Clandestine lab [Archive] - The Explosives and Weapons Forum

Pu239 Stuchtiger

April 3rd, 2002, 06:58 PM

I posted a reply that debunked that entire article. I don't know if they'll approve the reply and actually post the reply under the article, so I'll post it here too for all to read. Note that I am not one of those morons who is for drug-abolition or similar stupid un-Constitutional ideas; I wrote the article in a way that I thought would be the most effective at modifying that average person's opinions in our favor.

<blockquote>quote:<hr />I happen to be very interested in chemistry that isn’t considered illegal by the government. I have been my whole life, and I have a home laboratory set up. I have a college level understanding of chemistry. Looking at that article on how to "spot a clandestine lab" makes me very angry. It is not possible to do anything other than make green goo from kids chemistry sets without being defined as a "clandestine" lab by the above definitions! It's ridiculous!

"Jars containing clear liquid with a white colored solid on the bottom"

This simply means there is a liquid with a precipitate. Could be millions (literally) of different things. C6H10O5x (corn starch) and water. Saturated water and NaCl (table salt). Saturated water and sucrose. Saturated water and NaHCO3 (baking soda). Water and flour. Toluene and NaCl. The list goes on forever...

"Jars labeled as containing iodine or dark shiny metallic purple crystals inside of jars"

This again could be one of many things. Iodine has much use in organic synthesis (not just drug synthesis!). "Dark shiny metallic purple crystals"? Oh, come on... potassium permanganate, ammonium permanganate, sodium permanganate, etceteras, all are dark shiny metallic purple crystals with no use in drug synthesis, but are chemicals that a laboratory cannot do without...

"Jars labeled as containing red phosphorus or a fine dark red or purple powder"

Phosphorous has a great number of uses outside of drug synthesis. Phosphorous halides can be prepared. Phosphorous halides are also useful, they can be used to prepare formyl halides and acetyl halides. Those are also useful, they can be used to prepare organic acid anhydrides, amides, etceteras. Phosphorous can be oxidized to P2O5 and P4O10. Those are the best dehydrating agents known, even dehydrating H2SO4 to SO3. They are also necessary to prepare phosphoric acid and phosphorous acid. Those are used to prepare phosphates and phosphites. Those can be reduced to phosphides.

"Coffee filters containing a white pasty substance, a dark red sludge, or small amounts of shiny white crystals"

This is getting ridiculous. That could be millions of compounds having NOTHING to do with drugs! In fact, it is almost impossible to do ANYTHING in a lab without filtering out precipitates; and most precipitates are going to be whitish, and usually will form crystals!

"Bottles labeled as containing sulfuric acid or hydrochloric acid"

Sulfuric and hydrochloric acid are the two most important chemicals to a laboratory. Sulfuric acid has an infinite number of uses. It can be used to prepare virtually any concentrated acid from its salt; it can be used to dehydrate compounds; it can be used as an oxidizing agent; it can be used to prepare CuSO4*0H2O, which is very useful in indicating the presence of H2O; there are so many uses it would take years (I am not exaggerating) to explain them all. Hydrochloric acid is very important also; it is used to prepare chlorides of virtually any metal or alkaline organic compound.

“Bottles or jars with rubber tubing attached”

This is equally preposterous. This is called a simple gas recovery setup. If someone was to prepare, for example, Cl2O7, and wanted to use it to prepare perchloric acid, HClO4, they would have to use that setup. Same with preparing any compound (if high purity is to be achieved) from its anhydride. There are many other uses of the “Bottles or jars with rubber tubing attached” setup that I simply don’t have the decades of typing necessary to address them.

“Glass cookware or frying pans containing a powdery residue”

That simply indicated that someone did not want to wait for a solution to finish evaporating and decided to speed things by boiling off the solvent (the solvent is often water). The powdery residue could be anything.

“An usually large number of cans of Coleman fuel, paint thinner, acetone, starting fluid, Red Devil Lye and drain cleaners containing sulfuric acid or bottles containing muriatic acid”

Again, those are the most important chemicals to a laboratory. Red Devil Lye is usually NaOH, which is one of the most important chemicals there is. The sodium salt of any acidic compound can be prepared from it. It can also be melted and electrolyzed in an oxygen-free environment to prepare sodium metal, which has many uses (I will go into detail on the uses of sodium metal soon). I have already explained the uses of sulfuric acid and muriatic acid (another name for hydrochloric acid). Acetone is one of the best organic solvents there is. It is an even better solvent than water. Acetone is a chemical you will find in every decently equipped lab in the world (as you will find sulfuric acid, hydrochloric acid, and lye). “Coleman fuel” is used in propane burners, which is used to heat chemicals. Heating is key in distillation, which is a process that is used to purify and concentrate any compound that can be boiled at realistic temperatures and pressures. Paint thinner and starting fluid are other non-polar solvents, which can dissolve compounds that acetone or water cannot (acetone and water are polar, and thus dissolve compounds that non-polar solvents won’t). That makes them very useful in the purification and extraction of compounds from mixes of products from a reaction; without those chemicals many compounds would be impossible to acquire at decent levels of purity.

“Large amounts of lithium batteries, especially ones that have been stripped”

That simply means that someone extracted the lithium metal from the battery! It’s the simplest source of lithium metal! Lithium metal can be used to prepare any lithium compound known to man. Very useful to someone who has chemistry as a hobby. Lithium compounds are excellent desiccating agents.

“Soft silver or gray metallic ribbon (in chunk form) stored in oil or Kerosene”

That is simply sodium or potassium metal. It is very useful to the chemist. It can be used to prepare any sodium or potassium compound known to man. It can be used to prepare amides; it is not possible to prepare alkaline amides without the pure metal (in this case, sodium metal and potassium metal). The list of uses of pure sodium metal and pure potassium metal goes on forever.

“Propane tanks with fittings that have turned blue”

That indicates that someone has a decently equipped laboratory! The fittings are made of copper metal. Any lab will have traces of acid vapors floating through the air. These acid vapors will react with the copper metal, forming the copper salt of that acid. Copper salts generally are blue. Thus, “Propane tanks with fittings that have turned blue” has no real meaning in attempting to decide if someone is preparing drugs.

“Occupants of residences going outside to smoke”

Plenty of people go outside to smoke. These people have family members who don’t like them smoking. It is ridiculous to believe that to be a sign that that person is preparing illegal drugs.

“Strong smell of urine, or unusual chemical smells like ether, ammonia or acetone”

Once again, that is a sign that someone has a laboratory; it is not a sign that someone is preparing drugs. Ether is an excellent solvent. Ammonia is the chemical from which all nitrogen-containing compounds are prepared. Industry depends off of ammonia to prepare nitrogen-based compounds, as does a chemist. Acetone, as I have previously explained, is a chemical that will be found in every well-equipped laboratory in the world.

“Caution: Many of the chemicals found in these labs are very corrosive or flammable. The vapors that evolved from the chemical reactions attack mucous membranes, skin, eyes, respiratory tract. Some chemicals will react with water or other chemicals and cause fire and explosion.”

Of course chemicals can be dangerous if someone doesn’t understand them. This is an example of fear tactics; trying to scare people into fearing the unknown. The above statement doesn’t mean anything beyond that one shouldn’t dump chemicals together if they have never opened a chemistry book in their life.

“Source: U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration”

I say this regretfully: reading their publication on the “signs of a clandestine lab” makes me think that “U.S. Anti-Chemist Enforcement Administration” is a more appropriate title. They don’t seem to be addressing the drug problem at all. They simply are just attacking people who have the knowledge to be able to prepare drugs, instead of targeting those who actually commit the crimes. They using the average person’s lack of strong understanding of chemistry to turn them against those who are interested and knowledgeable in the field of chemistry. The government should be combating the guilty, not those who are capable of committing an act that would make them guilty.<hr /></blockquote>

Arkangel

April 3rd, 2002, 07:29 PM

Stuch, can I call you Stuch? Your letter certainly debunked the article, and hats off to you for taking the time. I seriously doubt though, that it was either published, or even fully read by the editor - they need stuff a lot more succinct than that. Sorry it's slightly off topic now, but I have to take issue with the contradictory statement at the beginning of your reply. Anti drug legislation is in itself anti constitutional, as are all laws that restrict victimless crimes (such as prostitution, drugs, buggery and in some states, oral sex.....) In fact, it's my belief that drug legislation leads to more crime, violence and poverty than any other social force. Look to Holland for a ray of hope. :rolleyes:

nbk2000

April 3rd, 2002, 07:55 PM

While certainly very well formed, it suffers from being to "techno-babble" for the average dimwit reader.

Anything "techie" makes the sheeples head hurt, thus they tune it out and ignore it. Plus, it's too long. You have to operate in short, concise, sound bites that are easily digested by fuzzy minded sheeple.

Remember, logic has nothing to do with winning an argument. It's all about perceptions.

I remember, when I was a kid, going to Kay-Bee toy stores and buying things like magnesium ribbon, liebig and grahm condensers (YES!), ferricyanide, etc in one ounce bottles for a buck or two. Frogs and clams preserved in formaldehyde.

Now, you get a chemistry set, all you get is a few vials of liquid in sealed containers that you can't actually touch, and that do nothing more exciting than change color or some stupid shit like that. WEAK!

I remember seeing somewhere a quote that went "Chemistry is all that which stinks, burns, and stains.". Or something to that effect.

We've effectively dumbed down the national average. Oh sure, plenty of people know how to turn on a computer, but how many know how to USE a computer? And is it of any real relevance? NO.

In the Amatuer Scientist CD I have, you see articles of high school students in the '50s building cyclotrons and particle accelerators. What do we have now? Nothing like that I'm sure. Too much ignorance and laws about "liability" and "Oh! Scary evil radiation!". GRRR!

And Scientific American isn't helping since they cut out the AS section. There went the last hope of any budding future scientist. :(

If you want to keep your lab safe, you'll have to follow the example of the better equipped and thought out dope labs. Buy your chemicals from varied sources in small quantities. Don't mention you hobby to ANYONE (family especially). Pay cash, avoid mail order. Use drop offs and fake addresses.

You get the idea.

Remember, the war against drugs is a war against freedom.

Pu239 Stuchtiger

April 4th, 2002, 03:02 AM

Agreed. I also find the scene of modern day chemistry sets to be depressing. Today's youngsters get to make goo, bubbles (just carbon dioxide, not anything exciting), and pretty colors. An old chemistry set that I have has far more interesting chemicals, one of them being sodium ferrocyanide. Even older chemistry sets (from around the 50's era) often had nitric acid! One really has to wonder how America can expect to have a plentiful supply of intelligent, enthusiastic chemists in the future... Young people who are interested in chemistry are in serious trouble, because all adults assume that they're preparing psychoactive substances, and because most adults have not a clue about chemistry, thus will attempt to prevent their child from learning about it and/or experimenting (people fear the unknown and what they don't understand).

I agree that my debunking will not affect most people. However, I feel that what I wrote is the most effective method available; I intended to make myself sound intelligent and very well informed; most people agree with who sounds like they know what they're talking about. I really don't know what else to write other than a debunking involving chemistry-babble.

nbk2000

April 4th, 2002, 03:15 AM

If there's no risk of serious injury/death/fire/explosion, than what's the point of a chemistry set?

<img src="http://www.candlepowerforums.com/ubb/icons/icon18.gif" alt="" />

I'm afraid that there's no hope for the future, what with the "war on drugs" making any home chemistry enthusiast an automatic dope cook suspect.

Now electronics have potential risks too, such as electrocution and such, but you don't see that hobby being reduced to "connect two wires to make a light blink" stupidity, do you? :mad:

Though, if anyone manages to make some electronic device out of radio shack parts that'll get you high, you can be sure that "diode limits" and "Controlled IC precursors" would be following in short order. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />

vulture

April 4th, 2002, 05:26 AM

I'm going to insult a lot of people over here, but hell...

The US government is fucking itself and every US citizen up, i will illustrate this:
They are forbidding chemicals and arresting people with labs in their OWN country. Now this is totally ridiculous, because first Bin Laden isn't going to come to the US to buy nerve gas precursors and second you get the braindrain effect, people with the knowledge flee from the US to other country's which possibly are anti-US.

In the end, the US will be totally dependent of foreign scientists, while the terrorist states bomb and poison it's citizens to hell because they got the precursors and the knowledge....

Good luck guys....

a_bab

April 4th, 2002, 05:41 AM

The problem in these days is that all the people are very afraid. Are afraid for there safety, their goods, etc. In fact, if I'd knew that one of my neighbor is in possessing of 20 kg of TNT, I will be *somehow* worried about.(because is not mine :D ).
But how about a non-pyro person ? You know, a parent with kids, with the mind filled off crap like carcinogenic chemicals or other shit like this. He will report you to the pigs with no hesitation!

When I was young I was threaten by LOTS of neighbors that they'll report me to the police due to my noisy and stinky activities. But I was only a kid then. Now, it's another story. Most of us (the good ones) are over 18 I suppose.
Mega is right: all the good chemists I know (ask your chemistry teachers) has somehow breaked the law by possessing some banned chemical, or by synthesizing other. This is the point of chemistry...
(sorry for my English)

DBSP

April 4th, 2002, 06:27 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Occupants of residences going outside to smoke<hr /></blockquote>Are they insane? :mad: Thought of the possibility that they don't want the hole house smelling tobaco??

I don't smoke so I don't know but some of you must smoke. Do you go outside to smoke or do you smoke inside?

I wouldn't want to be a smoker with our hobby :p

Zambosan

April 4th, 2002, 11:03 AM

Haha NBK... if they took their cues from the DEA, they'd identify silicon dioxide as an important precursor to semiconductors, and immediately begin "interdicting" as much as possible. :D

"Mommy, where'd the beach go?"

megalomania

April 5th, 2002, 02:43 PM

Sometimes my pots and frying pans have a white residue on them when they come out of the dishwasher... I think perhaps I had better call my lawyer and await the jack booted thugs to bust down my door.

It is important to note that actually having chemicals and laboratory equipment is not (yet) illegial. It may be difficult to get things, but if you are not making illegal narcotics, than there is little to fear. Of course that dosn't mean the DEA won't hassle you if you are too open about your home lab.

Why is it that popular TV shows shows also show the kids with their own labs as being smart decent people, and the media shows them to be criminals? Dexter's Lab, that Billy Neutron Boy Genius, the movie with the kids who played little league football (with Rick Moranas, I forget the name but they had a kid with a nice lab). What I see in the news is "DRUG LAB RAIDED, CITIZENS ORDERED TO EVACUATE IN 10 MILE RADIUS!!!" I just saw on one of those police video things on the show "Real TV" about some guy who was pulled over and had his car searched. Well, the guy had his mobile drug lab in the car, the cop searches the car...
Ocifer Doofus: "Duh, uh, what does you suppose is in this here bottle labeled Dan Ger?"
Ocifer Cletus: "His ID says right here he ain't no Dan, is you Dan?"
Citizen: "That says dangerous ocifer"
Ocifer Doofus: "Don't be given me no lip, boy! I'll beat you silly. We'll jus see what's in this here bottle, Mr. Ger."

The audience is now treated to sounds of a crying piggy coated with chemicals.

Ocifer Doofus: "My eyes, my eyes!"
Ocifer Cletus: "His eyes, his eyes!"

The citizen was charged with felonius assult of a police ocifer with a deadly weapon (the bottle of chemicals that the pig dumped on his face). The charge was dropped because it was the cops own damn fault. The pig could see a few days later.

I don't recommend driving around with chemicals in your car, but it is things like this that the media can hype up to turn the public against us. Notice how he citizen did not get charged for having chemicals or a lab in his car, it's still not quite illegial.

April 5th, 2002, 03:21 PM

I'm happy to say that I've never read of a drug lab being raided here in Britain. I think all our dealers tend to smuggle their stuff in from abroad.

Getting hold of chemicals is not much of a problem, and I'm fairly open about my hobby to friends and family. My only problem is moving around too much at the moment what with being in uni, so I don't have the space/location/time to set up a decent lab.

Anthony

April 5th, 2002, 03:31 PM

I've seen on the news about explosive labs being raided in the UK (England to be specific), damned IRA keep giving us a bad name...

nbk2000

April 5th, 2002, 03:59 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />
Ocifer Doofus: "My eyes, my eyes!"
Ocifer Cletus: "His eyes, his eyes!"
<hr /></blockquote><img src="http://assaultweb.net/ubb/icons/icon7.gif" alt="" />

Too bad what happened to the cop...recovering his eyesight, I mean.

I also found "Mommy, where's the beach?" rather true in a sad way.

Our labs are dope, you brits have bombs. And in each case, it's rampant paranoia.

'course, they'll never be able to stop them because modern civilization is too dependant on chemicals to be able to ban them. All they can do is make it more difficult by requiring more steps in making the precursors, hiding the lab, and the attendant hassles.

I've read old Popular Science and Popular Mechanics from before the '40s that told you how to make NI3, Hydriodic Acid, phosphoruous, and other "bad" chemicals that you'd get arrested for nowadays.

I guess the sheeple are more plentiful nowadays than then. Obviously, the world needs more predators to keep the prey in check.

Alchemist

April 5th, 2002, 05:03 PM

Hello all,

What really makes me mad is the fact that the Government, universities, research companies, science teachers, and etc. are constantly stating we need more scientist (chemist being one) in the U.S.A., and other countries. Even at the high school level, teachers (chemistry) can NOT perform many experiments that they used to be able to. No more Sodium /Potassium in water, Gunpowder demo, white/yellow Phosphorus in Benzene then dropped on a pea size crystal of Potassium Chlorate, and etc. At least in my area most high schools do not even stock Nitrates, Chlorates, Phosphorus, Benzene, and a lot more! Most chemistry teachers and a few chemist and even a couple of pharmacist I know all started out playing with chemistry sets, homemade pyrotechnics, and etc. I even remember my dad saying in science club (a after school club) the teacher showed them how to make KNO3/Surgar bottle rockets, how to sublime Iodine from tincture of Iodine, he even showed them how to make Nitrogen Tri-iodide and fulminating Silver ! This kind of thing was even encouraged for the young scientist to try! And like stated, in the back of Popular Science there where MANY adds for chemical companies selling glassware, formulas for pyrotechnics, even a few explosives, and chemicals galore.

What does the future bring us? Are we all going to have to have special permits to shop at the hardware store, paint store, pharmacist, etc., that state what we are allowed to purchase?

Maybe its time to fight back! Talk to are teachers, write letters to congress men, the scientist, the companies that will be hiring new chemist, the law makers, and even the leaders of our Countries!

Jack Ruby

April 6th, 2002, 12:24 AM

Oral sex in inllegal in some places? that is fucked up.

Next they will say the Annal is illegal. Then where will we be?

After that now doggy style. We will be left with straight, plain-jane vanilla Sex. No Orgies or anything.

They will even restrict Whipped creame and choclate syrup.

Polverone

April 6th, 2002, 01:35 AM

NBK: I know you have a slow connection, but if that Amateur Scientist CD could ever make its way to the FTP, that'd be awesome.

Pu239: Your rebuttal of the "drug lab clues" was exhaustive, exhaustingly exhaustive. Here's the sound bite version: The vast majority of the public has little or no chemical education and is ill-equipped to distinguish clandestine drug synthesis from a hobbyist's scientific explorations. These vague "tips" can only encourage people to spy on and suspect their neighbors. While you're at it, why didn't you have some "terrorist spotting tips" that included "sharp objects can be found in or around home" and "residents of home complain about the American government?"

As for the general theme of this topic...
There are a few related issues involved. The increasing regulation of chemicals, labware, etc. is mostly thanks to the DEA, somewhat (recently) related to terrorism fears. FWIW, I have not had any trouble obtaining chemicals that weren't on any DEA lists, though I had to look around for suppliers. I do think that thanks to the War on Drugs most people are going to think "drug lab" when they hear a sentence like "there was a lab in his basement next to the guest bedroom." A few decades ago people might've thought you were talking about a home photography lab or even scientific experimentation (remember, during the height of the Cold War the American gov't wanted to produce all the scientists, engineers, and mathematicians it could.)

I think the dumbed-down chemistry sets are the fault of the horrid legal climate facing anyone who sells a product more dangerous than soap, not the DEA. This is why I really, really wouldn't want Ralph Nader as president even if I had a genie that could perform such a miracle. He's been working for decades to "protect the public" - by denying the public the right to buy anything they might hurt themselves with.

I get the impression - though it may be wrong - that there really isn't much demand for people with undergraduate degrees in chemistry. It doesn't even seem like organizations are scouring the countryside for people with their master's or PhD. Most graduate students in the US aren't American citizens. Is the plan for the next few decades to keep the people at home well-policed, well-socialized, and minimally critical, then import brainpower (when needed) from abroad? I have no resentment for the vast number of foreigners in our institutions of higher learning, but I cringe at the degeneration of America's collective mind.

Here's a story that starts out great and ends on a bleak note (sorry if any of this is redundant - I may have mentioned it in earlier posts):

My high school was a pretty decent place. It was private, so if somebody didn't want to learn and just wanted to make an ass of himself, he got shown the door a month after arrival. The principal of the school was awesome. She had a B.S. in chemistry and a master's in physics. During the 1970s she'd actually done an advanced chemistry course at the school centered on pyrotechnics. She wanted to revive it while I was there but the insurance costs would have killed the school.

The school's chemistry lab was well stocked. I, and a few other students who demonstrated responsibility and knowledge, got to use it with minimal supervision after school on occasion. They had "horribly dangerous" stuff like metallic sodium, chlorates, perchlorates, mercury, peroxides, etc. on hand. During one of the classes the activity for the day was actually synthesizing acetone peroxide! Another time the class got to make NI3. On parents' night I got to demonstrate a few pyro comps, various spontaneous ignitions, and thermite. Nobody got hurt during any of this, we were actually interested in the chemistry and were learning well, etc. It sounds like it should be the launching point for a long and glorious love affair with science.

All of this came to a screeching halt when, in a rather unrelated way, a friend of mine blew his left hand off with a considerable amount of acetone peroxide while trying to set up special effects for a play. His life certainly changed, and so did mine. My home lab was cleaned up by the bomb squad (everyone who was a known pyro got a little visit) and I dropped chemistry for nearly 4 years. I didn't keep up with the injured friend after high school, but I recently heard that when he turned 21 he filed a suit against the high school, presumably because they failed to protect him from his own idiocy. And I think that nicely encapsulates the larger American transition from "science is a wonderful tool and a noble pursuit" to "science is dangerous and bad." And, let us not forget, should you maim yourself with materials of your own creation, it's never too late to blame somebody else. Hopefully somebody with more money than you.

nbk2000

April 6th, 2002, 03:33 AM

I'd imagine a copy could be mailed to Ctrl_C one of these days. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />

My kid is going to have the chemistry set from hell. :D

But it'll all be under lock and key and strict supervision. I'm not risking my investment getting maimed or killed.

And alot of the ignorance of science originates from the State Indoctrination Centers (AKA school) that kids go to nowadays. They don't incourage free thinking, only mindless memorization of state approved orthodoxy.

It used to be that schools were a place where you'd learn HOW to learn. Now all they want are semi-literate drones to fill the meaningless positions they create to continue justifying the crippling taxes and laws that they pass to control us.

I think we should do away with liability laws. In it's place, we mandate full disclosure of the risks. As long as you've disclosed the risks of a product/activity, you're not liable for it. This would also include "act of god" freak accidents as being unforseeable.

You'd only be liable for things that you knew about, but didn't disclose. Like if you know your product spountaneously explodes every tenth time you turn it on, but don't mention that in the disclosure, then you're liable for any injury resulting from the explosion.

But, because of all the lawyers needing jobs, we no longer have lawn darts, chemistry sets, realistic cap guns, and other toys I grew up with.

Mr Cool

April 6th, 2002, 09:52 AM

Alchemist: wow, your school sucks!
Our school has great chemistry facilities, in fact it's good for science in general (which is why I chose it) - it's almost a school rule that everyone does chemistry, biology AND physics at GCSE level. After the GCSE's, when it's only the serious chemists left, we get to use mercury and it's compounds, concentrated acids, potassium (etc), dichromates, chlorates, permanganates, chlorobenzenes, phosphorous pentoxide etc. All kinds of crazy stuff, under supervision. And the teachers do things like thermites, Al/I, chlorine/hydrogen with a camera flash, Na2O2/Al + water etc. As far as I know, the only common chemicals that we might need to use but are not allowed to use are benzene and chloroform. I think benzene is banned from all schools.
We were given a lecture at school by someone (can't remember his name now) on chemical energy which involved demos of gunpowder, NC (confined and unconfined), KClO4/P mixtures, flash powders, whistles, HUGE propane/oxygen explosions and similar sorts of things, as well as chemiluminescence and all that other stuff...
All the chemistry teachers I've had were either pyro's themselves at one point, or they were understanding. A while back I burnt my hand pretty badly, the chem teacher simply chuckled "That's what happens when amateurs make explosives". I think he must have guessed. One of my physics teachers also said that he used to spread NI3/water paste on the pavements around his house, and hide behind bushes to see people's reactions to the exploding pavement. I think he got asked to leave the school though, which is a shame. He was a great bloke, the most eccentric guy I've ever known. Whenever someone anoyed him they got shocked with the 350kV Van Der Graaf or the induction coil (is that legal??) instead of getting a detention, so I think he basically got fired :( He also used to try and convince little kids that if they ran at a locked door fast enough, they would quantum tunnel through it and appear on the other side, unharmed. Though I only ever heard of one boy actually trying it. Stupid fucker :)
Shit, how did I get talking about this? I think I'd better stop typing and post this, before I go off on another tangent...

Pu239 Stuchtiger

April 7th, 2002, 05:08 AM

WOW. I truly am shocked. That news site actually posted my reply and someone elses! Take a look!

nbk2000

April 7th, 2002, 06:04 AM

Well, since they're actually posting replies, I thought I'd make mine known. I don't know how long it takes to be approved, so I'll just post it here and we'll see how long it takes (if at all) to show up on their site.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +++++++++++++++++++

I remember, when I was a kid, going to Kay-Bee toy stores and buying things like magnesium ribbon, ferricyanide, etc in one ounce bottles for a buck or two. Or frogs and clams preserved in formaldehyde and liebig and grahm condensers

Now, you get a chemistry set, all you get is a few vials of liquid in sealed containers that you can't actually touch, and that do nothing more exciting than change color or some stupid trick like that.

In the Amatuer Scientist CD I have, you see articles of high school students in the '50s building cyclotrons and particle accelerators. What do we have now? Nothing like that I'm sure. Too much ignorance and laws about "liability" and "Oh! Scary evil radiation!". GRRR!

And Scientific American isn't helping since they cut out the AS section. There went the last hope of any budding future scientist.

We've effectively dumbed down the national average. Oh sure, plenty of people know how to turn on a computer, but how many know how to USE a computer? And is it of any real relevance? NO.

Because the schools no longer teach students HOW to learn, but rather rout memorization of the state approved orthodoxy, the children of today are becoming nothing more than well trained consumers.

With the greatest information repository the world has ever seen at their disposal (The Internet), what do todays children do when they're sitting at the internet terminals at a library?

Play silly games by pounding the keyboard to mush to make their (bunny, racecar, whatever) go faster.

My God!

The children have no desire to learn, nor any reason to want to. Why should they? Their parents are so busy doing nothing, that the children spend more time watching the TV that tells them "BUY! BUY! BUY!", rather than interacting with their own family.

The United States used to lead the world in all fields of science, medicine, and engineering.

Now, we're falling behind to countries like India, Singapore, and Taiwan. That's because they make a dedicated effort to make their children learn the hard sciences that are the foundation of a nations financial and military power.

And it's a sad commentary on american education that children born and raised here have a lesser understanding of the english language than a singapore high school student.

It's ironic that the US produces the finest military weapons in the world, but many of the engineers who design them are from foreign countries like germany and france.

And why is it that we have allowed ourselves to fall behind?

Hysteria and fear.

Fear of being hurt, hysteria about drugs, ignorance about things that we don't understand.

If a child is injured with something from a chemistry set, rather than the parents accepting the responsiblility for not having supervised their children, it's easier (and more profitable) to blame the chemistry set manufacturer and sue them.

The drug war has become a war on freedom of thought.

I've read old Popular Science and Popular Mechanics magazines from before the '40s that told you how to make Nitrogen Triiodide (an explosive), Hydriodic Acid (Meth precursor), Phosphorous (Meth), and other "bad" chemicals that you'd get arrested just for having nowadays, even without "intent to manufacture".

It's gotten to where you can't even buy certain books because the publishers are too afraid of the laws that make them liable for what some idiot does with it.

I'm referring to the "Hitman" trial against Paladin Press.

So, if this is the way things are going to be in the future, can I sue a home canning book publisher if I get food poisoning through my own negligence? It would seem so. The precedent has already been set.

I remember a certain historical figure saying that the best way to control the masses was to keep them in constant fear of a new enemy. It may have been Hitler, or Stalin, but it certainly wasn't the Founding Fathers.

I hope I die before I live long enough to see America disintegrate into a third world regime ran by tyrant leaders with state approved reading lists and children fingering their parents for "crimes" against the state.

Oh, wait...too late.

Polverone

April 7th, 2002, 07:07 AM

Wow. That's probably the most eloquent writing I've ever seen you produce. I definitely hope they publish your response. Myself, I'm not sure whether the Forum is part of the problem or the solution. Having a publicly readable message board dedicated to socially unacceptable substances allows fear-mongers to point their fingers and say "look! A nest of budding terrorists! We told you chemistry and the internet were bad!" On the other hand, the Forum is the finest discussion area of its kind. Those who contribute and learn from this site are gaining (for the most part) better information on explosives than they'll find anywhere else on the net, honing their minds, and broadening their understanding of the natural world.

Anecdotally, I'd say that about 75% of all males have some degree of natural fascination with fire and things that go "boom." There's also at least a minority of females who share that fascination. On sci.chem I've seen more than one chemist admit that he first grew interested in chemistry for "all the wrong reasons" - blowing stuff up and making fires. I'm one of the (apparent) minority who first loved chemistry and developed my interest of explosives out of that, instead of vice-versa. If I knew I could be a mentor of sorts to any younger budding chemist or pyro, male or female, I would - were it not for the horrendous jeopardy that would put me in. But on the internet, we are still (mostly) free to learn and teach as much as experience and spare time permit.

Things may grow worse before they grow better, but I think there's eventually going to be a backlash against the government's nanny-meddling. I don't mean a revolution by crazed militia members or anything like that; just a new generation of people in power who are tired of life without spice or risks. I fully expect to see soft drugs decriminalized within my lifetime and I can hope that other victimless activities will be treated in the same fashion. And, even if you're an uptight authoritarian, eventually you have to realize that a country that squelches the next generation's interest in science is going to have a tough time of it in the 21st century.

Arkangel

April 7th, 2002, 01:11 PM

Jack, I'm sorry to have to tell you that anal sex (with a woman) is still illegal in the uk and probably plenty of other places too. As is group homosexual sex and sadistic practices. Were I so inclined, I could legally fuck you in the ass, but not nail your testicles to a table. I certainly couldn't do either if there was another guy watching - That is unless you're a chick with a man's nickname, in which case I couldn't do those things for other reasons (it being illegal to fuck you in the ass, and you not HAVING any testicles)

Speaking of asses, the law is an ass, as the old saying goes, and another of my favourites (one I use to legitimise my own misbehaviour from time to time) is "rules are for the guidance of the wise, and the blind obedience of fools".

The USA, as the land of the "free", really puzzles me, in that it has amazing liberties on one hand, yet ridiculous, oppressive legislation on the other. NBK, your last post here really was a great bit of writing, and if it weren't so worrying, the litigation you see so much of and which you describe so well would be hysterical.

Pu239 Stuchtiger

April 7th, 2002, 02:23 PM

Nbk, that's outstanding work of writing. :)

Anthony

April 7th, 2002, 02:25 PM

Taken from: <a href="http://www.addenbrookes.org.uk/shac/advice/law.html" target="_blank">http://www.addenbrookes.org.uk/shac/advice/law.html</a>

"The legal age of consent for anal sex between a man and a woman in England and Wales is 18 years. In Scotland, it is 16 years. In Northern Ireland, it is illegal"

I thought the sodomoy law had been revoked quite some time ago, obviously not in N.Ireland though:)

nbk2000

April 7th, 2002, 07:13 PM

It's a little known fact, but the IRA hasn't been fighting to be free of the brits, but rather for the right to bugger each other.

<img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />

But don't fret, even in America we have stupid sex laws. Some moron in one of the "Deliverance" states passed a law outlawing sex toys like dildos and vibrators.

:rolleyes:

Probably caught his wife using one to get off because he's a limp dick. :D

I seriously doubt that future generations will grow tired of living in a nanny-state. They'll have been too well conditioned by the state indoctrination camps (schools) and behavioral condition devices (TV) to even WANT to change.

To this day, there are germans who were Hitler Youth who think Hitler was great man! Which he is, in some aspects, but dude WAS insane.

Anthony

April 7th, 2002, 10:02 PM

Sure Hitler was a bit fruity, but the guy was a genius. What other single, everyday person has caused so much trouble, loss of life and brought many powerful world countries nearly, or onto their knees?

One thing I don't like is the stigma now attached to the Nazi ideology.

Arkangel

April 7th, 2002, 10:15 PM

Which elements of it's ideology unjustly have the stigma?

Ctrl_C

April 7th, 2002, 11:39 PM

nbk: I missed something...what could be mailed to me?

nbk2000

April 7th, 2002, 11:51 PM

Ctrl_C: a copy of the "Scientific American 20th Century Amatuer Scientist" articles CD.

I belive the stigma is the racial purity, eugenics, national pride, and other "racist, homophobic, anti-foreigner, anti-tolerance, anti-diversity, yada yada" crap that the liberals spout.

[ April 07, 2002, 11:06 PM: Message edited by: nbk2000 ]

Anthony

April 8th, 2002, 12:45 AM

Exactly. There's nothing wrong with a national socialist party, but try telling people that you think Nazism is a good idea...

Jack Ruby

April 8th, 2002, 01:10 AM

I don't have children or a particular want to have them. This is for serveral reasons:

I refuse to have anything in my life that I can't walk away from in an instant. I couldn't do this to my heir.

I also would hold the child to the same standard i do myself. I would Expect him to be Fit, Intelligent, and feel the world owes him nothing.

I would never allow him to go to school with out everyday explaining to him what everything really means. How the laws that are being passed are joke.

I would never want him to feel the alienation that I do. It is not the being an outcast because I am not. It is the feeling of having increasingly less people to Identify with. I would have ended my life long ago if not for my deep rooted love for myself(Mind, Body and Spirt).

Although on the other hand If I had a child I would just as the great Creator did; I would build him in my own image. The endless persuit of average is something he would not be victim of...

Polverone

April 8th, 2002, 02:12 AM

What stigma of evil don't the Nazis have attached to them? They've pretty much been the archetypical embodiment of evil in popular culture ever since WW II. This gives "nazi" a special resonance and power not attached to other words. Try to imagine people laughing about a "Soup Stalinist" or "Soup Khmer Rouge." Sorry, it's just not funny. But "Soup Nazi" is.

It's not as if this stigma is undeserved. Although classical and revisionist historians debate the exact figures, it's clear that Nazi Germany worked to exterminate vast numbers of its own population and of territories that it conquered. This is why Nazi is such an enduring synonym for evil, rather than because of the "let's conquer Europe" scheme that ignited WW II. I really can't explain why Stalin and Mao aren't remembered with the same horror as Hitler. Perhaps it's because they mainly killed their own citizens and that's all well and good as far as historical image goes.

Hitler was good at rousing national unity and pride. He was very charismatic. I'm not sure he gets full marks in any other areas.

As far as the more memorable parts of Nazi thought go... Let me get this straight: Jews are inferior and worthless but somehow manage to secretly rule the world through the media, banks, and other institutions of power. Mmmkay. No insult intended to anyone with far right political leanings, but the sampling of neo-Nazi writings I've come across on the web have struck me as the batshit-loony ravings of foil-hat-wearing conspiracy theorists and homeless alcoholics.

nbk2000

April 8th, 2002, 03:37 AM

You're absolutely right about that!

99.99% of so-called "Nazis" are worthless human garbage. No better than the untermensch that they purport to hate.

And Jews don't rule the world through the banks and such. Though they do have an undue influence in American policy via their connections in media, news, finance, and politics.

I think the reason why the communists and khemer rouge don't have the same impact as "Nazi" is because they died quietly. Whereas the Nazis went down kicking and screaming, dragging the world into hell with them.

It's a shame that the word "Nazi" doesn't inspire the fear it used to. Tell people "The Nazis are coming!" back in the 30's and 40's, people would literally shit on themselves in fear.

Now, it brings to mind the marching morons on the Jewry Springer show. BTW, jerry is a jew, in case you didn't get the hint.

Funny that, isn't it?

Though perhaps in the '30s and '40s of this century, the word "Nazi" will once again inspire bowel loosening terror in the enemies of the Aryan race.

I'd certainly like to an American leader who could inspire the same loyalty as Adolf Hitler. But all I think we'll see in the future is jew asskissing and nigger butt wiping by race traitors interested in nothing more than votes to get political power for their own personal gain.

PS: Mao was red china, Pol Pot was Khmer Rouge.

Polverone

April 8th, 2002, 03:48 AM

Just to clarify: I know Pol Pot is Khmer Rouge and Mao is Communist Chinese. I was just giving different examples of death-dealing leaders who are not as universally remembered as the (ironically, older) Nazi leader Adolph Hitler.

Here's something I wonder: being that you realize modern neo-Nazis are mostly fruitcakes, and the actual historical Nazis lost their war, why do you bother to adopt the political identity/philosophy of Nazis at all? The National Socialists rallied behind the idea of reclaiming Germany for its original inhabitants. I'm sure you're not clamoring for the restoration of the US to American Indians. It seems confusing to identify yourself with historical or neo-Nazis since there are so many things that can't translate right over.

Are you worried or just pissed about the "ass-kissing" of blacks and Jews? They're a numerical minority and they're going to remain that way. Historically they've voted in large blocks, which is why the Democrats (and now Republicans too) try to woo them by any means possible. Actually, that applies more to blacks. Jews are numerically of little significance but have successfully managed to perpetuate a tradition of strong education and employment in influential fields such as finance, entertainment, and medicine. If anything I'd think you'd be more worried about the Hispanic influx, which is projected to significantly alter this country's makeup in the next 50 years.

Myself, I'm not worried. It seems like it's the people with service/manufacturing jobs who get worried about cheap new labor coming into the country. And they should be. From what I can see, the Hispanics aren't in unions and they work their asses off at jobs that nobody else will do for the low pay. Granted, there are also problems with gangs and crime, but where I am I don't see that at all. I just see lots of Hispanics working hard at cleaning the toilets, mowing the lawns, raking leaves, doing all the low-paid menial tasks at this expensive private university. Makes me feel kind of awkward sometimes. But even if the parents aren't learning English, the kids are picking it up (no thanks to bilingual programs), and I expect that in a generation or two their descendants will be attending this school instead of cleaning it. However, it may be different in California where the Spanish-speaking population is more concentrated and self-perpetuating.

Don't get me started on affirmative action, that's a whole other can of worms, but I have nothing but respect for people who make their lives on their own merits, whatever their genetic makeup. The concept of race-loyalty is pretty alien to me, I'll admit. Does someone behave honorably? Are they intelligent? If "yes" and "yes" then I'm probably get along with them just fine whether they just immigrated from India or were born in Missouri. On the other hand, I have a really hard time getting along with idiots, and I know more caucasians fitting that description than anyone else. So I'm entranced by the brains, not the skin.

Oh, heck, as long as I'm probing the depths of your mind... Are you strongly anti-homosexual? If so, why? They don't bite. And every man who wants a man frees up another woman for the straights.

[ April 08, 2002, 03:20 AM: Message edited by: Polverone ]

Jack Ruby

April 8th, 2002, 04:15 AM

Hitler's Mind was strong when he was coming to power and had a well laid out plan.

I would hardly call him a genius though. A great Leader yes a genius no. He repeatedly Fucked up. He was reposible for holding back the jet propulsion programs as well as the V2 rocket porgram.

His mind deteriated gradually until he took his own life.

The reason the Americans were head of the Technology fields, etc years ago and not now is becauce they kidnapped the german Scientist. There is anything odd about it. That is how it was done? Who headed the space Program? A german. Who headed the manhatten Project? a german. I don't see the need to prepetuate this.

So to say that they only reason is because of the chemistry set is a crock. It has to do with American putting to much money into the military and not enough into education. That is the reason that most of your doctors have accents. Why uneducated hill billys' in Alabama have something to bitch about. There country has failed them.

The whites are the only race to inslave other races. the whites have had slaves of all colours. We aren't fussy that way :D . Whether that makes us genetically superior or not it is a fact that can't disputed.

I am currently looking for a copy of Mine Kampf(Sp?) by Adolf Hitler Translated to English. The man was fucked up but when it came to leading he was very wise.

Polverone

April 8th, 2002, 04:53 AM

Oh, certainly, the US received a huge boost in mind power when it got all those European scientists and engineers during and after WW II. I think the deterioration of its technical/scientific might is complex. It's not as simple as "chemistry sets were outlawed" or "education went down the shitter." Although those certainly are valid complaints in their own right.

I'm not sure the problems with American education can be strictly blamed on under-funding, though that's a factor in some areas. I'm probably not the best person to comment on American public education since I've never been within that system. All of my impressions of it are at best second-hand.

I'll try to concentrate on two non-funding factors that seem, even from second hand experience, to be major hinderances to the success of American public education:

1) There is no asshole control. Imagine the Forum if NBK (or any of the other mods) did not hold the power to ban idiots or lock topics. Assholes are everywhere and they're allowed to destroy the learning environment for those who are interested because schools have no effective power over them. They can't be physically punished. They can't even be mentally/verbally punished the way people can online - the teacher can't mock them until they shut up and sit down. Only in the most extreme cases do students actually get expelled, and then they're just kind of shuffled around until they find a new place to plague. I'd like to say "fine, don't go to school, but if you hit 21 and can't support yourself the state ain't saving you." But I know that's not going to happen.

2) There's insufficient academic challenge. In 8th grade someone I knew left the school we were both attending and started going to the local public school. This public school was, by national standards, not bad. This guy had been pulling a D- in the Algebra II class at our school. When he transferred to the public school he landed in Algebra II there also. But his classmates and teachers alike thought he was some sort of "math genius" because he knew the material so much better than anyone already in the class. In the public school, he was grade A material. (No offense intended to anyone who's a good student at a public school, they vary greatly by region and yours might be more rigorous.)

People who are bored tend to become bad students in a hurry, regardless of their normal attitudes toward learning. If you're not allowed to break up classes by ability because that would be "discriminatory," then you have to lump everyone in one big mass and go as slow as the thickest brick in the lot. So not only are the people with quick minds wasting their abilities, they get bored and may even turn into assholes just because school is so annoying and pointless.

Even people who are pretty self-motivated learn better when there's competition to spur them on. Conversely, smart people who never have the experience of learning side by side with other smart people are going to have stunted mental growth, even if they still seem pretty bright.

Notice that neither of these problems (especially the first) can be cured by infusions of money.

Even though I wasn't in a crappy school, this was one of the most frustrating parts of high school (and all school before it). I wanted to read encyclopedias, science books, novels in the 3rd grade, and I did, but I regularly got in trouble for "not paying attention" to the stuff that I could absorb with one ear open. I seriously think that I could have received passing grades in college level courses when I was in the 8th grade, though I would have been totally unprepared socially.

Should I ever have kids I'd want them to be pushed academically to bring out their full potential. I don't care if they have a lot of homework or not, but I want classes that seriously challenge them to think. And I want them tossed in the "shark cage" of a classroom full of kids just as bright as they are. Of course, that's assuming that they turned out like me. If they didn't I'd probably be terribly disappointed and end up a lousy father, which is just one reason I'm not too keen to have offspring.

[ April 08, 2002, 03:54 AM: Message edited by: Polverone ]

Arkangel

April 8th, 2002, 05:33 AM

Just to clarify, I have my own views on the stigma attached to Nazi's, my question was really to stir debate, which it seems to be doing.

Didn't they call Mein Kampf "164,000 offences to German grammar"

Polverone has a very good point in that most Nazis are applying that name to their own ideology, when in fact it was a flawed doctrine that ultimately failed, like it or not. The fact that they went down kicking and screaming doesn't validate it any more than the barbarity it practised does.

German scientists surely didn't get dragged kicking and screaming into the Manhattan Project or jet Propulsion Laboratories, they went because their country was fucked and they realised they were going to get a better life elsewhere. And I'd just like to make the point that there are plenty of other amazing brains around the world, not just residing in the US and Germany. The US didn't invent everything, and be in no doubt, it wouldn't be where it is today (wherever you think that is) without buying, cheating or stealing as much technology in from outside as it created itself. I attribute it's technological advancement at the moment to a combination of a developed society (the Pilgrim Fathers) moving to a relatively untouched, virgin land. The same entrepreneurial spirit that was needed to expand into and exploit that, is as fundamental a facet of the American character, as it's xenophobia. Who needs to think about the rest of the world when we have all of this?

nbk2000

April 8th, 2002, 06:05 AM

Well, the reasons I admire the Nazis most is that they kicked ass!

They took a small country that had been devastated in a world war, suffering hyperinflation, an occupying army, a ruinous depression, starvation, etc...and turned it into one of the global superpowers of the day that required the combine forces of the most advanced and populous countries on earth 6 years to defeat.

The Aryans didn't sit on their butts going "Woe is me!". They got armed, angry, and said "Fuck this! We're not going to take anyones shit anymore! We're going to kick ass!" and proceeded to do so.

Plus their policy of eradication of imbeciles, feebs, retards, genetic defects, etc really strikes me as a neccessary evil if the white race is to remain vital and healthy.

Any species that supports the sickly and degenerated of its species long enough to perpetrate the disease, can not long survive. And it's this "compassion" that the Jews are pushing on us with their media propaganda of "tolerance, equality, blah blah".

One story that really stuck with me is some talking head (news anchor) in Los Angeles that has some kind of crab-claw hand deformity that she KNEW would be passed on to her children.

What does this caucasian (can't call her white) twat do? She has kids, all of whom have the crab-hand deformity.

I've seen other, similar examples, of people (of all races) breeding and multiplying their defective genes. This degrades the entire human race, not just the white race.

The possibility of them breeding needs to be eliminated, by eliminating THEM. Those that are deformed like this need to be immediately exterminated to eliminate their pitiful souls from our sight.

Those that carry the disease genes, but are otherwise "normal", can contribute by being left alive, but sterilized and marked as untermensch, to be used for the work that is too dangerous to risk good aryan lives on. Things like mining, hazardous waste disposal, nuke plant work, etc.

Things like the march of dimes, peace corps, unicef, and other globalist peace-nik feel-good programs do absolutely nothing to solve the "problem" of disease, war, poverty, and all the rest of the problems that have been mans lot since time began.

All they do is serve as means of draining money and resources from America to the endless sinkhole of the third-world.

We'd be better served by giving them guns to kill each other with, and withholding the grain that serves only to keep them alive long enough to multiply their teeming numbers.

I don't think it any coincidence that Jews are the major pushers of gun control in this country. Or that they own the majority of the news and entertainment outlets in this country. If you control what people hear and see, and remove their ability to fight you once you reveal your true intentions, then you've won by default. Simply because your enemies are helpless.

America used to know that the jews weren't their friends either. We knew about the concentration camps, and did nothing to stop it. We wanted rid of the jews, just as much as the Nazis did.

Did you know that to this day, there's only like 1% of the pre-war jewry in europe? The vast majority are either in the US or Israel. So Hitlers plan WAS 99% effective in meeting its goal.

And we could have cared less about what happened to europe. We were neutral. It's only when Hitler threatened England that we entered the war. If Hitler had been happy with just europe, they would have won the war and the whole cold war would never have happened like it did with the communists.

It was only because of America that the Nazis were defeated. Given our almost unlimited manpower, huge industrial base secured by two vast oceans from enemy attack, vast natural resources to draw on with no interdictable lines of communication, and advanced technology, it was very likely that the Nazis were going to eventually lose, though it may have become a cold-war standoff if the Nazis had made a few different choices than they did (like the jets, ENIGMA, etc).

Living in california, I can see quite clearly the "browning" of America. My house is litterally surrounded by beaners on all sides. I see them playing in the fields, driving down the streets, walking in the store isles.... :mad:

I almost feel like I'm in Tijuana, rather than America.

By 2050, whites will be the MINORITY in the US, with the browns being the majority of the other 50%, followed by niggers, then gooks.

NAFTA and the lose of jobs are the results of communistic unions that drove up the wage so high that no business can afford to hire a white man, and the UN agenda to subvert Americas supremacy in world affairs by weakening our economy and distracting us with piddley crap like Haiti, Somalia, and the rest of the third world toilets problems.

Let the niggers starve!

As for the fags, I don't personally hate them. But, they're a symptom of the disease that needs eradication. The spreading of AIDS in the US is primarily through faggots. They've been lying through their cum stained teeth about the myth of heterosexual AIDS in the US. Otherwise, the government and public wouldn't give a shit about a bunch of dead sissies, and they wouldn't have any money for AIDS research and treatment.

If you eliminate fags, bisexuals, IV dope users, and whores from the AIDS count, you're left with just the hemophiliacs and the partners of the bisexuals, whores, and drug users as innocent victims of AIDS.

Comes out to less than 5% of the total.

In africa, AIDS is endemic. It's estimated that more than a third, and maybe even half of all of africa is HIV+. What does that say about the niggers to you? Says to me that they're a bunch of mindless dicks and holes poking each other as often as possible, multiplying like roaches, and dropping like flies. <img src="http://assaultweb.net/ubb/icons/icon18.gif" alt="" />

Anyways, enough of my rant. I've discussed this in great depth many times before in other posts. I'm sure a search through the archives with "nbk2000" and "nazi" will provide more than enough insight for your enjoyment.

megalomania

April 8th, 2002, 02:40 PM

I think the Nazi's did what they had to to survive. Killing the weak may not be ethical, but it is practical to free up scarce resources to enable the strong to survive. Killing the jews was just a way to unify the nation against a common enemy, just like a school football team says "Kill the (insert mascot here)!!"

In todays world we have a more enlightned attitude towards ethical considerations. We know it is wrong to kill, or allow someone to be killed. Unfortunatly it has thinned our resources. Were we to close down schools for retards and put that money into supporting the rest of the kids, education could improve. Were we to stop spending money on AIDS treatments and concentrate on curing cancer (the top killer of humans) we could get the cure sooner. I don't imagine people with disease would like having all money for treatments spent on finding a cure, but that would be the right thing to do in the long run.

Nobody ever thinks about the long term. That's where banning chemistry sets comes in. When you remove something that has the potential to inspire someone to be more than a telemarketer or an artist, you will have enabled that person to be the curer of cancer or AIDS. The current crisis is waning interest in science and mathematics in general. I have never seen any students impressed by the formation of tetraamine complexes causing blue color changes, but they all -ALL- love it when something is blown up or lit on fire. Nobody wants to see Halli Berry act, we just want to see her tits (a true oscar winning performance :) ), it is this Holywood mentality that science needs to create interest.

Arkangel

April 9th, 2002, 04:15 PM

This made me laugh. The piggies were ORDERED to give the guy his pot back, but refused, NOT because it was illegal to have, but because they were worried about quality issues - "what if he had a bad reaction, would we be civilly liable?" Litigation paranoia in it's most entertaining form.

Maybe they could just BUY it off him instead :D

<a href="http://www.mapinc.org/norml/v02/n683/a06.htm" target="_blank">http://www.mapinc.org/norml/v02/n683/a06.htm</a>

And while you're here, the link I found it from:

<a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/americas/newsid_1918000/1918750.stm" target="_blank">http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/americas/newsid_1918000/1918750.stm</a> :D

Ctrl_C

April 9th, 2002, 06:02 PM

There is a copy of Mein Kampf on the FTP however the FTP is not up until further notice. It is a very interesting read.

Personally, and this usually brings me a lot of flak, we should start a systemized human breeding and elimination program. With the genetics engineering, the genome research being conducted, and cloning technology, it may be possible to do it in a lab rather than breed humans. Think about this: we mate Steven Hawking (ok bad example with him prolly being limp dick and all) with the smartest female astrophysicist in the world, they would most likely produce offspring with certainly a high IQ and intellectual understanding, possibly an intellectual understanding specific to astrophysics. This child is then "steered" toward astrophysics and he eventually discovers how to travel at the speed of light...wow.

Now imagine we keep doing this. The smartest, strongest, healthist, get bred with the same. In a few decades, you will have "shortcut" evolution by a few hundred years. The benefit would be unbelievable.

Now as for people inferior genetics, intelligence, or health wise...they could be limited to one child or even none then they must undergo mandatory birth control.

Maybe I've been watching to much GATTACA (which I figured out stands for Guanine, Adenine, Thymine, and Cytosine - the four bases of DNA) or we could stand to benefit from this immensely.

Arkangel

April 9th, 2002, 06:12 PM

Oh dear,

If only it were as simple as that.

You might get someone with a potentially amazingly high IQ, but the chances are they would turn out to be a cunt. Stephen Hawkings (and he wouldn't need to fuck anyone to reproduce, they just stick a probe up his arse....etc Anyway), was interested in what he was, and developed the way he is because of his conditioning, environment etc as much as his fab brainy genes.

You get someone like that from an early age and condition them to do the stuff you want, and sooner or later, they're going to tell you. "Listen dad, I want to fuck around, I want to take drugs, I want to eat popcorn and see movies, and I want to listen to Enya and other shit music that only continental Europeans would nortmally like. And what's more dad, if you don't fucking let me, I'm going to shoot your arse off with this natty little ray gun I invented last week." (That's assuming he doesn't just shoot you, as I say, he'll prbably turn out to be a cunt)

And don't imagine you can get away with hiding stuff like that from him, because he WILL find out about it, and when he does "Bzzzkkkkkkkkrackkkk!" - more ray gun carnage :D .

Super races are not going to happen.

Sorry

Jack Ruby

April 9th, 2002, 07:28 PM

In my opinion Fat people, shouldn't breed with ugly people...

"You kid will be Fat, ugly, both, or has a relatively small chnace turn out relatively normal". To gamble with a childs life as you are there is wrong. If there is only a 1 in 4(25%) chance your child will not be a degenerate is it really worth the risk? Who is to say that the odds are that good.

If a persons only contribution to the race is to bring down the Averages and have resources wasted on them why should they be aloud to exist.

Like my father always said, "Son, you will pull your own wait." This means that you better be worth at least as much space you take up or resources you use.

I believe in Racial Purity... I love the white race and am pro-White(Because I am White). I believe that each race has certain advantages and disadvatages by genetic default. If you mix blood(racially) you will have inferior kin and they will also be troubled by an Identity crisis. They will not belong to one group or the other nor will either except them.

The Black race are more physically developed. This is due to them being more primative and are more suited towards(Hunting, manual labor, stuff with there bodies).

The Asian Race are great accumulators of knowledge. It is not so much that they discover technologies or are a wealth of Ideas. They are also great sustainers of culture and civilization.
Perfect Example is Martial Arts. The chinese Say eveything Comes from Kung Fu..Wrong. Kung Fu came from india where there is a long standing tradition of Wrestling. The which inturn got it from the Romans/greeks.
Now would race would you Say greeks and romans are?

Indians(Aboriginals, indigenous, what ever you would like to call them) are a very spirtual People and great thinkers although failing to document anything by writing it down. The are in tune with them selves and the universe.

The Jewish Race... Well I haven't gotten that far yet...

The White or "Ayran" race very well suited for the Coming up with Ideas and technology, Constantly are looking for more frontier, But the problem is that we are in capable of sustaining a society or empire. All of the great Empires Have collapsed; Rome, Third Riech, Greeks, Monarchy repeatedly. We are so great that our only worthy adversary is ourselves.

[ April 09, 2002, 06:31 PM: Message edited by: Jack Ruby ]

Arkangel

April 9th, 2002, 07:41 PM

"We are so great that our only worthy adversary is ourselves", that's an interesting way of describing human nature.

I have to say that you've got a refreshing (for me) take on racial purity. i.e. for the benefit of the individual races, and each knowing it's place and being most suited to it. In many ways thats a Buddhist principle (or is it Taoist)

Taken to the nth degree though, doesn't this stifle evolution? Though I suppose you could argue that the rapid advance of technology (travel/medicine/warfare etc) has fucked so much with the evolution of the human race that we ARE very confused.

Does a half caste FEEL disorientated? Maybe, but I doubt it's for genetic reasons, rather because they have parents from 2 different cultures. (Check out the film "East is East" and you'll see what I mean. btw it's HYSTERICAL)

Machiavelli

April 9th, 2002, 08:29 PM

(flame)
Oh, we have a genetics expert here. Yeah, fat people are so because they had fat parents and not because they're sitting on the couch the whole fucking day, watching tv and munching chips. What makes me wonder, will your children inherit your spelling errors?
If you want racial purity, go to redneck country, that's what racial purity will give you, fuckin inbreds.

If you take a look at basic evolution and genetics you'll see that for a species to survive and thrive you need diversity, otherwise it can't react to enviromental changes.

And if you mix blood, you'll probably get clumping, but that hasn't got anything to do with race but with real science not that pseudo shit :)

Empires collapse by default, it's been that way and it'll stay that way, nothing lasts forever, otherwise life would be boring. Ok, maybe stupidity is eternal, but that's it.

You are so great that your only worthy adversary is proper spelling and grammar.
(/flame)

Arkangel

April 9th, 2002, 09:30 PM

Eloquently put Machiavelli, and before you "flame" me, remember that I take your side on this - I'm just playing Devil's advocate here:

Black men evolved that way generally in Africa, yellow men generally in Asia, white men generally in Europe....more or less??

Also, the genetically imperfect used to generally die, because they were less able to live in their harsh surroundings wherever they were.

My question is; travel means we mix racially now, medicine means the weak survive...and breed. Is THAT a generally good thing for the human race? I guess that depends what you mean by "good for". Stephen Hawkings would die, where an Aryan dullard would thrive - I know which I would prefer.

I was interested in Jack's opinion, because he wasn't so much saying white is BETTER, just different (and he is white and proud of it - nothing wrong with that). Some people are suited to some things, others to others. It was the least extreme WP comment I've ever heard

EventHorizon

April 9th, 2002, 09:43 PM

Anyone want to do a study on when our society started to decline...give you a hint...you can start around about the time of INTIGRATION.

Human nature, once you set a lower standard as "acceptable" and mix the smart with the dumb, weak with the strong, etc., etc. the whole shittin' mess starts to degrade. I for one was an example of this. Whereas I'm not the brightest crayon in the box, I'm far from a driveling idiot. No one was there to push me nor was there a "motivating" environment in place to make me strive for a higher standard. I basically coasted through school and now wish I hadn't.

Some of the ideals here are a bit harsh, but if things get worse (as I fear they will) there will be ONLY one way to right them...and thats by UNnatural selection.

Arkangel

April 9th, 2002, 10:32 PM

What a cop out.

It's too easy to say "things got worse when we allowed integration". Worse than what, heading towards what caused by what? The black people in western society got there because they were dragged in chains. They were then subjugated and persecuted and it is arguable that they only really had the chance to develop INTO western society in the last 50 years.

How many Jamaican Bobsleighers are there? Fuck all. Why? Because it's hot and they are too busy smoking weed and fighting each other. That's not to say that a Jamaican couldn't be a good bobsleigher, good enough to win gold medals. However, the pool of ability and experience from which to draw is so small that it would take at LEAST 50 years for them to make headway against the pool of existing talent in the alpine world - IF they put their minds to it.

If society has problems because of black people in society, is that problem caused by their integration, or the fact that WE brought them here, yet only allowed them to join society (bitchin all the fucking way about it) 50 years ago. Small wonder there are social problems, but they aren't caused BY the people you are integrating.

It's a shame you coasted through school. It's a shame you were allowed to, but you know what? If you'd been beaten like they were in the "good old days", I'm pretty sure you'd have had plenty to say about that. Would you have learnt any more - hmmmm, impossible to say, but what it is possible to say is that blame is easy. Blame is a cop out and it leads to unjust, damaging, dangerous actions - the war on drugs, the war on terror, the war on liberty, the war on disneyland (it's next, believe me)

What is hard is taking a fair and balanced view, being honest about where things were fucked up, and then try not to make the same blundering mistakes that were made in the past.

In the meantime:

:D

BLAME CANADA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

nbk2000

April 9th, 2002, 11:03 PM

Mach, please don't confuse choosing to breed with your own race with breeding with your own family. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /> There is a BIG difference.

With hundreds of millions of whites, there's more than enough genetic diversity to ensure healthy survival of the race.

Mongrelization of the Aryan race by interbreeding with muds serves only to weaken, not strengthen, us. Universal fact of biology is that the introduction of a defective gene into a species gene pool inevitably causes the species to grow weaker, not stronger.

And, once contaminated, it takes much more pure genes to dilute the defective gene enough to suppress the defect, though it will always be present if the carriers of the defect are allowed to reproduce.

An simple experiment to demonstrate this is to put a pinch of cigarette ash in a cup of milk. That milk is now foul and bitter. It takes several more gallons of milk to dilute the pollutant enough to make the milk drinkable again. Don't believe me? Try it, I have.

Same thing with races.

Also, it's a well documented fact that heat makes the brain less capable of higher thought. Anyone who's been outside in 110 degree weather knows that you're not going to be able to do calculus in your head, or even on paper most likely.

Thus, the reason why niggers are inately stupid. They've lived in a hot enviroment for many millenia, thus their mental capacity to develop higher learning was never able to develop. Also, food was abundant in africa because there was never a killing winter.
Instead, evolutionary pressures selected for strength, endurance, and the ability to withstand heat.

Whereas, the white mans brain, having evolved in temperate climates, wasn't burdened by heat, thus his brain was able to eventually develop the higher thought capacity he now has. Also, the killing cold provided a selection pressure for intelligence since stupid people wouldn't have survived 6 months of winter. No foresight to stock supplies, adapt to the snow and ice, or hunt scarce game in difficult terrain.

Studies have been conducted where people would wear caps that would either heat or cool their heads by 1 degree F. Cooling raised IQ scores by 10 points, heating caused a similar or even more dramatic shift towards stupidity.

Thus:

cool brain = smarter brain

warm brain = dumber brain

:D

And it's always VERY warm in africa. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />

BTW, they published my response. Took 'em long enough.

CyclonitePyro

April 10th, 2002, 12:12 AM

I have to agree with jack, eventhorizon and nbk.

I dislike the geneticly engineered rugrats.
People with IQ's over 200 tend to be a little odd. They just sit in a corner drooling while thinking of space travel,(space cadets, haha)
Life has more important issues, like having fun. These manufactured brain people would be arrogent penis wrinkles, they would probably take over the world. We should, if this is done, keep them captive, and make them smart up to the level that they can still communicate.

Anthony

April 10th, 2002, 12:55 PM

[devil's advocat]

But think of white man with his intelligence but with the strength and stamina of a black man?

[/devil's advocat}

I agree that it would be cruel to bread "brains", they'd have no freedom. Imagine that from birth you were assigned the job of working at McDonalds and were forced to do it until the day you died, it was also the *only* thing that you were allowed to do. I know for sure that I'd take a 9mm headache pill...

Arkangel

April 10th, 2002, 01:30 PM

Nobody has made it clear to me why mixed races are BAD, or rather, what's the big plan about keeping genetic "purity" if there is such a thing. Do all you guys have some sort of plan for your lives, the world (well, your world anyway)? What's it all heading towards?

And please don't try to convince me that the moral and social decline in our societies is because the black man is incapable of higher thought.

NBK, you claim that blacks are inferior mentally because they are in a hot country, but what about eskimos, native Americans (redskins), and the degenerate slavs you talk about. They live in pretty cool climates, so what piece of their respective DNA makes THEM degenerate and inferior?

nbk2000

April 11th, 2002, 12:25 AM

They're of asiatic descent. Thus inferior. :) Plus, it's ALWAYS cold there, with nary a summer to just loaf around and think. If you're spending litterally every day of your life struggling for survival against freezing to death, you don't have time to be creative.

Hell, look at the native american indians. They live in a lot of places that were just like europe weather wise, had plenty of natural resources at their disposal, and yet they never advanced past stone age technology.

Shit, they hadn't even discovered the FUCKING WHEEL!

Not them, not the eskimos, the niggers, not the south americans, none of them. Why is that?

And the indians never developed a written language beyond pictographs. Thus, knowledge learned could only be passed on person to person via talking. No history means no advancement.

As for the devils advocate view of breeding white man intelligence with negro endurance...ain't happening. You can't breed a human with an ape and expect a strong human. At most, you'll get a clever ape, but still, it's an ape.

OH OH AH AH! <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />

Decline of society is becasue we started accepting the bullshit that "All men are equal". IT'S A LIE!

In every species of life, there are the superior and the inferior. The inferior die, the superior survive, and the species gets stronger.

Unfortunately, due to our own intelligence and technology, we're able to subvert that law of nature and we're reaping the whirlwind because of it.

Degenerates are outbreeding the superior, and the forces of natural selection like starvation and disease that'd cull them is being held in check by agricultral and medicine.

[ April 10, 2002, 11:39 PM: Message edited by: nbk2000 ]

Jack Ruby

April 11th, 2002, 02:17 AM

Machiavelli,

Why instead of reading and understanding my words did you try to attack me on a personal level. Whether or not My message had spelling mistakes has very little to due with how much sense it makes.

I don't Believe that very shallow Gene Pool is the Answer. White Trash, Hill Billies, ReadNecks, etc. are Degenerates. You know nothing about my background so don't ever assume.

Let me put it this way I belive Deversity is beautiful. As I stated above all of the races have their Traits. If you mix blood these traits will not carry over properly. It was not intended to happen. Thats why Different Races originate from Different parts of the world.

Can you answer this Question were you Conditioned to hate your own race?

I don't believe in Hate for another race... Just pride for your own. You must Love your what you are... no matter what.

Polverone

April 11th, 2002, 02:51 AM

This may be flamebait. I don't believe in feeling pride or shame for anything you didn't do. Did you decide to be born caucasian? Can you take any credit for the accomplishments of any of the great men and women of history? Don't mistake blind luck for divine favor. If you're superior, show it. Online, in a textual medium, you must have a firm grasp of language or risk looking a fool. Machiavelli was completely justified in upbraiding someone cocksure of his inherited greatness who can't even control a keyboard.

Most of the great scientists and technologists have been of European ancestry, just like me. But I wouldn't dare hijack their accomplishments and lineage as evidence of my own superiority. I don't care if you're the love child of Marie Curie and Carl Friedrich Gauss, I think you're still just Joe Nobody until you accomplish something.

As I said at the beginning of this message, I don't believe in inerited shame either. No reparations for slavery, no imposed mourning for colonialism and exploitation and all the other catchphrase sins of our ancestors. The world is a hard place and everybody who had a personal stake in these things is already dead.

Jack Ruby

April 11th, 2002, 03:34 AM

So now we are basing Superiority on wheter or not your finger slips off a key or not? Whether your keyboard has had some one Spill coke, etc on it and there for your keys stick sometimes?

As I recall all great men must be measured on the basis spelling/typing skills... Grow up.

Lets completely toss away and over look the value of the content because it hurts your brain to much the think about the concepts discussed.

I said that I am Proud of who I am and what I am. I simply pointed out the traits of the different races through my own observations.

nbk2000

April 11th, 2002, 03:53 AM

A good grasp of language DOES make a big difference in how people percieve your message. It's hard to put much credence in anything that "zouDns lik diS", no matter how true it is.

Anyways, I don't think that anyone can take personal credit for their ancestors accomplishments. But that doesn't mean that can't take pride in them.

I can't take credit for helping to put a man on the moon, but I can be proud of being a citizen of the country (and race) that did.

Same with race. I may not be a great scientist or artist, but I'm proud to be part of a race that has spawned so many of the great scientists and artists.

I can also contribute by not being an embarassment to my race.

When you see crowds of people of any race acting the fool, don't you feel disgusted by that race? If I see a white man acting shamefully, I feel embarrassed by him because it's a reflection on my race to other races.

Mud:
"Lookie 'ere! Some crazy crackerz passes out in the gutter! Let's spit on 'im!"

:mad:

It's not proper for anyone of the Master Race to act like a foolish mud. Begging in the streets, being slovenly drunk, acting like a fool (and more), are all hallmarks of inferiors. Inferior intellect, inferior self-control, and inferior pride.

As a White man, you need to carry yourself with respect, pride, and dignity for your race. It'll show to those races who have none for themselves.

Show them why the White Race has conquered every country on earth (at one time or another), enslaved every other race on the planet, and are the leaders of the destiny of the planet.

Polverone

April 11th, 2002, 04:18 AM

I normally don't feel good about slamming someone I've never met. Note that I don't dislike you personally, but I find your ideas weak. Weak theories and weak theorists should be broken down head-on.

<blockquote>quote:<hr />I don't believe in Hate for another race... Just pride for your own. You must Love your what you are... no matter what.<hr /></blockquote>Unconditional pride in oneself, regardless of merit, effort, or ability, is ridiculous. Pride and respect are earned, not inherited. If you have earned these things in your own eyes, I congratulate you.

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Lets completely toss away and over look the value of the content because it hurts your brain to much the think about the concepts discussed.<hr /></blockquote>I didn't just touch on your incompetence with language (hint: Coke on your keyboard does not force random capitalizations or inappropriate homonym choice). I also noted your insensate pride in something (genetic makeup) that you had no control over and did nothing to earn. Going back further, your notion of different races and their strengths is so broad and clichèd that it might as well have come from a video game manual.

"The Black race are more physically developed. This is due to them being more primative and are more suited towards(Hunting, manual labor, stuff with there bodies).

Indians(Aboriginals, indigenous, what ever you would like to call them) are a very spirtual People and great thinkers although failing to document anything by writing it down. The are in tune with them selves and the universe.

Orcs have +2 to initial strength but they are not very Dexterous or intelligent. They are better suited to being Fighters than Thieves or Mages. They have a long history as a proud but aloof Race."

BoB-

April 11th, 2002, 04:57 AM

My dad once told me the secret to success is to only care about yourself, but never let anyone know that is how you feel.

"Same with race. I may not be a great scientist or artist, but I'm proud to be part of a race that has spawned so many of the great scientists and artists."

In the US, black people are made to feel special from the day they are born. In fact we have an entire month (February) set aside that is dedicated soley to black history. We already learn about black history year round, yet for the whole month the media tells black sheeple's all about the acheivements of they're race, essentially glorifying a sense of racial pride.

But the second a white man says he is proud of his race he is deemed a KKK nut, a racist, and can even be sued for "defemation of character".

Hypocrisy is ugly, lets just let people have they're opinion and stop thinking we can change a persons mindset.

Arkangel

April 11th, 2002, 06:29 AM

Jack, neither does coke on your keyboard prevent you from going back over what you've written to check that it's accurate, to the point and spelled correctly - or whatever you want it to be. I doubt you want it to look scruffy, so am given to assume that you just bang it out and don't give a crap what it really looks like. That's not a critiscism, it's an observation. You can tell a lot about a person by the way the look and act, the state of their shoes etc. Since all we have to go on is what you type, it's not unreasonable for Polverone to make assumptions based on that.

NBK, "they're of Asiatic descent, thus infericr". Yeah, that's pretty obvious - er, not really though, you have to do better than that. I don't get the impression that you are a grim, miserable person from what I see of you, as most of your posts have a major element of fun about them; but that last reply had me wondering - never slovenly drunk or acting the fool........what is so wrong about that? People who take themselves seriously are dull, difficult to be near, and a waste of time. I can just imagine one of your parties. All these white guys in crisply ironed shirts and slacks, sipping mineral water, knawing at fat free pretzels, some Wagner on in the background, some frau in summer dresses pottering around deferentially. I'd appear, burping and giggling and all their heads would snap round, eyes narrow..."Mein Gott..UNTERMENSCH!", as one voice. Tell you what, I'll invite you to one of mine instead eh? :D

Anyway, I think the reason I get so irritated by all this WP, segregationalist nonsense is that it's just so futile. I mean do you really think you're going to stop integration, interracial breeding (you say it yourself, JLO and Mariah Carey are HOT, and who wouldn't want to screw them? Personally I'd be bored with humping girls from just one ethnic background). You aren't going to stop it (really though, you are not), so why nurture such passionate views on it. You'd be doing society a bigger favour if you campaigned more fiercly for issues that are divisive and destructive. You and society would be stronger for it.

BoB, (glad to see you back on Earth) I agree with much of what you say, but not that blacks are made to feel special and whites not. Look at Irish, Italians, Hispanics, and so on. Each group like that in America is proud of its heritage, there's plenty of pride also in the founding fathers, it just isn't badged as an issue of colour.

Affirmative action is a BAD thing, and it makes me angry that I can't hang my own national flag up without being regarded as a Nazi, but it's a mistake to say that it's all one sided.

[ April 11, 2002, 05:47 AM: Message edited by: Arkangel ]

Arkangel

April 11th, 2002, 10:48 AM

And another couple of NBK's points that I'd like to take issue with:

In one post above, he mentions that "faggots are lying through their cum stained teeth about the myth of heterosexual AIDS", yet goes on to state that the blacks in Africa are dropping like flies......So how does that work then? Are all African men gay, and the women IV drug users? You can't explain a phenomenon affecting an entire continent as being a piece of homosexual propoganda.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
There are many different strains of HIV in the world. The predominant form in africa is transmitted by hetero mud banging. The type in the US is a much less virulent strain that requires the "direct injection" route of ass sex or IV shooting.

So, the fags screaming about the hetero AIDS threat in America IS fag propaganda.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Next, wearing cooling or heating hats raises or lowers the iq of the wearer.

Mkaaay :rolleyes:

So what you're saying is not that blacks in Africa are less able to think, it's that if they are still in Africa, they can't think so well because of the heat. So by that logic, even NBK in Africa during his world tour (don't let them know you're coming eh?) is going to be a few sandwiches short of a picnic. (course I can well imagine him getting off a plane with a coolbox on his head to avoid being dragged down to their intellectual level :D )

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
As a matter of fact, I have worn blue ice packs under a beanie during really hot weather. Not only does it keep me from sweating (the head being the hottest part of the body), but it also helps keep my anger in check. When I get hot, I get violent.

People sometimes ask me why I'm wearing a thick beanie in such hot weather. I tell them to feel my head. They do, the light goes on, and they feel stupid for not doing the same thing.

I stay cool, calm, and collected, while others around me are wilting in the sun. :p

I even had a T-shirt with pockets sewn in it for the big ice packets. :D

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

By the same token, a black guy going to live in Alaska is going to have to wear BIIIIIG wooly hats to avoid getting considerably more intelligent.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I said the IQ shift was measured during studies. Meaning temporary shifting of IQ under controlled conditions.

However, what's temporary in the lab, has had many thousands of years to become permanent in humans under constant exposure.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

You say that eskimos are of asiatic descent and therefore inferior, however, you also say "the killing cold provided a selection pressure for intelligence since stupid people wouldn't have survived 6 months of winter". So bearing in mind your argument, eskimos, who live with 10 or 11 months of winter should be the brightest folks around, no?

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
As I already explained, survival pressure in perpetual winter (not 6 months) doesn't allow any free time for creative thinking. And, let's not forget, that extreme cold dulls the thought too. When you're freezing you ass off, you're not thinking about why the sun crosses the sky.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Clearly genetics has a lot less effect than environment. If I'm not mistaken, your own argument has removed the foundation for a large part of your prejudice. :p

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
It's not an EITHER/OR thing. It's both. Genetics combined with enviroment. Genetics is predominant, but enviroment will eventually make it's influence felt over many thousands of years.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

[ April 11, 2002, 12:23 PM: Message edited by: nbk2000 ]

Mr Cool

April 11th, 2002, 12:35 PM

I HATE it when I join a long topic late, there are too many things to argue against!

That "all men are equal", or even created equal, is indeed a lie. I can't imagine how anyone could possibly believe it.

A society similar to that in "A Brave New World" would be nice (alpha +'s doing the thinking, epsilons cleaning public toilets), but it wouldn't work. Epsilons might not know much, but they know they don't like cleaning up other people's shit. The only way to get round this would be to make them amazingly stupid, but you won't find a mother who'll let you feed her child alcohol to kill its brain cells so that it can be condemned to a life of servitude!
Or maybe a more communist society - from each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs. But true communism is practically impossible to achieve, since it needs organising by someone and they don't let go of their power, and a single labourer doesn't get much for doing hard work so he get's pissed off. But maybe aspects of it could be utilised....

The best way forward would be to have a much more complex education system, with everyone grouped with others of similar abilities. Then the smart people could be given more advanced education, and their minds would be stimulated through conversations and interactions with other clever, interesting people (it is NOT true that, as someone said, people with IQ's of 200 sit around drooling about space travel. They are often the funniest, most interesting people, but in order to be so they do need the right environment). This way, clever people would not be stunted by learning at the pace of idiots, and more progress in science and technology could perhaps be made.

The only way that I can see defective genes being removed from the gene pool is if society TOTALLY collapses, and people realise that if they spend their time looking after others they won't be able to scrounge up enough food. But then re-building society would take a long time, and it would be even longer before things were better than they were before.

Machiavelli: "Yeah, fat people are so because they had fat parents and not because they're sitting on the couch the whole fucking day, watching tv and munching chips." It is true, it is likely to be because they had fat parents. It is largely genetic, and if you have fat parents who sit around munching chips all day, what do you think the kids will end up doing? So they have a genetic tendency to be fat, and their environment encourages lazyness.

"If you take a look at basic evolution and genetics you'll see that for a species to survive and thrive you need diversity, otherwise it can't react to enviromental changes." - very true. I read an interesting fact a while ago, that there is more genetic diversity in a few famillies of chimps (or maybe baboons or some other primate) than in the whole human race. Weird, huh?
But diversity is only an advantage if there are factors that weed out the week. Otherwise weeknesses and defects will be multiplied, as well as strengths.

And you might have to compromise between physical strength and mental ability. I believe it was Einstein who commented that he had not known a truly brilliant person who didn't have some sort of physical defect, although the only example that comes to mind is Hawkin.

Well, I'm getting tired of typing now. Like I said, there are so many things I want to say that I can't organise my thoughts properly.

Lol, perhaps someone should change the title of this thread :)

[ April 11, 2002, 11:37 AM: Message edited by: Mr Cool ]

Arkangel

April 11th, 2002, 12:54 PM

You don't have to argue, you could just agree with me! <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />

Anyway, STILL nobody has bothered to explain to me WHY the human race NEEDS within it a "master race". WHY we shouldn't just keep going the way we are. Interracial breeding is not the cause of the decline in society that I believe we are seeing. It's far more complex than that. How for example would it explain the maniac litigation that is crippling the states at the moment?

[ April 11, 2002, 12:14 PM: Message edited by: Arkangel ]

nbk2000

April 11th, 2002, 01:38 PM

Duality is why there must be a master race.

Light and Dark

Good and Evil

Strong and Weak

Smart and Stupid

Master and Slave

That's why.

So either the White Race is in charge, or it'll wither up and become no better than the slaves it used to own. And I'm not seeing how having the africans in charge, or the gooks, is going to help the planet.

Look at africa. The niggers are in total charge of the continent, and the whole continent is the toilet of the world. Starvation, war, poverty, disease, etc is the daily norm.

Only South Africa under Apartheid was worth a shit. It was controlled by whites and was the only nuclear power on the continent (thank god DeKlerk had the nukes destroyed before giving up the country).

Their army kicked butt, the economy was strong, and it was safe to walk the streets.

Now, under the mud government, the streets are a war-zone, the economy is down the shitter, and the army is like every other third-world army with armed monkeys.

Pathetic.

Notice how all the liberals who were bitching about Apartheid aren't saying shit about the new government? That's because they realize what a fuck up the niggers are now that they're in charge.

It used to be people wanted to immigrate to SA, now they want to leave.

Also, I edited your post to include my rebuttal. Much easier than a long ass reply.

PS: where is Pangea?

[ April 11, 2002, 12:44 PM: Message edited by: nbk2000 ]

Arkangel

April 11th, 2002, 02:47 PM

Pan·gae·a also Pan·ge·a (păn-jē'ə)n.

A hypothetical supercontinent that included all the landmasses of the earth before the Triassic Period. When continental drift began, Pangaea broke up into Laurasia and Gondwanaland.

[PAN– + Greek gaia, earth.]

(I've mentioned it before, but you might want to check out <a href="http://www.atomica.com" target="_blank">www.atomica.com</a> and download their free application. When you want to find out what a word means, you press and hold Alt, then click your cursor over any word and it will explain. It's never failed me yet and I use it a lot.)

10fingers

April 11th, 2002, 04:16 PM

It is in human nature to try to put yourself above others who are different. ALL races and cultures practice this. We never feel higher than when we are standing on the back of another of less value.
If you believe in Darwinism this is normal behavior. Can 4 billion years of evolution be wrong?
If you take several strains of bacteria and put it on a carcass the one that can outproduce and adapt the best will survive, the rest perish. There is no morality or right/wrong in this, only survival of the fittest. If you look at human history there are strong parallels in human behavior and that of any other animal or bacteria.
The Europeans, of which I am a descendant, have been the dominant culture for the last 500 years. In that time they have probably done more conquering, caused more death and destruction than any other culture in history. What gave them the ability to do this was technical prowess and desire.
The Europeans found America and it was like pouring hungry bacteria on a fresh carcass. They proceeded to devour everything in sight, multiply and become strong. They also committed genocide on the native population. Was this wrong or survival of the fittest? I don't know. They were the master race on this continent at that time.
What the Nazi's did was take Darwinism and turn it into a religion. By using logic I cannot disagree with all of their philosophies. If you believe in religion and morality then they were totally wrong. But if Hitler and his religion could have conquered Europe and the World would they have been the Master Race?

Pu239 Stuchtiger

April 11th, 2002, 09:16 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />I said the IQ shift was measured during studies. Meaning temporary shifting of IQ under controlled conditions.

However, what's temporary in the lab, has had many thousands of years to become permanent in humans under constant exposure.<hr /></blockquote>This is a long-discredited evolutionary theory. Look up Lamarck's theory of inherited traits. Lamarck was not actually an idiot as he is depicted in many introductory biology books, but putting the terms Lamarck and "acquired traits" into a search engine is a good way to come up with relevant documents.

Arkangel

May 13th, 2002, 10:00 PM

Even if you're not making Meth, watch what you do, as now, Wal MArt agents appear to be joining with the FBI in the "war on, well, stuff, OK!"

<a href="http://robots.cnn.com/2002/HEALTH/05/10/meth.makings.ap/index.html" target="_blank">http://robots.cnn.com/2002/HEALTH/05/10/meth.makings.ap/index.html</a>

vulture

May 14th, 2002, 01:18 PM

We went to ANOTHER jew memorial museum today, in ANOTHER indoctrinating effort of our school. I get so sick about that complaining culture of the jews. 6 million jews were exterminated in WWII. MMkaay, how many people did Stalin kill, how many American natives were killed in the 1500's and last but not least: HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE BEING KILLED BY AIDS TODAY BECAUSE OF RELIGOUS BAN OF ANTICONCEPTIVA???

We are all so shit scared about bioterrorism, but isn't the ban of Bush and the pope on
condomes also a form of bioterrorism by spreading AIDS???

In fact, you could sue them for the UN court just like Milosevic for mass murder.....
Compared to that, Milosevic is just a wannabe....

EDIT: Oh, and i finally understand why the US doesn't want to sign the chem and bioweapons treaty: In 10 years or more, they won't have any chemists or decent scientists anymore, so they need to hold on to their reserves in case they ever would need them. :rolleyes:

[ May 14, 2002, 12:29 PM: Message edited by: vulture ]

Flake2m

June 4th, 2002, 12:30 PM

Thank goodness I live in a country with slightly more freedom. Australia is starting to become like the USA, you cannot buy a bag of KNO3 without people asking about a thousand questions :mad: .

As people may know, in the 50's-60's you could buy fireworks at virtually at any age. Now if you want anything like that, you need a licence and a permit. Why? because their were people that lost they fingers or hands because they were holding the firework when it went off. 90% of the time this would be because the person didn't have enough brain cells to figure out that fireworks can be dangerous if they aren't used properly :confused: . As a result fireworks were banned from retail sale.

These days you wouldn't be able to find a respectable company that will sell chemicals and glassware that could also be used in drug labs, even if they are going to be used for a legitimate reason. The state government (WA) has even passed a bill to make it more difficult to purchase this equipment without you telling them your age, address, phone number and reason for buying these products :mad: . This alone is enough to make any pyro or amateur chemist mad, because you might wake up at 5am in the morning to find a team of TRG police in your house/ shed/ basement and ruining your science experiment :mad: then arresting you for "conspiring to make a dangerous odour".
If someone can give me advice on how to make a Pig proof lab I would be grateful.

and remember:

[ June 04, 2002, 11:42 AM: Message edited by: Flake2m ]

James

June 4th, 2002, 03:32 PM

Get 80 acres out in the middle of nowhere, and a valid excuse for being there ie an apiary. Oh nevermind.

AmonDin

July 1st, 2002, 04:01 AM

I believe in a policy of non-interference. If countries A and B want to go to war and anniahlate each other, let them. If Etheopia can't grow enough food to support it's own massively expanding population, let the morons starve. And don't give me that famine crap and 'they can't help it', fuck em, natural climate changes have been happening for a LOT longer than any of us have been around, if they've lived through that many, I doubt that one little dry spell will completely anniahlate them. (even if it did, who cares? To my knowledge, etheopia does not produce anything of value to anyone, it is just a cesspit for western money.) Migrate, adapt, learn, survive. That is the only reason we are still around, our brain power. We aren't as strong as a gorilla or as fast as a cheetah, and I doubt that any of us could kill a lion bare-handed. So why are we living in cities with comforts, luxuries, free thought, the internet etc? We adapted. We couldn't chase down our prey, so we trapped it instead. We couldn't fight of the animals with our hands, so we made spears and axes to even the score. That is how it has been and how it will continue to be. The ethiopians will learn to grow food in their new climate, or they will move. The only other choice is death. People with disabilities and defects of all varieties face the same problem. They will learn to adapt and survive in a world designed for normal humans or they will die off. It's that simple, they should be given no help, nor should they be hindered. If they can't adapt, that is their problem, not ours. A healthy gene pool only grows because of mutations, beneficial 'defects' will be kept as those individuals will better survive, unhealthy and harmful mutations will be weeded out. To interfere in this process is to weaken the human race, Hitler interfered, so do the march of dimes and X number of organizations for the weak, diseased, and stupid.

Thats not to say that we shouldn't find the cure for cancer, aids, etc. Cancer is a plague on our race created by our own success in adaptation (longevity, etc.). If we adapt to such an extent that we can fix the problems associated with survival itself, that would be truely remarkable. AIDS and other viruses are organisms that have evolved to feed on our success in survival (we're so damned good at the game called evolutaion, that we have things appearing which feed on our success!) To wipe out these diseases would likewise be remarkable.

As for racial purity, I'll apply some simple economics to it. If I am better at producing commodity A, and you is better at producing commodity B. Then logic dictates that I should concentrate everything to producing A and you should concentrate on producing B, then we trade that which we have for that which we need and come out better than if we had divided our respective resources trying to produce both A and B. If the blacks can provide better manual labor and we can produce better leaders and scientists, then these principles dictate that we (the whites) should be creating, discovering, and researching; while the blacks should be producing the things which we create. One is not nescessarially superior to the other, just different. A theorist who can't build is not much of anything, and a laborer without anything to build is likewise lost. (note: I personally don't believe that all members of one race are good at the same things. Simply that people should stick to their strengths and trade that for which they can't get on their own. A man of strength and skilled with his hands, but limited intelligence should barter his skills to get ahead. Likewise a man of great intelligence but limited practical ability. To those of you who have both, congratulations, you're a step above.)

zaibatsu

July 1st, 2002, 04:11 PM

AmonDin, I have to question you when you say "One is not nescessarially superior to the other, just different". A scientist IS superior to a manual labourer, as a scientist could easily become a manual labourer, while a manual labourer could not become a scientist. This is assuming that the scientist is of a higher intelligence than the manual worker.

NoltaiR

July 1st, 2002, 04:32 PM

I used to get many of my misc chems from walmart without any questions... especially everything for my APrc. I could buy the acetone by the gallon for about $5, 3% H2O2 for about 75 cents a quart, and rubber cement for about $1 a pint. HCl could be bought by the quart but I always just used H2SO4 drain cleaner from the store across the street, Lowes. But thermometers and other glass measuring equipment could also be bought a walmart.

Now they I.D. me for everything.. supposedly the acetone and rc is an inhalant. And for some idiot reason or another you have to be 18 to buy more than one quart of H2O2. Of coarse I have been 18 for about 5 months now so there is no problem, but I can't ever get any of my younger brothers to pick anything up for me anymore because they aren't old enough.

kingspaz

July 1st, 2002, 06:35 PM

i agree with Zaibatsu. unless the scientist is a chimp in a lab coat :D

frostfire

July 4th, 2002, 05:17 PM

wow, I've never seen so much senior members join in some out of topic feud...guess what the leaders do is always right...

zaibatsu, can Stephen Hawking become a laborer? ..hehe, just teasing, he surely can build an exo skeleton cybernetics system to aid him...I've seen a joke with that in a physics message board long ago

superiority or not is based on first; choices, remember back in your kid age when you really want to take a break from school one day? well, one choices lead to another and you end up where you are. Second is environment, it's is almost inevitable that one's mindset is afftected by his/her living environment since childhood.

NBK, with your belief of the existence white superiority, I wish you best of luck. You mentioned whites should not embarass themselves, well with the existing "animal house" tradition among the whites even in top colleges like caltech/mit/gatech, and the continuous flow of indian population to these places, the next US generation might be "different." Also the growing porn industry in the net has basically made the impression of US as the "whore house" which is a very sad thing.

As I've mentioned in other thread, racial superiority is based on a search for a scapegoat from one's own misconduct in his/her life. By this theory,say one day there's one gigantic genocide where the whites wipe off the entire inferior race off the planet, the next thing happen would be ethics or even family superiority since that need to blame others would continue to exist. As for pride, I believe it's generally true that for one to excel, he/she should sometimes eradicate their pride and ego

as in racial mixing, it can be bad or good, which one is more is nothing but statistics, a tool that enable one to sleep at night just because he/she belongs to 95% of the good side, but as far as guarantee, nothing goes for absolution. Statistic is only 100% when it happens to you.
One example of good result is facial appearance,I notice that the best mix is between white and asians, particulary Italian and Chinese, but I won't go any further to my observation.

I believe men are created equal FROM ground zero, from there it all depends on their environment and choices they make, while from christian perspective, men are created equal no matter what. However, everytime I see white and black pairing on the street, something doesn;t feel right, I don't see myself as hypocrate, rather I haven't managed to resolve this personal phenomena.

One of the power of US is their diversity, they use color atheletes to excel in specific sports, and they use asian thinkers as a thinking weapons against their own origin. Beat then technologically, economically etc etc. Yes, things degradate as well from this diversity, but from thermodynamics view, the entropy of the whole universe is always +, so things are goinf more towards disorder...it's just nature's occurence, and from christian perspective, our era is the days of the end where almost all signs have been seen, so the end is near. Nothing is too spectacular anymore these days

ps: so Bob, you're always around eh?
I really wish the topic title is changed and the section too

[ July 07, 2002, 06:47 PM: Message edited by: frostfire ]

Arkangel

July 4th, 2002, 05:36 PM

Start a new topic and carry it on again Frostfire. Not that the whole thing hasn't been talked about at length before, but it's great that people have and express views, of whatever perspective :)

edit:typo

[ July 04, 2002, 04:38 PM: Message edited by: Arkangel ]

Anthony

July 4th, 2002, 08:24 PM

I'm afraid that I've "embarresed" the white race on many occassions... :D

Mick

July 4th, 2002, 10:09 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />
AmonDin, I have to question you when you say "One is not nescessarially superior to the other, just different". A scientist IS superior to a manual labourer, as a scientist could easily become a manual labourer, while a manual labourer could not become a scientist. This is assuming that the scientist is of a higher intelligence than the manual worker. <hr /></blockquote>

where the fuck did you get this retarded idea?

i fail to see why a labourer can not become a scientist.
the only difference between the 2 is knowledge. and last time i checked, being a labourer does not stop you learning new things.

i myself am a labourer, does that mean that i shouldn't be at this forum?.

don't try to pigeon hole people, it doesn't work.

photonic

July 4th, 2002, 11:11 PM

If I understood what he was saying correctly, then that "retarded idea" is a fact. All men are not equal. Some are created differently than others. For example, there are people at my school who love football and work as hard as is possible, but still will never play college football. I also know people who don't work at all and will get all of their college education paid for playing it. This does not demonstrate equality. All he was saying as that there is such a thing as inequality/superiority. Some people may want to do something but simply can't. You may be able to become a scientist, but until you do a scientist is more "significant" because he's less easily replaced.That's not to say you both don't deserve the same rights and oppurtunities. It's the position, not the person.

BTW, this is very far off topic, no?

PYRO500

July 5th, 2002, 01:02 AM

If all men are equal then what the hell are all the minorities complaining about?

Mick

July 5th, 2002, 03:26 AM

at what point did i say all men are equal?....um, nope i didn't.

my point was, you can not say "a scientist can become a labourer, but a labourer can not become a scientist".
i see absolutely no logic in saying that.

i don't understand how your statement works? i mean, why can one do both things, and the other can't.

however, on the subject of equality...
what you are basicly saying is that scientist is more important then a builder. why?
they are both equally as important as each other, just on completely different ends of the scale.

they are both equal in important, but un-equal in knowledge.
if you ask a builder what HNO3 is, he probably won't know.
if you ask a scientist make and erect the frame of a house, he probably won't know.

everyone is different. but everyone is needed.

man, i hate these pointless "Z person is better then Y person" discussions. i shouldn't have bothered replying. and i don't think i will after this.

[ July 05, 2002, 02:29 AM: Message edited by: Mick ]

Pu239 Stuchtiger

July 5th, 2002, 03:30 AM

I think what he is saying is that a scientist already has everything he needs to become a laborer - two arms, two legs, and a head screwed on straight. A laborer, on the the other hand, does not already have everything he needs to become a scientist - knowledge, which takes years of study to acquire.

It's more difficult to become a scientist than a laborer. That's why there isn't ads playing on TV, inviting you to attend the College of Construction Workers.

vulture

July 5th, 2002, 06:00 AM

I just finished reading the book black hawk down by mark bowden, which accuratly describes the situation in mogadishu when the americans were there in 1993. The writer says he had the idea the people don't give a fuck about peace or rebuilding society, they only want power and money.
Personally, I think this is the case in many third world countries.

We should face the truth that in the end every man has to fight for himself. We didn't get full stores, health care, food and money dropped right out of the sky. We worked for it. The best proof of this is that although most industrial civilised nations have little or no natural resources, while most third world countries bulk with gold, oil, etc.

When we send the ragheads money, they buy guns and drugs. When we send them food, one runs with the load while the others starve.
For god's sake, let the people in Africa starve to death and don't send food supplies twice a year which are barely enough to keep them alive so they suffer from hunger and diseases the rest of the year.

Anyway, Africa is a problem which is going to efficiently solve itself in the next 20 years if we just keep our hands clean and don't interfere.
AIDS, famine, water shortage, malaria, ebola, they're all going to do the dirty work for us.

The thing why I hate the lazy ragheads the most is the following; for example here in Brussels, there are alot of North-Africans which live of welfare. They all have 5-10 sons between the age of 13 and 17 which should be going to school according to Belgian law.
When the police arrests some of them because they not only needed to steel our hard earned tax money, suddenly the neighbourhood is crawling with these little cocksuckers, their fathers, their nephews, everything and they start beating up the police.

That's why I fear the day when there will be enough of them to run us over.
If the shitty politicians continue with their ostrich politics, that day is going to come. That's why we need to elimate that threat.
Such a shame the Rangers were told to leave Somalia after the Black Hawk down debacle. I'm sure they would have turned the city into ashes during the next mission.

nbk2000

July 5th, 2002, 11:41 AM

A brain-damaged dullard who's only fit to dig a ditch could never be a scientist because his brain is incapable of the level of thought needed to be a scientist.

Whereas, a man with the needed brainpower could be a ditch digger simply because of lack of financial opprotunities while growing up. If he was given the needed schooling, he could be a scientist.

The difference between the two isn't what they do as a job, but what's between their ears. Not everyone has the needed "software" to do the thinking of a scientist. But almost everyone has the "hardware" needed to dig a ditch. (Hawkings excluded <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /> )

Some people have natural talent for a certain task, sport, whatever, and excell at it without any real effort. Others bust their ass but never succeed because they're just not meant to be doing it. This is the way life works, and life isn't "equal" or "fair", it just IS. People who can't deal with it turn into politicians who try to legislate reality into conforming with their fucked up fantasy version of what life SHOULD BE. But it never works.

Frostfire, the reason you don't feel "right" when you see race mixing is because every species (or race) of animal recognizes its own, and instinctivly knows when there's something "not right" with the offspring or pairing of others of its kind. This instinct is natures way to preserve the purity and integrity of the species.

Lions don't go around fucking cheetahs (and not because they can't catch them :D ). Alligators don't fuck crocodiles. Dolphins don't fuck porpises. Same species (and don't get all techno-babble about the "branches" either), different "races". If it was intended for different species to mix, it wouldn't be such a universal instinctive taboo in every species on the planet. The same thing among humans except where socialist liberal "equality" mind-programming has overridden the natural order.

As for "equality", there's no such thing. Within any species, there are those who are superior and those who are inferior. Whether it's Lions, monkeys, sharks, bugs, or humans, there's always "Better and Worse". To claim "equality" is communist thinking, where everyone is the same, no better or worse than their neighbor. We all saw how well THAT worked out. :p

Read "Anthem" by Ayn Rand and get the point.

"Anthem" is set in a distant collectivist (ie: communist) future, when every form and emblem of individualism has been erased, every man is "equal", and society has reverted to a preindustrial level. Its hero, a scientist in a world where the pursuit of knowledge is a crime, discovers the meaning of individual freedom and escapes to build a world of his own choosing while plotting the later conquest and destruction of the old world using the technology he discovers in the ruins of the ancient (technologically advanced) past. :)

PS: The hero's a white man. :p

Mick

July 5th, 2002, 02:14 PM

alot of what i am posting may not be making alot of sense, my sugars are all over the place today, so just bare with me.

<blockquote>quote:<hr />A laborer, on the the other hand, does not already have everything he needs to become a scientist - knowledge, which takes years of study to acquire.<hr /></blockquote>so does being a labourer(when i say labourer, i mean builder, or electrician etc...i don't mean shit kicker who moves bricks from one pile to another, or digs a ditch.)

to become a builder takes years of learning, just as it does to become a scientist. its just a different kind of learning.
while the scientist is learning theory behind a desk.
the builder is learning practicle out in the real world.

screw it, i just can't keep a decent train of thought..

fuck this shit...sick of trying to explain, going to bed.

Ctrl_C

July 5th, 2002, 04:35 PM

Wow, i just read this whole thread just now and have witnessed the violent and chaotic derailment of the entire Forum's train of thought. This thread literally went:

Clandestine lab --> Political oppression --> Mass paranoia --> Sexual oppression --> Nazi ideology --> Racism

now anyone can see that Racism has almost (somehow you all found a very indirect way though) nothing to do with Explosives and Weapons or even a clandestine lab for that matter.

I move this thread be locked or continued in issues/opinions.

[ July 05, 2002, 03:36 PM: Message edited by: Ctrl_C ]

vulture

July 5th, 2002, 04:58 PM

Tsk, Tsk, partypooper! :p

10fingers

July 7th, 2002, 05:32 AM

Maybe politics, sex and racism are more interesting than E&W?
Anyway, I've met a lot of scientifically educated people that wouldn't know which end of hammer to hold onto. If you want quantum physics, then you need a scientist, if you want a house then you need a laborer.
It would be nice if all men were created equal but I just don't see it. But whether or not one race or culture is superior to another depends on what criteria you are judging them by. The top dog always judges others by his standards.
One look at the world situation and you would have to say that the Europeans and their descendants are pretty much in control politically and economically. Now it is also this same race that has been fighting wars for the last 500 years and caused the last two world wars, subjugated and exploited the third world, fostered industrialisation to the point that the average worker is just an automaton, raped the earth of it's natural resources, pollutes the place he lives in, etc.,etc.
It would appear to me that we are not as smart as we would like to think we are.

[ July 07, 2002, 05:05 AM: Message edited by: 10fingers ]

nbk2000

July 7th, 2002, 12:51 PM

Sure, we anglo-saxons have been fighting for centuries, raped the earth, enslaved the third world, etc.

But it's also true that you're all enjoying the benefits of all that raping and exploiting. You're sitting at your computer made from raped resources and built with exploited third world slave labor, all while stuffing your face with food that 80% of humanity wish they had but don't.

All while sitting in air-conditioned comfort with clean drinking water on tap, flush toilet down the hallway of the roof over your head, and electricity/phone/internet on call at the flick of a switch or push of a button. Something another 75+% of humanity DOESN'T have.

(Did you know that more than 50% of humanity has never heard a phone dial tone? That's because they don't have phone service, let alone internet, in most of the world.)

Quite frankly, I get pissed at people who whine about how we exploit the third world or the earth while they themselves are benefiting from said exploitation. If you don't like it, give it up.

Disconnect from the 'net, turn off the phone, disconnect the power, give away the computer, start drinking from a nearby stream filled with parasites and cholera, shit in said stream, stop getting vaccinated for diptheria, tetanus, measles, and every other disease that you haven't contracted, don't brush your teeth, see a doctor, or use antibiotics.

Cook your meal of freshly killed rat over a cow dung fire while fighting off the swarms of flies buzzing your body. And as you pick off the lice crawling through your crotch and scratch the scabies burrowing under your skin for after dinner entertainment, you can plan on building a nice addition to your mud and plastic sheet hut. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />

Sleep on your comfy straw ground mat as the roaches and rats scurry in the darkness of your hut with only the feeble light of a rendered fat candle to light up the dismal bleakness of your pathetic life. You can dream while sleeping of how you can spread your little empire of misery to your neighbors.

Steal all the food from your neighbors so they starve to death. Plant landmines in your neighbors yards, roads, schools, hospitals, etc to blow off their legs and maim their children. Shoot up the street with an M2 BMG mounted on the back of a pickup truck ('Technical' ala Somalia). Rape every female between 8 and 80 before chopping off their arms with a machete. Start a 200 year long blood feud that'll lead to total anarchy and destruction of society.

In other words, bring a little piece of the lovely third world to your part of the world. :mad:

This is all the lovely shit that's going on in the third world and that ISN'T happening in the european/american countries. So suck it up, get a grip, and quite whining you ungrateful fucks!

Yeah, 20% of the world uses 80% of the resources, and be damn glad you're part of the 20%! Otherwise you'd be part of the 80% picking bugs off your filthy, diseased, parasite ridden, starved, soon-to-be-shot-in-endless-civil-war, body.

I'm proud to be part of the exploiters, rather than the exploited. (As Rom on DS9 said "I don't want to end the exploitation. I want to become the exploiter!" :D )

Frankly, I'd rather it was 5% of the population had 100% of the resources and let the rest die! Since I'm part of the 5%, I'm more than ready to see that happen.

10fingers

July 7th, 2002, 01:59 PM

A lot of the problems of the third world are the fault of the industrialized societies.
Before the Europeans came to America it was a paradise here. There was no smallpox, no starvation, no alcoholism. The white man brought only death.
If the top dog can't take a look around once in awhile and question what he is doing, instead of taking the arrogant attitude that everything he does is divine, then he won't be top dog for long.
Look at the Third Reich. They thought they had the world by the ass, the master race. Where are they now NBK?

[ July 07, 2002, 03:42 PM: Message edited by: 10fingers ]

frostfire

July 7th, 2002, 04:41 PM

WOW: "what goes around, always comes around"

alexander the great, gengis khan, napoleon, etc etc.....nothing last forever....it's all utterly meaningless...

nbk2000

July 7th, 2002, 05:41 PM

Hitler violated Law 47 (of the "48 Laws of Power") "In victory, know when to stop". He also violated RTPB "Don't get greedy", and it was the death of him.

BTW, notice how Germany has one of the highest standards of living in the world? So, really, did they lose? :p

America was a real paradise when the indians were in charge. Oh...yeah...right. :rolleyes: The fuckers didn't have alchoholism because they were too stupid to figure out how to make alcohol. Didn't know how to make bread rise either. Or even the fucking wheel! Even pacific island tribes figured that one out, but an entire continent of indians couldn't. BWAHAHAHAHA! Morons stuck in the stone age!

Besides which, the bastards where dying of diseases long before the white man showed up. Is it the white mans fault that his diseases are more potent? Shows his immune system was more resistant, thus superior anyways. The weak and sickly die, literally.

+++++++++++++++++
Redirecting topic to anti-enviromentalist thread. :D
+++++++++++++++++

Fucking eco-freaks are stuck in the past of a pristine earth. That's long gone and ain't never coming back. The poles are going to melt, flood the earth, ozones gone and the sun'll give you a 3rd degree burn in 10 minutes, and any other number of things. So we've got to get off the dying earth before we die with it. The only way to make that happen would be to ACCELERATE the RAPE of the earth to get the resources to get enough people off the planet and into space colonies on the moon/mars before it dies.

There's also an old joke:

Q: Why do Nazis love 'The Jetsons'?

A: Because there's no blacks in the future.

Rather silly, yes. But I don't think there'll be many somalians, hindus, or mexicans colonizing mars in the future.

I bet you'd cut off your left nut to live in a Star Trek future of FTL travel to alien worlds, transporters, and all that shit. Hell, I would! If the earth has to be reduce to a hollowed out wasteland to bring it about then "make it so". <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /> After all, we'd be spreading out across the stars, so who gives a shit about the old world.

Anthony

July 7th, 2002, 09:00 PM

Yeah, when we're done and outta here, the hippies can have the lot and do WTF they want :)

I too am fed up with stupid environmentalists who think we'd all be better off in the dark ages. What the dumbarses don't realise is that their romantic images of untouched rolling countryside, gallant knights in shinning armour, classy society etc is not what the dark ages were like... The dark ages were plauged by disease, famine, war, savage crime, invasions etc.

The comforts we raped the world for mean these stupid hippies don't have to do "nasty" things like cut a pig's throat and gut it with their bare hands.

I look at the world around me sometimes and feel quite the sense of pride at what we have achieved, even if it's just driving along a road in a car. Progress lad, progress.

I do have concerns about some of the effects on our planet, more specifically the knock-on effect to *my* local environment. But mistakes were inevitably made and it was worth what we got out of it, we just need to ensure we try to use more efficient methods to minimise damage.

It's hard luck on the people that were born in shitty places, but that's the one coin toss that I won, so <img src="http://www.roguesci.org/ubb/icons/icon26.gif" alt=" - " />

We should stop foreign aid. There's starving people on our own streets that need taking care of first. What pisses me off are shitty countries begging for aid at the same time every bloody year. Like Bangladesh. Floods wipe out all the villages year after year, then the rainy season comes again and mister dumbfucks hut get's washed away again. "Oh, you built your hut on the bank of the same fucking river that floods every year *again* did you?".

Some areas just aren't intended to support life. When millions are starving to death because they can't grow shit, it means something. That they shouldn't be living there. So instead of sustaining them in poverty, be kind and let them die and save all the successive generations from suffering the same shit life in land that won't ever let be any better.

Times change and people will always say "t'weren't like that in ma day lad". The world will never be like it was so let it go. Someone said nothing lasts forever, same goes for the native American. Their dominace ended when they proved too lacking to defend themselves. Just like natural selection, the dead wood gets cleared out and replaced with something more ideal.

[ July 08, 2002, 02:36 PM: Message edited by: Anthony ]

Arkangel

July 7th, 2002, 11:41 PM

Your argument "rape the earth to get to the stars" is bullshit.

1. No single act of mankind is going to destroy the earth and make it uninhabitable in the medium to long term, it's just going to destroy the environment and make life unpleasant. :(

2. We have not yet found a single planet that currently has the capability to support human life, and you can't say it is for want of trying :rolleyes:

3. Even if we did find something in our galaxy, the chances are that it would have been burned up by the time we made it there. Or, the pioneers would find that by the time they arrived, the rest of earth was dead centuries before <img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="eek.gif" />

I'm all for progress, and have seen for myself the strides mankind has made in the last few decades. But have you noticed that since the big push to the moon in the 60's (motivated by anti communist paranoia - if it ever happened), there hasn't been a single massive space milestone for over 40 years. Compare that to the growth in computing and other sciences and I have to say there has to be a fuckload more effort before we even think about leaving the earth.

Face facts, we're not going anywhere for decades, and in that time, unless we get a grip, the place is going to be fucked. Ecologism to me is NOT about going back to the stone age, and it's an ignorant, spurious argument to suggest that it is. Last year I stayed with an American colleague at her home. One morning, they gave their kid FIVE seperate dishes - porridge, toast, wheatos, eggs & hash browns and something else. The spoilt, petulant, oblivious little fucker picked at a couple of them and the rest was chucked in the bin. It hadn't a clue what had gone into putting that stuff on the table, hadn't a clue what it cost the planet to be given that opportunity. We are not raping the earth to make the leap to the stars, or to protect our cosseted way of life. We are doing it simply to pour more food into the gaping whining gizzards of western society, me included. The ecologists are just trying to say to the idiots that support reckless consumerism like that "this cannot go on indefinitely, and unless we wake up to that, life is going to get shitty for everybody, you included".

Read the book "Cod" by Mark Kurlanksi. It's badged as "a biography of the fish that changed the world". People didn't cross the Atlantic to find new lands, they went to catch the fish on the Grand Banks, and happened across the land as well. Canada was fucking BUILT on Cod, and just a century ago, scientists were saying "no matter how much we fish for cod, mankind will never be able to appreciably diminish the population of this marvelous fish". Now you can't find the stuff. Now, SALMON is cheaper than Cod. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="eek.gif" />

When I was 16 I worked on fishing boats, and we used to drop a line over with a weight and 10 feather hooks. It came back up in 30 seconds with a mackrel on every hook. Now you can't find mackrel on the east coast of England, nor can you find herring, and the Tuna haven't been seen there for 40 or 50 years.

That's just the sea, but walk through the countryside and listen for skylarks, look for sparrows - populations of both have crashed in the last 20 years, boreholes all over the country have become irrecoverably contaminated by agricultural phosphates that are a DIRECT result of trying too hard to feed the type of greedy little bastards that I mentioned earlier - plus me and you of course.

Don't buy from supermarkets, DO buy organic food.

And back to the race to the stars, don't be fooled into thinking that aid to the 3rd world is holding you back. It offends me grievously when the corrupt government of Ethiopia goes cap in hand to the west, whilst spending $5.5bn and seventy thousand lives on a fruitless war with Eritrea over a hundred square miles of fuck all and dust. That, however, is hardly the point. The US spends more in military aid to Israel than it does in any other kind of aid to the developing world. It also has the largest military budget on earth, and that dwarfs anything ever spent on the space programme. If we want to get to the stars, we need to quit bitching about supporting everybody else, and start cutting back on the stealth bombers we buy, then get on with the ISS programme, and some REAL space exploration. :)

Oh, and by the way NBK (and everyone else). You guys will NEVER be in the 5% that has 100%, not because you aren't smart enough, but because you're not a Kennedy, or a Rockerfeller. You might not realise this, but since soon after the introduction of fractional reserve banking, your taxes ceased going into paying for services and government, and started going into the bankers pockets as interest payments on your national debt. (And most other countries are in exactly the same position) <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />

frostfire

July 8th, 2002, 01:39 AM

thought I might put some advice/fact here:

"Don't buy from supermarkets, DO buy organic food."

what a joke, during my stay in a rural state, my neighbor is a farmer.
Let's talk about meat version of organic food. When they claim they're selling you organic food, the cow slaughtered is a milking cow instead of the usual "meat breed" cow. They'll tell you that it's organic since the cow is not injected with any growth hormon ot any other substance to make the cow bulky with meat. Well what do you know?
A cow grown for meat has usually 2-8 months life cycle, that is until the time they're slain, milking cow on the other hand has a longer cycle (could be up to 1.6 years, basically until no more milk is produced)How do they "force" it to keep producing milk all the time? INJECTION! and instead of eating meat from cows that's given artificial hormon for 2-6 months, you're eating the one with more than a year worth of hormones...imagine that...

there's other sort of knowledge like soybean is not absolutely better than cow milk, with the wrong process temperature, you'll end up with a synthetic fiber in you blood vein (a person working in a mortuary should know better of this)

what I'm really saying is unless you grow your own cow/poultry etc etc for their meat, organic or not, they're basically still a potential hazard to your health.

as for me, I don't really care for such thing since I'm not aiming for a long stay on earth, and I'm a vegetarian anyway...

Pu239 Stuchtiger

July 8th, 2002, 02:04 AM

I agree completely with Arkangel. Well put. :)

vulture

July 8th, 2002, 05:37 AM

Well, saw this morning in the paper that every US citizen needs 12 hectares (= 120000m^2) to support his food and other needs, while Europeans only need 60000m^2 (that still is an awful lot).

Also, the US has the highest dioxine output of the world, the number 1 state being texas, with it's oil industry that dates straight out of 1800 and which bought your new monkey president, George W.(Double Dumbass) Bush...

I know, I also rape the earth, but at least I try to save on water and electricity. I also close my frontdoor when I go outside in the winter when the heatings set on 22C, but for my US neighbours this seems to much hassle... :rolleyes:

nbk2000

July 8th, 2002, 05:48 AM

In rebuttal:

1. I never said any single act would destroy the planet, nor that it would be an overnight thing. But given the exploding population, increased material demands, etc., the earth is going to die the death of a thousand cuts.

2. Mars is "right next door" in astronomical distance and is well within current technology to reach and coionize. IF the finances where made available. It could also be terraformed to be an earthlike planet with an atmosphere in a few centuries time. Again, if the finances where made available.

3. A moot point with #2 above. Even if we had to go outside our solar system, it wouldn't matter since anyone leaveing would know it's a one-way trip to the stars. The point isn't to set up a new place for the "huddled masses" to emigrate to, but rather to disperse humanity so that, no matter what happens to the earth, humanity will continue to exist.

Right now, all our eggs are in the one basket called earth. If god chucks a rock (AKA extinction level impactor like that which killed the dinosaurs) into our basket, we're fucked and that's the end of the human race.

Yes, the US military is huge and expensive. But it's also needed to protect the interests and resources of our empire. Without it, Iraq would control the middle-eastern oil fields, Russia would control all of europe, and the rest of it.

I know we're not going anywhere anytime soon, and that's the point. We're stuck here because too many people are bitching about "Help the starving, save the whales, yada yada yada". They're doomed anyways and are beyond saving. Look to the future or be buried with the past.

Arkangel

July 8th, 2002, 06:09 AM

Frostfire, I take your point that there will always be con artists in the food game, but the real organic industry is HIGHLY regulated. Maybe I should be more expressive that as consumers it's in our power and it's our responsibility to make good buying decisions wherever possible. I know that in some areas there is little choice, or people don't have the money to do it, but that's not why society doesn't as a rule. It's pure ignorance and laziness on the part of the consumers.

In the UK at the moment, there's an ongoing debate over the traditional practice of foxhunting - people in red jackets on horses, chasing foxes about with packs of dogs. That's a whole other topic, but it raises urban hackles all over the place. Those exact same people that want to stop foxhunting because "it's cruel and inhumane" are more than happy to destroy the countryside by their implicit support for the destructive methods of farming that the supermarkets generate, by forcing farm prices down and down. They are more than happy to force chickens to live in a 18" square cage for LIFE, to tear up the hedges and habitats, to kill foxes by starvation because you've not only detroyed the place they lived, but also the animals they naturally consumed. It's utter hypocrisy, and it makes me furious. :mad:

Arkangel

July 8th, 2002, 08:03 AM

In double rebuttal: <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />

1. You state there is an exploding population, but that isn’t so much in the white west, but across India and China. The entire developing world is pretty soon going to be decimated by AIDS (which you believe is homosexual propaganda iirc) so that should ease the situation a bit. The increased material demands you mention are less to do with making our lives better, or advancing the human race, and far more to do with the fact that SUV’s have become popular all of a sudden, and little Johnny wants every star wars toy in the set. The earth looks like it is going to die the death of a thousand cuts, but it’s not inevitable IF we stop talking shit about where the human race is going. :rolleyes:

2. Mars IS "right next door" in astronomical terms, and certainly well within current technology to reach. Colonising it is another matter. Terraforming is an interesting idea, but making it into a planet with an atmosphere in a few centuries is way optimistic. Radiation energy decreases to the square of the distance, so if Mars is twice as far from the sun as us, it has a quarter of the solar energy. It is not a barren rock because somebody forgot to pay the electricity bill. The finances involved would be crippling, even to set up pioneer colonies, so you’re going to have to knock loudly on the door of the people with real financial clout, and that ISN’T the US government. :p

3. Your point about making sure the human race continues is a good one, and something I would support. However, you talk about Mars having carpet laid and drapes installed in a few centuries, yet in my own meagre lifetime, I have seen real and substantial changes to the environment. Unless we get a grip, mankind is going to run out of resources about, oooh, two or three centuries before it has even a single stepping stone out of here. And frankly, I’d rather we took a bit more care of the place and left it decent for our offspring, than work on the basis that we can use it and chuck it away because we’ll be moving out to fucking MARS in 2500!!!!! :(

Our eggs are indeed in the one basket, so you’re saying it makes sense to shit in the basket and use it as a bonfire this evening? If god does indeed chuck a rock at our basket, surely we’d be better spending half of the US defence budget on space defence systems, so that you and Bruce Willis can jet off out there and blast god’s rock to atoms. That would be achievable a lot quicker than any credible extra terrestrial colony.

Iraq never did control the middle east, it fought with Iran for 8 years over a piece of water, and then scraped a win because of air power they had BOUGHT from the US and France. If Uncle Sam wasn’t in the mid east, these countries would be buying mercenaries and materials from Europe and Russia. (Kuwait was a predictable anomaly) Absolutely Russia was a threat to Europe whilst Europe was picking itself up from Nazi damage, but in the last 20 years, knowing what we do about Russian technical and training inferiority they have not been a real threat for a hell of a long time. The US military is so bloated, not because it’s “empire” needs protecting, but because it wants to extend that empire.

Nobody is doomed on earth, nobody. This beautiful blue planet can sustain us indefinitely if we care for it like we would a garden. That’s all the ecologists are saying, and it isn’t inconsistent with your own ideals. If only you’d look to what is possible around you, instead of daydreaming about what future we have away from the planet. Do some sums. Look at what the average American has spent on his behalf in terms of interest repayments, military weapons, etc and compare it to what is spent on the starving. The two don’t even compare, and how the cold, brutal factuality of that allows you to deceive yourself into thinking it’s holding “us” back is beyond me.
:confused:

Flake2m

July 8th, 2002, 08:04 AM

When people start carrying on and bitching save the whales, help the poor, fight drug addiction etc. Many of them dont realise that people aren't always willing to help themselves.
In Australia there are welfare payments given to those the unemployed. Quite a few of these people don't intend to get a job and just suck off the system like a $2 whore :o . As a result the system suffers. All this does in the end is raise taxes which make the more honest citizens suffer.
Ask yourself this quesion; How can we help those that won't help themselves.

Arkangel

July 8th, 2002, 08:20 AM

Build a welfare system that weeds the bastards out and cut off all their benefits. Fuck 'em, I'm not a liberal I'm a humanitarian, and if someone who isn't prepared to put the effort expects me to put bread on their table, they can stick it up their fucking ARSE mate!

BUT flake, you're asking simplistic questions and expecting simplistic answers about something incredibly complex - society.

It's down to you to not moan about the minority that don't want to work, and focus on those that do, or some other major part of the puzzle that gets neglected because people prefer bitching to finding real answers :rolleyes:

Celtick

July 8th, 2002, 01:14 PM

My uncle who I saw recently is a world traveller. He staid in Asia for the past 4 years and as quoted by him:

The number of people in India is indeed really big, but the whole western community has no fucking clue what’s happening there. We all think the little funny looking skinnies are beading themselves in the Ganges every day, and burning dead relatives on the street. But look at the numbers; India is growing to one of the world’s largest country with mid-class people. The rise of people from low-class to mid-class is enormous. In India there is a city 'Bangalore' it was I believe, the whole city exists by programming of computer language, this city alone produces 10% of the worlds program language. There are enormous firms who provide insurance calculations and the like, when you make a call to an English insurance firm; they redirect your insurance problem to India.

10fingers

July 8th, 2002, 03:46 PM

The nearest star to the Earth is over 4 light years away. The fastest spaceship available now would take tens of thousands of years to get there. And it is not known if there are any habitable planets around that star. Could be a long trip for nothing.
With current technology it is estimated that it would cost over 200 billion dollars just to send a manned exploratory mission to Mars.
I'm afraid it's going to be a very long time before you can get into your little spaceship and fly off to a better world NBK. Guess you'll just have to stick it out and suck it up down here with all the Muds.
As for being a fucking eco-freak, thanks. I take that as a compliment however you misinterpreted what I was trying to say.
Technology is a double edged sword. The people that were dying a hundred years ago of typhus, smallpox, etc. are now dying of car accidents, alcoholism, drug addiction and cancer from living in a dangerous, polluted and dying world.
Once a person is exposed to and spoiled by the comforts of western technology it would be very hard to go back to a hunter gatherer existence and I'm not sure I would want to. That does not mean that technology cannot be used in a more responsible way.
As for protecting the environment, not even the dumbest animal on earth destroys it's own habitat, only people. Nature/Creator always thinks and works in a circle, what goes around comes around. Man thinks in a straight line. Which is why he's always finding himself at the edge of a cliff.

[ July 08, 2002, 02:53 PM: Message edited by: 10fingers ]

Celtick

July 8th, 2002, 03:59 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr /> It would be very hard to go back to a hunter-gatherer existence and I'm not sure I would want to <hr /></blockquote>Indeed, but why go back go further, go beyond civilisation. Civilisation has brought us nothing (ok maybe for 5% of the world population, but you have to agree with me this would be a terrible yield :D ). And when you conduct an experiment with this kind of yield you don’t go on doing MORE of it, if it didn’t work last time do something ELSE next time.

Some good books on this whole discussion would be: Ishmael and Beyond Civilisation from Daniel Quinn.
</li> <a href="http://us.f1.yahoofs.com/users/241add87/bc/E%26W/Industrial+Society+and+Its+Future.pdf?bc1WfK9Awodm Sjz0" target="_blank">Industrial Society and Its Future</a> by Theodore Kaczynski. </li>

[ July 08, 2002, 03:08 PM: Message edited by: Celtick ]

Anthony

July 8th, 2002, 04:03 PM

I will buy food from supermarkets as it is cheaper. Mass production is more efficient so costs less and probabably produces less waste (waste = money). I fail to see how battery hens are bad for the environment, they take up less space and because they don't run around they eat less and shit less.

"it's also needed to protect the interests and resources of our empire. Without it, Iraq would control the middle-eastern oil fields, Russia would control all of europe, and the rest of it"

Here we go :D NBK me ol' mucker, would it be hugely surprising that I dissagree with any of that? :)

I'm sure that some environmentalists/hippies/greenpeace people have *some* good ideas. But most of them are far too extreme and have stupid ideology. Maybe if they put themselves across better then people would take them as credible.

Partially related to the fox hunting issue, is recently a fox snuck into a house through an open patio door, there was a mother and baby asleep on the sofa. The fox bit the baby in head and tried to drag it away. The mother screamed and the father ran in, the fox sat there and looked at them till the father chased it away. The baby was covered in blood, had to have stitches etc and the fox has been spotted again in the family's garden. Understandably, the father has threatened to tear the thing apart if he gets ahold of it. The RSPCA who seems to have been over-run with liberal tree huggers has threatened the father with legal prosecution if he harms the fox! They're still trying to push the "cute and furry" fox image and stated that for a fox to attack a human, it must have been "confused or brain damaged". I can't stand their type and their ignorance and often plain *lies* standing in the way of medical research and other forms of progress.

I may seem like a trash the earth consumer, but I do my little bit. I don't run the tap when brushing my teeth, I don't overfill the kettle, I close the fridge door, I turn lights/TVs/monitor off when I leave the room, even if it's only for a few minutes. I'm aware of my power consumption and plan to generate some of my own electricity at some point. Solar panels are over priced, we have no natural water energy source and the wind is pretty poor so it's not easy. I'd do it as much for self profficiency as much as anything else. The only really wasteful thing I do is refuse to put on extra layers when I'm cold in doors. If I'm cold with a T-shirt on, then one goes the heating. I just can't use a computer comfortably in a jumper.

The world has an over-reliance on oil. This is bad as it will soon run out, is pollutive and is controlled by an unreliable source, yet no one is putting any serious thought/money into alternatives. Current electric cars can fulfill the needs of something like 80% of comutters, yet practically no one has them. With government funding to get production volume up and cost down they're a feasible solution with todays technology.

I'd rather let the earth die than live a life of 100% soya based food and hemp clothing where everything is rediculously expensive.

Oh and FFS use more nuclear power!

firebreether

July 8th, 2002, 05:59 PM

Anthony is right, the world sure does have a dependance on petroleum products. Someday, sometime, the world will start to get (even) lower on their oil reserves. What do we do then? Before we completely run out, prices will skyrocket, then methods we use now that are "environmentally friendly" will be cheaper than the existing ways of producing power etc. What we need to do is find cheaper ways for everything now. Alot of times this will be making existing proccesses more efficient which would reduce waste, or maybe developing new processes. Whatever the case, we should make the most with what we have for the profit of ourselves. Fuck the environment, I really don't care whats happening with global warming, or about saving whales. But when you're waking up to ground level ozone and smog up the wazoo, and you can't breathe because you're sitting in traffic behind a smelly ass 18 wheeler, you'll probably think there must be a better way. With the electric car thing, if they did get costs down, I would buy one. Hell, I'd rather drive a freaking honda insight then some big slow whatever brand car, because its cheaper that way since you dont have to pay as much for gas when you're getting 70 mpg vs 20 mpg. When the oil runs out, why don't we grow some crops that we can turn into alcohol to use in cars, that way we wouldn't need to drill,(plus alcohol would be mad cheap <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /> )we'd just use good old mother earth and live off the fat of the land. We'd still be exploiting it, just in a different way that would make us keep on going.

Arkangel

July 8th, 2002, 06:16 PM

I buy food from supermarkets most of the time, but mainly because in an attempt to be America, all the local councils have approved out of town developments that have killed off small businesses in town centres throughout the land. If I come across a small greengrocer, butcher, fishmonger or whatever, I buy from them. I’d much rather pay a bit of extra money to a guy working hard than to the shareholders of a massive supermarket chain. Supermarkets have done some good things – the range and quality of goods has expanded enormously, but just because of that, people don’t notice the insidious damage they do

Battery hens aren’t so much bad for the environment, as bad for the hens. I was making a point about hypocrisy in society – the anti blood sporters are almost certainly condemning chuckies to miserable painful lives because of purely commercial choices, all the while bitching about our inhumanity to those cuddly ickle foxy woxies - CUNTS. :mad:

MOST environmentalists have good ideas, the trouble is the strength of the lobbying business means that they don’t have enough clout with the media or politicians to make an impression. That and they all have dreadlocks and stink. PR is the same thing that’s fucking the pro-hunt people. The only spokesmen they seem to be able to wheel out are the archetypal pompous old dick in tweed, saying “yeeees, aled chap. Hanting’s the spawt for evereywan, donchaknow” More CUNTS :mad:

Think on the positive side, if things got too depressing in your soya milk and hemp clothes, at least you could smoke your pants <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /> . But seriously, given those choices, most people would say “fuck it, let’s trash the place and party!” But those aren’t the choices. It’s a matter of good sense and looking where we are going, but that’s too much to ask for some people!

Couldn’t agree more on the Nuclear power – more reactionary bullshit is stifling that. BUT let’s also get rid of the false obstacles to renewable energy

frostfire

July 8th, 2002, 07:10 PM

as far as I know, that's how (or one way) they make so called organic meat, it's no con artist by any means. The public just don't have the knowledge.

I'll go with more nuclear reactor (since I'll have more career options as well :D ), people are so frightened with the huge chimney and bulky white gas that's coming out. The truth is that's only part of the cooling system (heat exchanger) which is very unlikely to get contaminated (it's 2 separate water circulation), where the bulky gas is none but water vapor and some CO2, the real reactor core could be as far as 5km away from the cooling facility, and has much less size.

More nuclear plants is not equal to more raping of the earth, yes there's waste, but so far, we just keep them buried deep until their half life is over....yes it's 1000-10000 years, but as long as no fools start making dirty bomb, alles gut <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /> .....or perhaps we can send them to space heh heh...there goes another topic

"german has one of highest living standard"...you mean now NBK? all I know german is having social structural problem because of it's policy admitting people from all over the world (free tuition etc etc) esp. the turks
As for the equality view; I forgot to mention that the way I see it is it's best to see a person/people..not nation, not color, not race/not names..why? it's a crazy world these days, I've seen whites acting like blacks just because it's so called "cool"...trying to bring them to your level is just as painful as all the intl. aid

[ July 08, 2002, 07:14 PM: Message edited by: frostfire ]

Anthony

July 8th, 2002, 09:29 PM

A lot of people worry about the small traders run out of business by the big coperations. The sad reality though is that these small traders simply aren't as competitive and times change.

Battery hens is probably cruel, but I have a brilliant way of dealing with things like that - don't think about it... Works on starving/warring 3rd world countries too :)

With recyclable nuclear reactor waste, I really can't see any good reason not to use more of it. It's got to be one the safest methods of producing energy. Even if the occasional reactor goes up an contaminates a 100 sq miles and injures a thousand people every now and again, it's still less damage than the entire earth suffering the green house effect and a few billion with lung damage/skin cancer.

I found the Russian method of nuclear waste "disposal" quite humorous. They've been tossing the fuel rods into the hold of an old ship in one of their ports. When the hold got full, they simply started hammering more rods into any gap they could find, managing to buckle the structure of the ship, oh and rusty old thing is slowly sinking :D Highly cost effective solution...

The big problem with many renewable energy sources such as wind, solar, wave etc is the low energy output/space ratio of the generators. They're also quite expensive. You'd need to cover half a country in wind turbines or solar arrays to fulfill the population's needs. Which raises the issue of where are people going to live? Also, isn't that gross environmental/habbitat destruction?

I don't know if running a nation's cars on alcohol would be feasible. It'd take a huge amount of crop to ferment into fuel, I don't know if there'd be enough farm land.

I personally like EV's, they don't have to be slow and shit. We presently have cars that with 100mile range, cars that will toast a Porsche 911 and batteries that can be recharged in 8 minutes from flat. All with technology available to any member of the public.

firebreether

July 9th, 2002, 12:14 AM

Toast a porsche? Charge in 8 minutes? If they were that good we would be seeing them everywhere, can you reference me to any literature on these electric vehicles Anthony? The faster you go the shorter the range, and for it to have a 100 mile range while dusting a porsche would be fun. Right now i think the only way for an EVs batteries to charge up that fast and be that pwerful is not to use batteries at all, use ultracapacitors. They use carbon aerogel as each electrode, and use some sort of inorganic or organic fluid as the dielectric or something like that. Someone else probably knows more about them than me. They seem to be very cheap, can store thousands of farads per Kg at 1-3 volts and are infinitely useable, ulike batteries which will fade after time and need replacing - most of the reason EVs are so expensive, the electricity is cheap, but the battery changes are crazy expensive, so it offsets the benefit in a big way. Pretty cool sounding to me(ultracaps).
About the hens, I really don't care too much where they come from as long as they aren't diseased and taste good. Probably best not to think about it. I bet if I saw how they processed cows or any meat like that into hamburgers I'd be relatively sick.
EDIT - something I forgot to add, damn strait EVs don't have to be slow as shit. I was reading Popular Mechanics and they had an article about a Honda prototype that wasn't going to go into production that had a 3.5 L V6 mounted mid engine, with an electric motor mounted on it before the transmission. Two more motors were mounted on the fronts wheels. Total was 400 HP and got 40 mpg. Thats pretty cool.

[ July 08, 2002, 11:18 PM: Message edited by: firebreether ]

10fingers

July 9th, 2002, 12:41 AM

One of the first jobs I had was working in a meatpacking plant. It lasted for about 4 weeks and I have been a vegetarian ever since.
It takes 4 pounds of grain to make 1 lb. of meat. Theres actually a net loss of protein in the process. It's a totally assbackwards and inefficient way of getting your protein needs met. Also, 1 tablespoon of peanut butter contains more protein than a pound of meat.
Americans eat more meat per capita than any other country, we are also one of the unhealthiest industrialized nations. What does that tell you?
Another thing, all those cattle being raised for food purposes are farting up a tremendous amount of methane gas into the atmosphere. Methane is a greenhouse gas. Now personally I don't give a shit about this because I live in a frozen ass part of the country and I wouldn't mind if the earth warmed up a little bit. But those living nearer the equator may want to start thinking about it.

megalomania

July 9th, 2002, 01:38 AM

Since this thread has evolved from ways to spot a lab, to dwindiling interest in science, to racial superiority, to I don't know what the hell it is now, I am moving it to issues and opinions. I hope this thread dosn't evolve into a sentient being...

FlaAlchemist

June 18th, 2003, 03:21 AM

When I was a kid I had a gilbert chemistry set. Remember those? Now that was a chemistry set.
Not like todays garbage! As a chemist I can say that if you have a chem home lab these days the goverment has made it look like you are a drug maker or bomb maker. Even the college level labs are watered down and crap. It is no wonder the kids of today do not want to be chemists. Uncle sam brainwashed are society and put fear in its people to report any type of chem home lab. They also made so many regulations and laws concerning chemicals that even if you were interested you would find it difficult to purchase the items. The US is becomming less and less a free country...Soon they wont even allow this type of content on the net.. Most of are society is chemically illeterate so it was easy for uncle sam to pass all these crazy laws. Maybe they will start screening perspective chemistry students..Just think of it you must ask big daddy if you can be a chemist.. By the way, the pay in chemistry sucks big time too compared with other professions..

Kid Orgo

June 18th, 2003, 04:10 AM

Many kids today want to be chemists, at least at my school. One good, inspired chemist can spawn entire classes more. In my case, one fantastic AP Chem teacher (pyromaniac tendencies and all) inspired a lot of my classmates to look into chem. That's why I think that despite a lack of understanding at the DEA, the science of chemistry will survive. It'll survive through the good chemists of today turning into the good teachers of tomorrow.

Shit, my kids will be taught all the chemistry they can handle.

megalomania

June 18th, 2003, 03:02 PM

I can count the number of undergrad chemistry majors I have met over the years on one hand. Sure there seem to be plenty of grad students, and actual chemists out there, but interest in mathematical and physical sciences as a whole is fading in the US. In fact we are forced to import a large number of students from foreign countries to fill the demand. The US remains the best place to get a (higher) education in the sciences, and to get a job in the sciences.

I don’t know who told you the pay as a chemist sucks, FlaAlchemist, but the annual ACS employment outlook and job survey seems fine to me. Chemists can pretty much write their own ticket these days because there is high demand and short supply, the perfect economical situation to squeeze employers of every last penny. Chemistry, and the sciences in general, is also a secure career. Manufacturing labor is being sent overseas, doctors and lawyers are a dime a dozen, but technical workers can always find a job down the street if they lose their job. This used to be the way with the steel industry my dad tells me (a 30 year vetrin of the mills), back when he started there were plenty to choose from. This may change, like steel, but I don’t see this happening.

You start to run into trouble when you get into the biology related fields. Everyone wants to help the sick, bleah. The biotech industry is headed for saturation, and I can see it going the way of American steel. The trick is to choose something in demand but not so rare you can’t get a job. Art history majors, or anything to do with art is pretty much a dead end. Same goes for business, accounting, economics types and for English, journalism, media types. They are all a dime a dozen. Only scientific degrees are worth a damn these days.

Perhaps if the schools would stop worrying about a lack of women or negros going into the sciences and instead focused on getting ANY students into the sciences things might not be so bad. We have a culture that would rather focus on churning out business majors and lawyers. Last I checked these kinds of people don’t drive industry or progress, they contribute no lasting good to society. It is no wonder the people are brainwashed against science, it is seem as something mystical and esoteric, some sort of neo voodoo or witch craft. People are too damned concerned with Hollywood stars and political scandals when they should be learning about how their world works.

If the government wants to ensure national security it should educate scientists, not maintain huge armies, or build massive weapons as the better and cheaper weapons of this scientific elite will better protect the nation. If the people are worried about how they are going to pay for health care they should educate scientists so they can find cures for disease rather than let the people linger on with less than successful treatments. If the people are worried about the economy then they need to educate scientists whose developments will spur growth and development in all sectors of the economy.

So many of the worlds social problems would fall like so many dominoes if the government concentrated on creating a generation of scientists. How can their be war and political unrest when world hunger is alleviated? When the Palestinian ghettoes or African tent cities are replaced by modern homes? When oil is no longer important when cars get 100 miles to the gallon on hydrogen based fuels, what will the mideast turmoil matter to us? Will China or North Korea be so troubling if they had viable jobs and a thriving economy, an economy achieved by trading with the west? Will welfare be so important when there are enough high paying jobs to employ everyone, not just let them leech of the government? Will crime remain high when poverty is limited due to all those high paying jobs? Will the burden of the government to provide for the sick be so great when we have cheap, effective medical treatments?

So many social problems could be solved by science, so much good could be done within our lifetimes if only the governments of the world make the investment in our future and educate an army of knowledge workers. I would even go so far as to say the government should tax gasoline and all fuel heavily to create a scholarship fund to train scientists who will study alternative forms of energy. Let today’s oil profits subsidize its obsolescence tomorrow. Let their be a billion dollar prize to the company who develops the first 75 mpg engine that can still get 200 HP. Lets tax electricity to fund research into developing super cheap and efficient solar panels. Lets tax food to pay for the educations of scientists who will create genetically modified foodstuffs, or plants that will revitalize the desert wastelands of the world. We should be creating nationally standardized electronic textbooks so no school is without an up to date version, we should be promoting higher education standards so only the best teachers are teaching our children. If they government spent its defense budgets on schools we would have a more secure nation from the discoveries the students will make.

The world needs to develop a voracious appetite for scientists and knowledge if it is to become a better place. If we reprioritized the world’s wealth to science we could achieve the kind of world in 50 years that will take us 200 years to get at the rate we are going now. I don’t see this happening though. The world will continue on worrying about treating disease rather than curing it, fighting wars rather than preventing them, and training lawyers rather than scientists.

vulture

June 18th, 2003, 05:08 PM

where the bulky gas is none but water vapor and some CO2

Nuclear reactors do not produce CO2!! Where the hell should it come from?

In belgium, we currently rely for 60% on nuclear energy. But, being the smartasses they are, the environmentalist party has "achieved" (as they like to call it) that all nuclear reactors are going to be shut down in the future. They got the population so shit scared about nuclear energy that 25% actually thinks nuclear energy provides enough CO2 to endanger our compliance to the Kyoto treaty! :rolleyes:

No, instead were going to build 5000 windmills for energy production. They happen to forget that these calculations are made on 100% efficiency, no breakdowns, no storms, no days without wind and that this would take an enormous chunk of land to put these things on. Five years ago they were complaining how windmills polluted the horizon and caused noise pollution. Yeah really. Ever been standing underneath a windmill? You'd haven to listen carefully to hear to the sound that's being overwhelmed by a single car passing at 200m.

tmp

December 3rd, 2003, 12:25 AM

I went through several chemistry sets growing up. My parents didn't mind what
I made as long as I didn't kill myself or burn the house down. The chemistry
sets of today were designed by companies who fear litigation. What I had
growing up implied some serious hell-raising. Any chemicals not in the set, I
usually had no problem getting, even as a minor.
BTW, I favor building more nuclear fission power plants for the near term and a
crash program for nuclear fusion in the future. This would lessen our need for oil
from the Middle East. Then would could tell Omar the tent maker and his friends to
go fuck themselves and live as best they could off their sand heaps and camel shit !

ShadowAlchemist

December 24th, 2003, 01:04 AM

Well i'll be fucked; This thread came out boasting that lithium could be extracted out of batteries and has resulted in the most stimulating discussion about the oppression of american citizens caused by over zealous beaurocrats, the social and industrial development outlook in america over the next 50 years.
You also turned the clock back 60 years to talk about nazi ideology and socialist reform. Nbk2000 i must admit that your post detailing "survival of the fittest" was the best piece of reading ive done in a long time; credit is due!
I myself live in a country that is fast becoming a nation of strength and superiority but at the same time we are, for one painting a red "X" on our soil to encourage terroists to bomb us, causing world leaders to mock us and we are becoming more and more like america every day. alas i live in australia!
I personally dont give a fuck about so-called terroists because i know the majority of the damage they can inflict is psychological.Their trump card is playing on the fear and insecurity of a nation.
A tiger CAN kill an elephant...if the tiger bites the elephant once a day for a week, the elephant will die from its wounds. This tactic had been used before and quite effectively may i add. eg viet minh/cong and the fuckin rag heads defending afganistan from the russians.
In any case i think australia is more susceptible to attacks than ever before..but in a way thats good. We deserve to be fukn bombed. I have hoped and almost fukn prayed that we will be attacked, so as to show our ignorant prime minister and various ministers that we are not invincible and that our meddling will not go unnoticed and we will conseuqently be punished for it.
At the moment things are good. Irag is more or less finished despite resistance efforts and no oz soldiers died..so PM gets no backlash for sending troops in first place. the critics have been silenced and their votes has been swayed..mission accomplished! using war for political gain..deja vu!
Despite the elevated need for violence in todays world, our prime minister is set to introduce even more fucking gun prohibition laws, clamp down on import/export of precursor chemicals, build more IV rooms to help serial junkies get high without fear of being arrested and to spit in the face of all hardworking australians by upping taxes and lowering health benefits. A fucking mockery!
On the other hand, the idea of australia making a stand on the international arena and getting involved in alliances is great. free trade and better guns for army..yippee!
The prospect of John Howard and george bush holding hands in the playground is a marvellous thought though. In the next 5 years there is going to be alot of people who will try to pull our pants down and laugh at us, push us over and try to steal our lunch money. What better than to have the residant bully on YOUR side..aka America.
Hmmm, i had better go i have to run a business now. I had no idea how much i have typed.:)
Look forward to talkin bout the good things in life, some other time.

Mike76251

December 30th, 2003, 07:22 AM

Since this thread has several interesting topics I thought I would add something to one of them.
The "Browning" of Kalifornia.
I was in Cali 30 years ago and would often go to Seal Beach and marvel at the fact that there wasn't a black to be found anywhere on the beach. No mexicans either.
You didn't have drug problems and southern Cal. was a very nice place to live.
There was no such thing as Watts. And if you can believe.....NO Spanish was ever heard in school or seen written on a sign.
I went back there in 2001 for a year and noticed some "differences" to say the least.
Caucasions are now a minority there and to say it has a spic problem would be understating the situation quite a bit.
They come into a area and are peaceful (even sheepish) for the most part until their numbers rise.They breed very quickley and in just a few years you have a problem.
How do you "fix" a problem like that?
Zyklon B is my favored method.

YayItGoBoom!

January 6th, 2004, 05:44 PM

Wow, the world's future, or basement chemistry? Both topics are so tempting I think I will give both a try.

Mike, on the Mexican deal, I agree with you every bit. Minorities/turf rats/trailer kids are really starting to piss me off, there's tons of them at my school. All they do is complain about how bad their life is, and acting like the rest of the world owes them something. I just want to tell them all to shut the fuck up and make something with their life! Ever hear a successful minority bitching? Probably not. Thats because the ones who have half a brain are getting off their asses and making a life for themselves, and not whining with what their stuck with.

The whole terrorism thing bothers me a bit too. They've been in the media all the time in the past 3-4 years, but terrorists themselves (not ragheads, but any kind of person who gains what they want by instilling fear) have been around since mankind. I'm glad Bush got down in Afghanistan and Iraq, because his dad certainly didn't, and if Gore had gotten elected, he would have pussed out too. As funny as he talks, Bush is actually not half that bad.

It is really sad today how little you can do with chemistry. I had one as a child, maybe around 1995, which today I realize was pretty amazing compared to what you are limited to today. Among the lame stuff like acid base indicators, the kit had flashpaper to fool around with, a smokescreen compound you could make, as well as some zinc and sulfur powder IIRC. Anyways, it was a lot of fun for me, and I'm sure nowadays nothing like it would be on the market. Because (of the media) everyone thinks a chemistry will teach kids how to make a) bombs or b) drugs. Drugs are so...dumb. No offense to any light users out there, everyone likes to have entertainment, but die hard crackheads, meth makers, and the rest, are just wasting their lives. Not that the odds are that great of them doing something contributional to society, but its still a pretty lowly thing to do with your life.