, "It sure doesn't look overpopulated to me!" And for years I thought that was an adequate answer when in fact it was rubbish! Now, as far as Cousteau's (who's organization I stupidly donated to for years) overpopulation message -- he was a big proponent of depopulation. Don't deny this as I've seen he and his son's quotes advocating depopulation. Shame on them as well as yourself! Are you an advocate of Gates vaccines? How about Agenda 21? Do you rationalize culling population back to 500 million as spelled out in Agenda 21? It may very well happen with Monsanto's GMO/GE seeds contaminating our farmlands and our guts; our foods filled with poisonous toxic additives such as GE'd SOY, GE'd canola oil, MSG, high fructose corn syrup, aspartame, and the list goes on; Gates' massive worldwide vaccination program; continued poisoning of our water resources (now 70K known contaminants as well as recent plans to add the drug Lithium to it); chemtrails filling our skies day and night with off-the-chart aluminum, barium, titanium, and other toxic metals . . an illegal program about to be made legal via geo-engineering proposed in the Climate Change bill. But, it's not enough we're being fumigated and poisoned! The government's planning to take away anything that will help us combat the assault on our lives. Our freedoms are now threatened by legislation to force us to irradiate our homegrown organically-grown gardens, chose our supplements as potent as we wish without doctor prescriptions, and to say "no" to vaccines or to KNOW what they contain. Our local small, organic farmers are facing over-regulation and possible fines which will likely force them to close down. I particularly resent your complaining that you've taken enough time to explain your theory of over-population to those of us who object to it! It's your stinking theory you've been advocating for months. We're responding with objections based on excellent facts. Don't expect you're going to throw something out (teach it) and we're your classroom that must have an 'A' and keep quiet! I, and many others I'm close to, have spent years in time and money hoping to wake people up to the assault being made on them and their family's lives and educating people about your harmful and despicable message. Have you ever written about the hundreds of farmers in India who died because of Monsanto's devastating poisonous GE'd cotton and their animals that died within 48 hours after grazing on the farmer's GE'd fields? Have you ever exposed the toxic substances in vaccines that do severe damage and many times cause death? Or exposed the particular substance in vaccines that sterilize people as a depopulation program that Bill Gates touts to his audiences that he's particularly fond of? Do you ever advocate that the FDA clean up its act after approving countless drugs that have killed hundreds . . actually thousands? No, and do you know why? If you did, it would save lives and frankly, Frosty, that's not in your best interest. You're strictly into depopulation and making the the rest of us feel guilty we're alive!

Comment by Brock Lorber
Entered on:

sociopathic narcissism

Comment by Anonymous
Entered on:

 

      Frosty, my man, after reading my rather elongated comment below, you should know by now who is teaching whom between us.

     I will continue your education if you still believe that your “teaching” comes from God. Just spiritual passion in your writings does not make your arguments real. I have urged you to study mathematical economics so that you will understand the real meaning of “exponential equation of growth” you are harping on in your so one-sided dissertation based on your so narrow-minded view of the real world.

     Applied to the theory of population growth, economics’ theories of growth are more profound and therefore more educational for you, especially if you come across the Harrod-Domar model or the Cobb-Douglas Function.

     Divorce your mind from Malthus … he has been buried in the past when mankind started to produce food more than the mouths of the world could swallow, except in some God-forsaken parts of the Globe [especially NOT the United States that you are talking about] that have yet to be reached by civilization, deliverance from ignorance, education, freedom from superstitious beliefs and cultural bondage, places that time has forgotten where advancing technology and scientific discoveries have never been heard of.

      Finally, you should know that Malthus, your idol, is a Misanthropist. “He proposed that human beings adopt measures like infanticide, abortion, delay in marriage and strict following of celibacy to check population growth.” By birth, he is a natural sore and sour fellow. When you write about population control, you do not present Malthus to attract adherents.  The American people abhor insults of their intelligence. They cannot accept sore and sour people in a public debate. In your writings, you can start feeding them with honey of knowledge, not vinegar. Take it from me, gratis et amores!

 

Comment by Frosty Wooldridge
Entered on:

Good grief,

 Now I see a group of 'innumerates' with a teacher among them.  Good God, I don't have time to educate those who love their old paradigm and choose to stick with it until it kills them.  So much for me wasting my time reacting to reader comments.  Again, you people fail to understand the 'exponential equation of growth' on a finite planet.  There's nothing I can do to continue your education.  And fellow teacher, I am one hell of a superb teacher because I work with figures, facts and present with enthusiasm.  May the Great Spirit be with you!  Frosty

Comment by Anonymous
Entered on:

Frosty, you said in your response to my comment that I suffer the lack[s][of] intelligence to understand your self-imposed belief that the world will end due to population explosion. In your counter-comment you didn't even prove that I lack the intelligence, which you think no one have except you. But since you call for it, I will prove to you your "lack of intelligence" instead -- these are not my words, they are yours. My education is too far advance to go back down to that level by using those words of personal insult. I still hold you in a high esteem notwithstanding what you are showing as to lack of courtesy and civility. That's what you called Ernest too because he happened to disagree with you.

In year 2000, the population of Freeport, Illinois is 26,460. In 2001 it was 26,144 [minus 1.19%]. There was no population increase whatsoever, only negative decline from 2000 to 2001 [minus 1.19%], down to 25,275 population [minus 1.32%] in 2005. In 2008, this was still down by minus 0.64. This is not just a zero population growth, Frosty – IT IS A NEGATIVE POPULATION GROWTH. If you still don’t believe that I shocked you when I said your increasing population apocalypse is only good for those who do not know – I must tell you that it is not for me because I know that your arguments are full of holes. Click here: and re-enforce your knowledge that not only do population size increase – your one-way mentality – but population also can grow negative at least for a period of eight years, as I present to you this study, proof of a big hole in your argument.

Freeport is just one of hundreds, maybe thousands of modern cities in the United States that experience a population decline. I chose Freeport as proof – evidence to embarrass your one-sided "exponential" position [I have warned you] of which your knowledge of it is just a kindergarten mathematics where you thought 2+2=4 can never be wrong -- because I lived in Freeport in 2005, when the most severe amputation of population growth took place. So in this sense, my position against yours is solid.

In Singapore the fear that you entertain is not overpopulation. Contrary to your thesis, the danger is a fast declining birth rate and the rapidly aging population. Belying your argument that disincentive will curb unwanted population growth, the Singaporean government provide tax rebates to parents for a 3rd child in the family. This city state is the second most densely populated in the world.

Singapore "has the sixth-highest percentage of foreigners in the world (42%), who make up 50% of the service sector.[13]HYPERLINK "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singapore" \l "cite_note-singstat.gov.sg-13#cite_note-singstat.gov.sg-13" [14]HYPERLINK "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singapore" \l "cite_note-singstat.gov.sg-13#cite_note-singstat.gov.sg-13" The country is the second most densely populated in the world after Monaco.[Singapore is the fourth wealthiest country in the world in terms of GDP (PPP) per capita, and the twentieth wealthiest in terms of GDP (nominal) per capita. Despite Singapore's small size, it has the world's ninth largest foreign reserves.[19]HYPERLINK "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singapore" \l "cite_note-19#cite_note-19" [20]HYPERLINK "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singapore" \l "cite_note-19#cite_note-19" "

Please note that as of August 25, 2010 the population of Singapore was estimated to be approximately 5.1 million. Although death and birth rates create a minimal net gain in population growth [that is assuming that it is not negative or zero] to reach 6.5 million in 30-50 years Singapore will still survive. Like the United States, Singapore is so rich it can feed millions of increasing population that stays on top of one another due to limited space unlike the United States whose vast frontiers are yet to be explored for habitation purposes. In short, plenty of limitless space to fill up, perhaps for the next one million years more to come if in fact it could be filled up all! In fact we could be residing in the Moon or Mars by that time.

Let's talk about 100 million immigrants by the year 2050 that you brought up in your fallacious argument. In the long run, will the basin overflow because the faucet [immigration] is open? Not necessarily. You forgot that there is a hole in the basin that maintains the level of water so that even you open the faucet the water will not overflow. You talked of population added to a finite space [the basin], you forgot that we also subtract. If you think of addition "exponentially" you must not ignore the underlying subraction also "exponentially". So far, get my point".

I will also show you how economics affects and alters your single-minded, only one-way exponentially based mind. Freeport badly needed revenue to develop their infrastructures. The raised almost all forms of taxes. For example, sales tax was increased by almost 20%, and the city thought the higher the tax is, the better it is for their projected income. The result was, residents moved out of the city. Those remained out of the exodus, drove out of Freeport to the nearest adjoining cities to shop everyday. In Freeport, businesses folded as they died out and up to now since the year 2000 the population is still declining. See the economic implications that you missed by a mile that population also declines not just increases. So far, see my second point?

My third point was what I gave to you as a friendly advice: You must study "the application of mathematical and statistical techniques to economic data and problems" that may be germane to your thesis or advocacy of population control and close-door immigration policy. At this very instance, I am showing to you the shortcomings of your one-dimensional knowledge of the end of the world through "exponentially"[???] increasing population! Although by this exposure perhaps your self-esteem is bruised, I assure you that I came from the academe and I mean no harm.

Comment by Samantha Kent
Entered on:

  The old tactic, name calling and insulting your opposing readers ~ stupid or uneducated and so on; this is pure dialectic none sense.

 

Sure, how easy to blame the students ~ the very people who depend on the adults, the teachers to do their jobs properly. You blame the victim; this is an old and tired tactic that allows fascists to rule.

Frosty, you need to go back to school and brush-up on your mathematics and history. You are a symbol of why school children are not achieving the standards that you claim to be the expert on.

I suggest you be the first person to volunteer to help alleviate the so-called over population problem.

Sincerely

Samantha Kent

Retired public school teacher K-12

Paradise Valley Public School District #69

 

 

Comment by Anonymous
Entered on:

     Frosty, you said in your response to my comment that I suffer the lack[s][of] intelligence to understand your self-imposed belief that the world will end due to population explosion. In your counter-comment you didn't even prove that I lack the intelligence, which you think no one have except you. But since you call for it, I will prove to you your "lack of intelligence" instead -- these are not my words, they are yours. My education is too far advance to go back down to that level by using those words of personal insult. I still hold you in a high esteem notwithstanding what you are showing as to lack of courtesy and civility. That's what you called Ernest too because he happened to disagree with you.

In year 2000, the population of Freeport, Illinois is 26,460. In 2001 it was 26,144 [-1.19%]. There was no population increase whatsoever, only negative decline from 2000 to 2001 [-1.19%], down to 25,275 population [-1.32%] in 2005. In 2008, this was still down by -0.64.  This is not just a zero population growth, Frosty – IT IS A NEGATIVE POPULATION GROWTH. If you still don’t believe that I shocked you when I said your population apocalypse is only good for those who do not know – it is not for me because I know that your arguments are full of holes. Click here: http://www.epodunk.com/cgi-bin/popInfo.php?locIndex=6160 and re-enforce your knowledge that not only do population size increase – your one-way mentality – but population also can grow negative at least for a period of eight years, as I present to you this study, proof of a big hole in your argument. 

     Freeport is just one of hundreds, maybe thousands of modern cities in the United States that experience a population decline. I chose Freeport as proof – evidence to embarrass your one-sided “exponential” position [I warned you] of which your knowledge of it is just a kindergarten mathematics where you thought 2+2=4 can never be wrong -- because I lived in Freeport in 2005, when the most severe amputation of population growth took place. So in this sense, my position against yours is solid.

     In Singapore the fear that you entertain is not overpopulation. Contrary to your thesis, the danger is a fast declining birth rate and the rapidly aging population. Belying your argument that disincentive will curb unwanted population growth, the Singaporean government provide tax rebates to parents for a 3rd child in the family. This city state is the second most densely populated in the world.

      Singapore “has the sixth-highest percentage of foreigners in the world (42%), who make up 50% of the service sector.[13][14] The country is the second most densely populated in the world after Monaco.[Singapore is the fourth wealthiest country in the world in terms of GDP (PPP) per capita, and the twentieth wealthiest in terms of GDP (nominal) per capita. Despite Singapore's small size, it has the world's ninth largest foreign reserves.[19][20]”      

      Please note that as of August 25, 2010 the population of Singapore was approximately 5.1 million. Although death and birth rates create a minimal net gain in population growth [if not negative or zero] to reach 6.5 million in 30-50 years Singapore will still survive. Like the United States, Singapore is so rich it can feed millions of increasing population that stays on top of one another due to limited space unlike the United States whose vast frontiers are yet to be explored for habitation purposes. So far, get my point”.

       See how economics affects and alter your single-minded, only one-way exponential mind.  Freeport badly needed revenue to develop their infrastructures. The raised almost all forms of taxes. For example, sales tax was increased by almost 20%, and the city thought the higher the tax is, the better it is for their projected income. The result was, residents moved out of the city. Those remained out of the exodus, drive away from Freeport to the nearest adjoining cities to shop everyday. Business died out and up to now since the year 2000 the population is still declining. So far, see my second point?

       My third point was what I gave to you as a friendly advice: You must study “the application of mathematical and statistical techniques to economic data and problems” that may be germane to your thesis or advocacy of population control and close-door immigration policy. At this very instance, I am showing to you the shortcomings of your one-dimensional knowledge of the end of the world through “exponentially”[???] increasing population!  Although by this exposure perhaps your self-esteem is bruised, I assure you that I came from the academe and I mean no harm.

 

 

 

Comment by Michele Power
Entered on:

 Frosty, you disappoint me.  I appreciate your enthausiasm, but wish you weren't so close-minded.

"A study published in Science Magazine today presents new evidence supporting the abiotic theory for the origin of oil, which asserts oil is a natural product the Earth generates constantly rather than a "fossil fuel" derived from decaying ancient forests and dead dinosaurs." 

"Conventional wisdom says the world's supply of oil is finite, and that it was deposited in horizontal reservoirs near the surface in a process that took millions of years. Since the economies of entire countries ride on the fundamental notion that oil reserves are exhaustible, any contrary evidence 'would change the way people see the game, turn the world view upside down,' says Daniel Yergin, a petroleum futurist and industry consultant in Cambridge, Mass. 'Oil and renewable resource are not words that often appear in the same sentence.' "  http://www.oralchelation.com/faq/wsj4.htm

"An intriguing theory now permeating oil company research staffs suggests that crude oil may actually be a natural inorganic product, not a stepchild of unfathomable time and organic degradation. The theory suggests there may be huge, yet-to-be-discovered reserves of oil at depths that dwarf current world estimates.  The theory is simple: Crude oil forms as a natural inorganic process which occurs between the mantle and the crust, somewhere between 5 and 20 miles deep."

...I'm sure you get the point.

Comment by Judy Staab
Entered on:

OVER POPULATION? Yeah right! Consider the following: According to the information presented below, there is ~2.97 million square miles on just the continent of Australia alone. There are ~ 640 acres in 1 square mile Based on the size of the land mass of Australia, this equates to ~ 1.9 billion acres of land. The average lot size of a home in the U.S. is ~ 14,000 square feet This then equates to ~ 5.7 billion potential home lots. There are currently ~ 6.82 billion people on our planet. Also bear in mind that the world population is made up of families with children younger than 15. Therefore, considering the remaining land masses and their respective sizes left in the world, then the argument for overpopulation is bogus! How many square feet are in one acre? Units of Measure, Area There are 43,560 square feet in one acre. An acre is a unit of area. 640 acres equal a square mile. Hence, it is 1/640 of a square mile. Since a square mile contains 27,878,400 square feet, an acre is 27,878,400 divided by 640, which is 43,560 square feet. Remember: an acre can be converted to SQUARE feet, not plain (linear) feet. Square feet and feet are not the same units. A foot is unit of distance. A square foot is a unit of area. How many acres are in one square mile? Answer: One square mile is equal to 640 acres. Answer: 1 square mile = 639.9974 acres (Source: www.icoachmath.com) So why huge messages for over-population? Because it gives a strong argument for depopulation! That's what this is all about. Anyone advocating over-population such as Gates, will have a solution to depopulate. When we hear of multitudes being killed in wars, earthquakes, etc., we become immune to the death tolls, hence we're ready to accept despicable solutions like Gates is proposing w/mass immunization! It stinks plain and simple!

Comment by Frosty Wooldridge
Entered on:

Again, Bakadu fails and fails miserably the 'exponential equation'. He either doesn't understand it, or refuses to understand it, or lacks the intelligence to understand it.  Again, you cannot continue to grow population on a finite planet. That's a fact, the only fact, and the final fact.  If you don't get that reality, you don't get it at all. And, I can't help you because you lack the ability to understand the equation. Again, you prove yourself an 'innumerate' or one that express mathematical illiteracy.   I only used the 'Noah' moniker to get your attention. It still gets down to math and math only.  Read it and get it or become a victim of overpopulation.  

Comment by Anonymous
Entered on:

     Frosty, please advance your skill in mathematics to econometric. How did you consider yourself a teacher in Math when all you know is 2+2=4? What class are you teaching – kindergarten?  If 2 is to .5, 2+2=1, get it? In advance mathematics applied in economics, numbers have VALUES. Please do not venture into the territory of mathematical knowledge when you come out too short of it.  You are a total stranger in my domain – advance mathematics in economics! You personally referred to me as a person that is “lack[ing] of educational ability.That is not only unkind but also not true. You referred to Ernest as a Libertarian incapable of understanding what you are talking about. That is not showing “respect in the highest degree” which you claim you have for your opponent.

      Since you are bringing out a short circuit of economics in mathematical figures caused by immigration and overpopulation, you cannot stay in this juvenile mathematical fort of knowledge that 1+1=2 or 2+2=4. It is not safe for you to garrison yourself here with this tinseled knowledge of kindergarten mathematics when someone knowledgeable will expose you and you become the butt of the joke of those who are more educated but mean-spirited.

       I like your bravado and adventurous spirit – who would circle the globe in a bicycle but only you? My unsolicited friendly advice to you is, you must study “the application of mathematical and statistical techniques to economic data and problems” that may be germane to your thesis or advocacy of population control and close-door immigration policy. Forget about this fixation or obsession in citing quotations, you must be with your own original thoughts when you write something worth saving the world. People would like to read Frosty, not Shakespeare or Voltaire.

      By the way, by believing that you are the modern Noah incarnate, there is no need to save the world… There is no rain, Frosty … no flood, whatever that stands for. The truth is, we are suffering terrible draughts because Al Gore said we are so dim-witted not to listen to his “global warming ” bogeyman that like what you predicted will destroy our environment or by tinkering the balance of our ecological system we are doomed! In your prediction of the end of the world due to lack of space or food to sustain galloping population growth that you warned to be the terrible fate of mankind, I will not be surprise if maybe this time you will think of yourself as Nostradamus, the French apothecary and reputed seer, on wheels.

      You showed your kindness to mankind by pretending you are Noah who would save the world. And because of that I still like you even if you called me names out of your passionate or emotional nature, and if you think you are Nostradamus, I will drink to that. There is nothing wrong if you see the world through your heart, not necessarily through your head. 

Comment by Ned The Head
Entered on:

Noah! How long can you tread water?


Join us on our Social Networks:

 

Share this page with your friends on your favorite social network: