Why not brinjal?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
How to limit climate change
- Thread starter Clizby Wampuscat
- Start date
Why not brinjal?
Well, NYC sux compared to Revoltistan.
Wu Wei
ursus senum severiorum and ex-Bisy Backson
NYC is way south of me, almost 200 miles, and also about 21 degrees warmer in NYC than it is here
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Is he Indian?
200 miles away is suburban NYC.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
A high of 51 F today here. And "light rain". That means that it rains enough to keep the ground wet. Sometimes it is almost like the weather is having a contest to see how little actual precipitation falls but everything is still soggy outside.
Wu Wei
ursus senum severiorum and ex-Bisy Backson
Wu Wei
ursus senum severiorum and ex-Bisy Backson
We had a snow squall here early in the morning, the rest is all wind and cold
No, this time, I think I could manage a kudo.
So do you have a recommendation on the best way to eliminate the 6 billion you think are superfluous? More importantly, how will you decide who they are, and who should live?
rational experiences
Veteran Member
As animals aren't a problem in their owned being.
Methane a CH arises as the gas type..life's sacrifice above comes out of earths mass when human science converts holy dusts.
As the sun historic had converted earths mass to dusts. Infinite space stopped it. So dusts are holy said human men.
Do not change the holy body above or below. Pretty basic you already knew. Holy spirit holy types of gas..water that keeps life saved.
So flooding a law is saving biologies life. At the moment.
Yet humans can't live sustainably in flooding.
Same law a bared naked earth by droughts mass water evaporation does not sustain life.
So humans advise humans as the rich man already told us all he was going to nuclear above poison everything. Is doing it ..chose it ..gloats.
So bovine life begins to change by phenomena above causes as the proof. As cow God was given a holy ancient title. Hurt before by scientists.
Human scientists don't tell the public any truth.
They knew all of the advices. Had been preaching about it for years.
Do not give names to created creation. As science practice on earth destroys life.
Pretty basic reasons.
Nuclear science was the first choice man made that followed as a less eviller technology by transmitter science. Two evils.
As those two forms of science of men are the old technology he practiced.
Reason a vacuum void removed upper atmospheric particles.
As infinite law only kept gas mass as gases as the infinite law taught. As particle dense mass historic had changed into the gas by infinite space terms.
Law heavens and it's spirits. With infinite law.
Therefore if you allow for natural attrition the particles will be removed naturally as gained carbon Influx.
The reason law isn't dealing with pollution above is nuclear position first reinstated on ground.
As firmament above as law deals with nuclear dust eradication in vacuum position. So if you don't alter ground dusts balances above laws are met.
We need to stop being greedy. Pretty basic advice.
We need to save the ancient nature everywhere on earth as a mutual agreed existence.
So where humans remove trees for food growing...we supply that country food so forests can achieve its atmospheric function. For everyone.
And we know planting the bared ground wherever we can is necessary.
As plants assist keeping water up around biology.
Water hydro is least harmful.
So earths natural energetic conditions should be used for human needs.
Without changing how it exists in natural laws. Without greed or want of greed about choices. It just needs to be done achieved for everyone.
Profit should be eradicated it's destructive thinking.
Natives told science nuclear needed to remain in ground its evil. Yet evil has a purpose as maintained earth heat. Without it snap freeze is guaranteed.
We never should have agreed to plastic so that a few people can travel into space for no good reason. Life first is human law not technology.
And every choice we already knew had to be considered mindful and holy for survival. Not allowing greed to rule any choice by anyone.
As lifestyle won't save us.
We need to lessen the use of any pesticides and go back to a learned companion planting instead. Greed and monetary benefit doesnt save life.
Men already knew a lot of basic mutual hard work as a method. Technology made us all lazy and took away a need for family survival by sharing of mutual learnt life skills.
If you're busy working you don't have time to take drugs. Drink or have sex.
You are needed. You learn skills. You are physically fit.
As we already knew all this advice a long time ago. All we had to do was make the right choices.
How many times does humanity destroy itself claiming after and now I've learnt?
The truth humanity is its owned problem.
Methane a CH arises as the gas type..life's sacrifice above comes out of earths mass when human science converts holy dusts.
As the sun historic had converted earths mass to dusts. Infinite space stopped it. So dusts are holy said human men.
Do not change the holy body above or below. Pretty basic you already knew. Holy spirit holy types of gas..water that keeps life saved.
So flooding a law is saving biologies life. At the moment.
Yet humans can't live sustainably in flooding.
Same law a bared naked earth by droughts mass water evaporation does not sustain life.
So humans advise humans as the rich man already told us all he was going to nuclear above poison everything. Is doing it ..chose it ..gloats.
So bovine life begins to change by phenomena above causes as the proof. As cow God was given a holy ancient title. Hurt before by scientists.
Human scientists don't tell the public any truth.
They knew all of the advices. Had been preaching about it for years.
Do not give names to created creation. As science practice on earth destroys life.
Pretty basic reasons.
Nuclear science was the first choice man made that followed as a less eviller technology by transmitter science. Two evils.
As those two forms of science of men are the old technology he practiced.
Reason a vacuum void removed upper atmospheric particles.
As infinite law only kept gas mass as gases as the infinite law taught. As particle dense mass historic had changed into the gas by infinite space terms.
Law heavens and it's spirits. With infinite law.
Therefore if you allow for natural attrition the particles will be removed naturally as gained carbon Influx.
The reason law isn't dealing with pollution above is nuclear position first reinstated on ground.
As firmament above as law deals with nuclear dust eradication in vacuum position. So if you don't alter ground dusts balances above laws are met.
We need to stop being greedy. Pretty basic advice.
We need to save the ancient nature everywhere on earth as a mutual agreed existence.
So where humans remove trees for food growing...we supply that country food so forests can achieve its atmospheric function. For everyone.
And we know planting the bared ground wherever we can is necessary.
As plants assist keeping water up around biology.
Water hydro is least harmful.
So earths natural energetic conditions should be used for human needs.
Without changing how it exists in natural laws. Without greed or want of greed about choices. It just needs to be done achieved for everyone.
Profit should be eradicated it's destructive thinking.
Natives told science nuclear needed to remain in ground its evil. Yet evil has a purpose as maintained earth heat. Without it snap freeze is guaranteed.
We never should have agreed to plastic so that a few people can travel into space for no good reason. Life first is human law not technology.
And every choice we already knew had to be considered mindful and holy for survival. Not allowing greed to rule any choice by anyone.
As lifestyle won't save us.
We need to lessen the use of any pesticides and go back to a learned companion planting instead. Greed and monetary benefit doesnt save life.
Men already knew a lot of basic mutual hard work as a method. Technology made us all lazy and took away a need for family survival by sharing of mutual learnt life skills.
If you're busy working you don't have time to take drugs. Drink or have sex.
You are needed. You learn skills. You are physically fit.
As we already knew all this advice a long time ago. All we had to do was make the right choices.
How many times does humanity destroy itself claiming after and now I've learnt?
The truth humanity is its owned problem.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
The only moral way would be to find a way to convince people to have fewer children for a few generations until we got down to that number. If on could voluntarily get people to agree to one child each it would take two generations, or about fifty years, Well fifty years and then hold at two per generation. There would still be around four billion after the fifty years, but as people aged and died after only having one for that period of time and only two after that it would eventually stabilize at the two billion mark.\
And form of eugenics should not be part of the solution.
No, but he's not from the US, either, so if its going to be eggplant, it may as well be brinjal.
Why don't we just flavor it with an aubergine, an eggplant, and a brinjal so we can use them all?
I suspect, actually, that there is a little something of a eugenics programme in that. After all, there would be precious few resources available to care for the elderly and dying, and those few resources would inevitably wind up serving the more elite among us.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
That already exists to an extent. This would begin to allow an end to that.
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
All that urban warming effects.
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
As I recall, people freely choose to have fewer kids as they get more educated. Perhaps the solution is to increase educational opportunities and population would naturally taper?
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
There is that. but if you go due east from NYC what do you see and what is its temperature?
Clizby Wampuscat
Well-Known Member
Children are more than just old age insurance policies. But I am on your side, we should be reducing the population voluntarily.