Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

135Fw: Re: Fw: Bias, NOT ignorance

Expand Messages
  • aditmore@juno.com
    Feb 6, 2012
       
      ----- Forwarded Message -----
      Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2012 14:14:47 -0500
      Subject: Re: Fw: Bias, NOT ignorance
       
      Bias DOES tell us what to do and it is NOT education! And the HAVE already heard the proper arguements many times.  The proper thing to do is to establish independent communities that do not include the reporters and set an example there.  Examples cannot be ignored while academics can!
      -Alan
       
      On Fri, 3 Feb 2012 23:23:58 -0800 John Taves <john.taves@...> writes:
      This is like saying the car stopped running because it went over a bump, vs the car stopped running because the primary coil wire fell off. Both answers are correct, but only one tells you what to do to correct the problem. If you say the cause is bias, then what are we to do? If we recognize the cause is ignorance, we know what to do. Maybe we don't know the exact course of action, but education is the answer.

      Reporters have not heard the proper argument. I will use another analogy. What they have heard are a bunch of measurements all pointing at the concept that if you square and sum the two short sides of a right triangle you get the square of the hypotenuse. Measurements are inaccurate and the resulting conclusion can be doubted. They have not heard the equivalent to proofs of phythagorean theorem. If you comprehend the proof, you will doubt your measurements. You won't doubt that a2+b2=c2.

      We are overpopulated because we are consuming resources, that are essential to providing for our numbers, faster than those resources renew.

      As far as I can tell, this sentence is effectively the proof. It eliminates the problem of talking about population numbers and then having to talk about resources and do some comparison of the two. It eliminates the measurements that are controversial. If you don't know this, you will waste your time measuring things, and your conclusions will be debatable and just plain wrong. If you know this, you won't bother to measure.

      jt

      On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 11:34 AM, <aditmore@...> wrote:

      --------- Forwarded message ----------
      From: aditmore@...
      To: jenny.goldie@...,sheiladavis05@...,
              greg@...,
              mitch.transparentpictures@...,
              PublicPopForum@yahoogroups.com,mark@...,
              gloomndoom@...,madweld@...,
              support.au@...,dae.levine@...,
              robert@...,rboni@...,
              overpopulation@yahoogroups.com,
              OverpopulationAwareness@yahoogroups.com,
              Why_breed@yahoogroups.com,childfreesnip@yahoogroups.com,
              conscientiousnonprocreators@yahoogroups.com,
              childfreetown@yahoogroups.com
      Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2012 14:00:28 -0500
      Subject: Bias, NOT ignorance

      No, the Japan story is NOT ignorant reporting, it is BIASED reporting.
      The reporters have heard the sustainable population arguement many times
      and they don't believe it because they don't want to believe it; and they
      dont want to believe it because their brains have evolved for millenia
      not to believe it, along sociobiological lines.
      -Alan

      -------------------------------------------------------------------

      4b. Re: [PublicPopForum] Japan’s_Population_t o_Shrink_Nearly_a_Thir
         Posted by: "John Taves" john.taves@... johntaves1
         Date: Tue Jan 31, 2012 10:14 pm ((PST))

      This is not biased reporting. This is ignorant reporting.

      Demographers have done a dreadful job at explaining these things so that
      reporters can state facts. Demographers are ignorant of several facts,
      just
      like the general population is ignorant of these issues.

      It is a fact that *every country on this planet is overpopulated because
      no
      country can feed their current numbers without using resources faster
      than
      they renew*. For example, we cannot create food for 7 billion people each
      day without burning oil faster than it is created by the planet. This is
      a
      cold hard fact. There is no possibility for bias here. We might be able
      to
      feed, say 1 billion people without consuming oil, but we do not know how
      to
      feed 7 billion without consuming oil and without consuming plenty of
      other
      resources faster than they renew too. You don't need to calculate the
      number of people the planet can sustain, in order to recognize that we
      are
      overpopulated.
      ____________________________________________________________
      53 Year Old Mom Looks 33
      The Stunning Results of Her Wrinkle Trick Has Botox Doctors Worried
      http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/4f2993f45c8b513fccm08vuc



      --
      jt

      John Taves
      StopAtTwo