I am actually! (I just say Hall-of-the-Larks ‘cause it sounds fancier – Larkhall’s not got the best reputation!)AlgyTaylor wrote:btw - are you from Larkhall (in Lanarkshire)? My ex-flatmate was from there ...
Moderator: Community Team
Fast and out of control, kind of like he pitches.heavycola wrote:Well, I believe in the soul, the #cough#, the #ahem#, the small of a woman's back, the hanging curve ball, high fiber, good scotch, that the novels of Susan Sontag are self-indulgent, overrated crap. I believe Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone. I believe there ought to be a constitutional amendment outlawing Astroturf and the designated hitter. I believe in the sweet spot, soft-core pornography, opening your presents Christmas morning rather than Christmas Eve and I believe in long, slow, deep, soft, wet kisses that last three days. Goodnight.
If you mean storage of waste, I don't see why that can't be something that can be left to future generations - after all, they will benefit from the economic/scientific progress we make, so they can deal with the after-effects. As long as we can store waste for a century at a time, I don't see how it's a problem.areon wrote:Trading carbon emissions for half-lifes is a bad long term investment.
I've never heard of self-destructing seeds, (I assume that would be to ensure that purchasers would have to keep going back to the suppliers?), that sounds a little futuristic to me, but I ain't no biologist. I've got no illusions about the conduct of companies that produce GMOs - you'd hope there was proper regulation of GMOs. But it seems to me that, particularly in Europe, a lot of the opposition is just based on outright fear of anything new, rather than well-founded doubts.areon wrote:GMOs are very dangerous not for scientific reasons but political ones. When they start to create plants with seeds that self destruct to prevent replanting, ethical problems arise. A lot of these companies have bad histories in pesticides and growth hormones as well.
Some companies sells seeds that turn into plants that won't produce their own seeds, so you have to keep buying them from the company.Stopper wrote: I've never heard of self-destructing seeds, (I assume that would be to ensure that purchasers would have to keep going back to the suppliers?), that sounds a little futuristic to me, but I ain't no biologist. I've got no illusions about the conduct of companies that produce GMOs - you'd hope there was proper regulation of GMOs. But it seems to me that, particularly in Europe, a lot of the opposition is just based on outright fear of anything new, rather than well-founded doubts.
Pretty much what I think, to be honest (although I'm not convinced about PR, leeds to an unstable governemtn - look at Italy at the moment - and the scary thought of BNP members becoming MP for my hometown.)Stopper wrote:In real life, though, I'm a longtime Labour Party member, though I haven't been active for a while. If I was absolutely honest, I think the best outcome for the next UK election would be a hung parliament. Hopefully then some sort of PR would be negotiated, and I could support a proper socialist party, without feeling like I was wasting my votes and money.
qwert wrote:Can i ask you something?What is porpose for you to open these Political topic in ConquerClub? Why you mix politic with Risk? Why you not open topic like HOT AND SEXY,or something like that.
Yes that is unfortunately correct. The use of GM in North America is getting quite widespread and it is common practice for the producers to create hybrid plants which are sterile. One of the reasons they give for this is to stop the GM crop crossbreeding with wild crops (an indecently non customer neighboring farms) - but I think we all know the real reason is to allow repeat sales - as the previous posters pointed out.btownmeggy wrote:Some companies sells seeds that turn into plants that won't produce their own seeds, so you have to keep buying them from the company.Stopper wrote: I've never heard of self-destructing seeds, (I assume that would be to ensure that purchasers would have to keep going back to the suppliers?), that sounds a little futuristic to me, but I ain't no biologist. I've got no illusions about the conduct of companies that produce GMOs - you'd hope there was proper regulation of GMOs. But it seems to me that, particularly in Europe, a lot of the opposition is just based on outright fear of anything new, rather than well-founded doubts.
I accept what you say about both disadvantages - "weaker" government and extremist parties, but First-past-the-post only smooths over both these problems, it doesn't address them. Eg, areas where the BNP are on the rise are often areas Labour have neglected, because they're generally assured of the vote. The BNP should be properly tackled on a fair basis, not just because of the system - otherwise the poison they spread could just sit there and fester, while Labour MP after Labour MP just get re-elected.Guiscard wrote:Pretty much what I think, to be honest (although I'm not convinced about PR, leeds to an unstable governemtn - look at Italy at the moment - and the scary thought of BNP members becoming MP for my hometown.)Stopper wrote:In real life, though, I'm a longtime Labour Party member, though I haven't been active for a while. If I was absolutely honest, I think the best outcome for the next UK election would be a hung parliament. Hopefully then some sort of PR would be negotiated, and I could support a proper socialist party, without feeling like I was wasting my votes and money.
Being controversial then, I can't immediately see a problem with the principle of selling these kinds of seeds (I just got stuck on the idea of self-destructing seeds, rather than plants that produce sterile offspring, for some reason.)flashleg8 wrote:Yes that is unfortunately correct. The use of GM in North America is getting quite widespread and it is common practice for the producers to create hybrid plants which are sterile. One of the reasons they give for this is to stop the GM crop crossbreeding with wild crops (an indecently non customer neighboring farms) - but I think we all know the real reason is to allow repeat sales - as the previous posters pointed out.btownmeggy wrote:Some companies sells seeds that turn into plants that won't produce their own seeds, so you have to keep buying them from the company.
Monsanto tried to screw over indian farmers - INDIAN farmers FFS - with their terminator seed technology. And they tried to sue a Canadian farmer because some of their Roundup Ready seeds blew into his field and got mixed in with his crop. GM could be wonderfully beneficial, but multinational biotech does not have anyone's interests at heart but their shareholders. Humankind has managed to grow its own organic food for thousands of years and i we should know what we are doing by now.btownmeggy wrote:Some companies sells seeds that turn into plants that won't produce their own seeds, so you have to keep buying them from the company.Stopper wrote: I've never heard of self-destructing seeds, (I assume that would be to ensure that purchasers would have to keep going back to the suppliers?), that sounds a little futuristic to me, but I ain't no biologist. I've got no illusions about the conduct of companies that produce GMOs - you'd hope there was proper regulation of GMOs. But it seems to me that, particularly in Europe, a lot of the opposition is just based on outright fear of anything new, rather than well-founded doubts.

Ooooooooooooooohhhh. I thought by nuclear power you meant like Soviet Russia or America... my Bad. I'm somewhat pro it, but much more in support of wind power and solar power.Stopper wrote:Why? Surely it's one of the best current options for reducing carbon dioxide emissions? France provides 80% of its electricity using nuclear power, which seems to me to mean that its trains are almost carbon dioxide-emission free.unriggable wrote:I am anti-Nuclear Power.
Well political figures are meant to be people like Abraham Lincoln, Barack Obama, and JFK, but then we end up with deuschebags like Dick Cheney and Tom DeLay. Politicians are a wierd type. I blame the lobbyists.boogiesadda wrote:Political figures should only be allowed one term (there should be no such thing as a career politician)
JESUS SAVES!!!PLAYER57832 wrote:Too many of those who claim they don't believe global warming are really "end-timer" Christians.
flashleg8 wrote:I'm surprised Jay (I agree completely). I would have had you pegged for pro on this (just shows you not to pigeon hole anyone I suppose).jay_a2j wrote: My views:
Against death penalty
Is this because of your Christian beliefs?
JESUS SAVES!!!PLAYER57832 wrote:Too many of those who claim they don't believe global warming are really "end-timer" Christians.