Trump administration hints at ‘greater enforcement’ of marijuana laws

[Mick]

It's a waste of my time talking to deniers. They're always going to be looking for more excuses to keep trashing the planet and are not the least bit interested in science or the facts as we now know them. I know why I want a clean, green and sustainable future, but I wonder if the deniers even know in their heart of hearts why they'd rather a dirty polluted one. A lot of people are now coming to see them as the Dark side of the Force. So many people are trying to do the right thing and these people just keep dragging us down. With the move to a sustainable future in full swing and an equally big push back from the deniers, my money is on the deniers. Democracy is going to kill us all. Indigenous peoples think we're crazy and I've got to agree.
I'm reminded of the Cree Indian Prophecy.
“Only when the last tree has been cut down, the last fish been caught, and the last stream poisoned, will we realize we cannot eat money.”

 

[Genghis Kush]

It's a waste of my time talking to deniers. They're always going to be looking for more excuses to keep trashing the planet and are not the least bit interested in science or the facts as we now know them. I know why I want a clean, green and sustainable future, but I wonder if the deniers even know in their heart of hearts why they'd rather a dirty polluted one. A lot of people are now coming to see them as the Dark side of the Force. So many people are trying to do the right thing and these people just keep dragging us down. With the move to a sustainable future in full swing and an equally big push back from the deniers, my money is on the deniers. Democracy is going to kill us all. Indigenous peoples think we're crazy and I've got to agree.
I'm reminded of the Cree Indian Prophecy.
“Only when the last tree has been cut down, the last fish been caught, and the last stream poisoned, will we realize we cannot eat money.”

Its true, there is no reasoning with unreasonable people

sometimes I think there should be a test before you are allowed the right to vote.
A test to prove that you can think rationally or that even know what that is.

 

[resin_lung]

This IS killer!

For me this is actually better than if Sessions wouldn't ever mentioned it.

Knowing that the little guy wants to teach us a lesson so bad and him knowing that we know he can't.... that's a little cherry on top!

To bad for Trump. Had he never let Sessions bark we wouldn't had paid so much attention maybe and he could have taken credit for the Feds not enforcing the laws. But..... we know it's only because of funding not because he wanted out vote.

It's just another way he looks like a joke!
"I don't stand behind anything" haha

my GF actually feels a little bad for him! I called her a GOD DAMN PUSSY and told her to FUCK OFF!haha

Jk

 

[resin_lung]

I'm staring at a bachelors of arts degree from UCSB in environmental studies. It's my GF's. I've wanted to ask a few of the guys on here if " theeey had a degree in environmental studies" but I'm afraid it may be as worthless as the beautiful lady who studied so hard to deserve it. Haha

Edit: she just smacked me! Didn't hurt!hahaha

 

[big_nims]

This congressional spending bill only covers medical and then only for a few months. So I'm guessing that recreational is still fair game?

 

[seeded]

It's a waste of my time talking to deniers. They're always going to be looking for more excuses to keep trashing the planet and are not the least bit interested in science or the facts as we now know them. I know why I want a clean, green and sustainable future, but I wonder if the deniers even know in their heart of hearts why they'd rather a dirty polluted one. A lot of people are now coming to see them as the Dark side of the Force. So many people are trying to do the right thing and these people just keep dragging us down. With the move to a sustainable future in full swing and an equally big push back from the deniers, my money is on the deniers. Democracy is going to kill us all. Indigenous peoples think we're crazy and I've got to agree.
I'm reminded of the Cree Indian Prophecy.
“Only when the last tree has been cut down, the last fish been caught, and the last stream poisoned, will we realize we cannot eat money.”

Life borrows energy to temporarily reverse entropy and there's no truly closed ecosystem that's also sustainable which is why we're driven to find the densest energy sources we can find. It's doesn't matter if it's food or fuel we simply want the biggest bang for our buck because we know it's never going to last forever and since our mere existence requires a basic level of consumption which hurts the Earth anyway taking extra to ensure our success is seen as an acceptable thing to do. Back when we were cavemen than meant having a bigger fire and some belly fat but as more and more people become accustomed to the modern western lifestyle they're becoming unwilling to give it up and in a world where the population is going up a billion people every 20 years or so push will come to shove eventually forcing us to either give up our way of life to deal with our increasing numbers or to give up our population growth to maintain it.

Do you feel as though you have the right to dictate the breeding rights of others or to kill another person to maintain your way of life? I feel horrible for the way humans have abused this planet but unless we're willing to go to those kinds of extremes you're gonna have to get used to living in a mud hut with no wifi

 

[igrowone]

This congressional spending bill only covers medical and then only for a few months. So I'm guessing that recreational is still fair game?

i was wondering about that myself
all manner of opportunity for session's mischief
i don't think he can really do anything effective, but it's going to kill him if he doesn't try

 

[toxic hippie]

Its true, there is no reasoning with unreasonable people

might i add that its easier to fool someone than it is to convince someone they've been fooled

 

[Cannavore]

Yep and since a few years they grow potatoes over there.You can blame the Russians, you can stop breathing to lower the CO2 and the Washington Post always like the rest of the establishment supported the theory of global warming thnx to the rise of CO2 and now they're telling something else and all over a sudden its cherry picking.

see, the establishment and the washington post aren't scientists. what they say is irrelevant.
CO2 is warming the planet at a record pace. There is more Co2 in the atmosphere now than ever in human history and perhaps the last 50 million years. we have an overall net loss of land ice/land glaciers.

you cherry picked reports on SEA ICE growing to support your feelings on this issue. Sea Ice is irrelevant to the issue of climate change.

But I had given you the benefit of the doubt and assumed you had linked an article showing the north pole gaining ice. but it wasn't even that.

You ever heard about the magnetic shield and that the magnetic North Pole is shifting.

https://www.sciencealert.com/new-study-shows-that-earth-s-magnetic-field-is-weakening-more-rapidly-than-we-thought

In 2010 Tampa airport had to close down for a few days to recalculate their position because of the shifting.

http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2011/01...le-shifts-forces-closure-florida-airport.html

Another fact is that the earth's axis changed position thnx to 3 major earthquakes (2004, 2010, 2011).Even the Inuit people have noticed that.

http://www.sciencetimes.com/article...ge-the-earth-has-shifted-say-inuit-elders.htm

Keep on growing

ok but this has nothing to do with co2 driven climate change

 

[resin_lung]

It only takes one

So true! With that said... if all the disasters we need to avoid in the future, both known and unknown, will the one we can't avoid be the ONE or will the ONE be remembered as Trumps election?

 

[Mick]

Its true, there is no reasoning with unreasonable people

sometimes I think there should be a test before you are allowed the right to vote.
A test to prove that you can think rationally or that even know what that is.

Amen to that brother.

 

[OneStonedPony]

It's a shame, that both sides demand their view is the only correct one. That's what keeps the argument going, and accomplishes nothing. Some compromise on both sides, would make for some progress. With some progress, folks would see it's benefits, and desire more of the same. But continuing to call folks stupid, or haters, is the surest way to ensure, they are not going to sit down at the table, and talk compromise.

 

[Mick]

Life borrows energy to temporarily reverse entropy and there's no truly closed ecosystem that's also sustainable which is why we're driven to find the densest energy sources we can find. It's doesn't matter if it's food or fuel we simply want the biggest bang for our buck because we know it's never going to last forever and since our mere existence requires a basic level of consumption which hurts the Earth anyway taking extra to ensure our success is seen as an acceptable thing to do. Back when we were cavemen than meant having a bigger fire and some belly fat but as more and more people become accustomed to the modern western lifestyle they're becoming unwilling to give it up and in a world where the population is going up a billion people every 20 years or so push will come to shove eventually forcing us to either give up our way of life to deal with our increasing numbers or to give up our population growth to maintain it.

Do you feel as though you have the right to dictate the breeding rights of others or to kill another person to maintain your way of life? I feel horrible for the way humans have abused this planet but unless we're willing to go to those kinds of extremes you're gonna have to get used to living in a mud hut with no wifi

Do I think we as a society have the right to impinge on the breeding rights of others? Fuck yeah. Specieism has been used in the past and present to enslave black people, subjugate women and trash the environment and any species of non human animals it contains.Btw, the third biggest river in New Zealand has has just been granted the same legal rights as humans. The local indigenous tribe has fought for the river for years and now if it's abused the law sees no difference between harming the river or harming the tribe, because they are one and the same. I just don't follow the logic that the species causing all the cruelty, suffering and environmental destruction is somehow superior. I live in the mountains and there's always animals being killed by cars, and they are just pushed to the side of the road. But quite a few motor bike riders also die, confusing ambition with ability, and the road gets closed for the rest of the day, half a dozen ambulances and cops turn up and investigate the scene, like some kind of crime against humanity has just been committed At the end of the day we all live and die, human animals and non human animals alike, and we are all connected and part of the one beautiful whole. No one species is any better than any other.

As for living in a mud hut with no wifi, well I'm working towards that. A few acres further out in the mountains were I'll plant an orchard, put in a vegie patch and either build a mud brick house or put up a glass yert. I plan on getting a long way from all you crazy white people and living out my days with as much bliss as I muster, in peace and quite with dog. I suggest you get up into the mountains and clear your mind and feel the hum of the Earth, the hum of you and feel your connection to all. It's a beautiful thing and you just can't harm something you love

 

[Crusader Rabbit]

In the third world, having lots of children is your retirement security. If you knew that the odds of your children living to adulthood was high, you wouldn't need so many children to guarantee your own security. If you knew that with an education and worthwhile skills your kids could grow to have economic security, you'll have fewer children so that you can focus your resources to provide a few children the best opportunity in life. With adequate healthcare, social justice, and economic opportunity, couples tend to have fewer children.

Living the fast life living in high rises, flying around in jet planes, or walking barefoot and sleeping in the dirt are not our only options. People can live healthy worth while lives that are not overly destructive to the environment, and still enjoy and make use of appropriate efficient modern technologies.

 

[resin_lung]

It's a shame, that both sides demand their view is the only correct one. That's what keeps the argument going, and accomplishes nothing. Some compromise on both sides, would make for some progress. With some progress, folks would see it's benefits, and desire more of the same. But continuing to call folks stupid, or haters, is the surest way to ensure, they are not going to sit down at the table, and talk compromise.

Do you mean both sides of the debate or is "both sides" meant to be read as "both parties"?

Shouldn't there be equal amounts of pro and con in both political parties?

I kinda thought those regulations that Trumps Is to eager to lift were the compromise?

I figured that big business/money would want ZEROregulations and the the pro-climate camp would want ZERO big business/money?

Regulations/tax incentives or whatever was meeting in the middle. Kinda.

Trump lifting all those regulations was not much of compromise.

I'm not sure the Trumps agenda of dismantling the government will work with climate change. Can the Trump really be expected or even capable of compromising on climate change?

Can regulations be enforced without government oversight?

Doesn't look like anybody's gonna be looking for any input for the foreseeable future.

 

[Genghis Kush]

It's a shame, that both sides demand their view is the only correct one. That's what keeps the argument going, and accomplishes nothing. Some compromise on both sides, would make for some progress. With some progress, folks would see it's benefits, and desire more of the same. But continuing to call folks stupid, or haters, is the surest way to ensure, they are not going to sit down at the table, and talk compromise.

compromise? I think there has already been enough of that,
these people need to be put in their place

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6PQ6335puOc

"Mongol General: This is good, but what is best in life?

Mongol: The open steppe, fleet horse, falcons at your wrist, and the wind in your hair.

Mongol General: Wrong! Conan! What is best in life?

Conan: Crush your enemies. See them driven before you. Hear the lamentations of their women."

Mongol General: That is good! That is good.

 

[resin_lung]

I'm liking this side of you homeboy!

Ill fkn ride with you! First... I need to speak to my GOD.

Valor pleases you, Crom... so grant me one request. Grant me revenge! And if you do not listen, then to HELL with you!

Ok, Lets roll!lol

 

[Genghis Kush]

it would take about 200 years of a one child per couple policy to reduce the Human population from 8 billion to 500 million.

 

[gaiusmarius]

so what happens when there is a second kid? you know nature takes its course, life finds a way? what then? who decides? do the rich have to follow the same rules? how has it worked in China?

 

[HazyBulldog]

Overpopulation is a myth also.

You know everybody on the planet, standing side by side, would only cover the island of Hawaii? Over 70% of land on the earth is not heavily populated.


Don't have too look much further than past Earth Day predictions........

2: “100-200 Million People Per Year Will Be Starving to Death During the Next Ten Years.”
Stanford professor Dr. Paul Ehrlich declared in April 1970 that mass starvation was imminent. His dire predictions failed to materialize as the number of people living in poverty has significantly declined and the amount of food per person has steadily increased, despite population growth. The world’s Gross Domestic Product per person has immeasurably increased despite increases in population.
Ehrlich is largely responsible for this view, having co-published “The Population Bomb” with The Sierra Club in 1968. The book made a number of claims including that millions of humans would starve to death in the 1970s and 1980s, mass famines would sweep England leading to the country’s demise, and that ecological destruction would devastate the planet causing the collapse of civilization.


3: “Population Will Inevitably and Completely Outstrip Whatever Small Increases in Food Supplies We Make.”
Paul Ehrlich also made the above claim in 1970, shortly before an agricultural revolution that caused the world’s food supply to rapidly increase.
Ehrlich has consistently failed to revise his predictions when confronted with the fact that they did not occur, stating in 2009 that “perhaps the most serious flaw in The Bomb was that it was much too optimistic about the future.”

4: “Demographers Agree Almost Unanimously … Thirty Years From Now, the Entire World … Will Be in Famine.”
Environmentalists in 1970 truly believed in a scientific consensus predicting global famine due to population growth in the developing world, especially in India.
“Demographers agree almost unanimously on the following grim timetable: by 1975 widespread famines will begin in India; these will spread by 1990 to include all of India, Pakistan, China and the Near East, Africa. By the year 2000, or conceivably sooner, South and Central America will exist under famine conditions,” Peter Gunter, a professor at North Texas State University, said in a 1970 issue of The Living Wilderness.”By the year 2000, thirty years from now, the entire world, with the exception of Western Europe, North America, and Australia, will be in famine.”
India, where the famines were supposed to begin, recently became one of the world’s largest exporters of agricultural products and food supply per person in the country has drastically increased in recent years. In fact, the number of people in every country listed by Gunter has risen dramatically since 1970.


WHY DO PEOPLE STILL BELIEVE AND SPREAD THIS NONSENSE?