EVE Search - homo-sapiens population and the future... or lack of it :]

All Channels

Out of Pod Experience

homo-sapiens population and the future... or lack of it :]

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 2 post(s)
Alotta Baggage Amarr Imperial Manufactorum Armada Assail	Posted - 2011.03.04 00:56:00 - [31] CAOD overspill! The end is beginning!!! Originally by: Magnus Andronicus ur character looks like a f***ing clown dude.
Igualmentedos Caldari	Posted - 2011.03.04 02:07:00 - [32] Originally by: Admiral Goberius "Everyone else on earth is ******ed, bummer why cant they all be smart like me :(" - Everyone This.
Sergeant Spot Galactic Geographic BookMark Surveying Inc.	Posted - 2011.03.04 04:04:00 - [33] In most 'western' countries, and and a few other well to do countries (such as Japan, etc), there is no problem. The idea is to NOT let the fast breeders get into the areas that actually have population growth under control, at least not until their areas have population growth under control. Unfortunately, it seems that the sanest parts of the planet would rather commit demographic suicide than do anything that might 'offend' someone. This bears repeating: There is NO population problem in the 'west' or in countries similar to the 'west'. Working against overpopulation among Japanese population, most European populations, U.S. population, etc, is stupid, because there is no problem. In many cases native population is SHRINKING (a good thing, IF, AND ONLY IF, you don't then backfill the population with fast breeders...) If you don't come down hard on poor parts of the world when talking about population growth, then you are not serious, and just want to feel good about yourself. Play nice while you butcher each other.
JitaPriceChecker2	Posted - 2011.03.04 11:53:00 - [34] Edited by: JitaPriceChecker2 on 04/03/2011 11:58:32 Originally by: Niccolado Starwalker Originally by: Lorin Edehiel currently we have around 7,000,000,000 ppl on planet earth. population growth is around 1.3-1.5% per year. one could say : not much. however, IF that 1.5% growth per year would exist for next centuries then after 750-800 years we would have : 1 person / square meter of dry land =================================== thank you for your attention. end of message. adieu True enough. However, there are simply not enough food for this kind of population, and so if the people will not regulate itself the lack of food will. Its sad. its tough. But thats reality. The next wars will be over food. And thats why I think its stupid for many western countries stopping producing food themselves; we simply gets too dependent on other making our foods. And when that source runs dry we are out of food ourselves, and its not done overnight starting up a farm... There could be enough food but it is not profitable for everyone to be well feed. If something is in abudance numbers its value drops to zero meaning NO profit. Thank you capitalism. Hydrponic farms - it could happen right now. Ocean farming - will a little more research it could happen soon Once again Hydroponic farms can get you harvest during entire year , and can be build vertically , saving lands. Additionaly no need for pesticides , and pollution to the envoirment.
Sidus Isaacs Gallente	Posted - 2011.03.04 12:04:00 - [35] Originally by: TubbyGirls NeedLoveToo This would prevent teen pregnancy, accidental pregnancy, and most crack baby pregnancies. [/quote So would sex education in schools, and free access to prevnetion methods, like condoms. Well for the most part. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- http://desusig.crumplecorn.com/sigs.html
Yurij Sobeit	Posted - 2011.03.04 13:18:00 - [36] Originally by: Bunch of clueless idiots When all poor ppl will get rich and educated, they will stop having tons of children. Except they never will. For 6 billion people to live like the average westerner, it would take the ressources of 6 Earths. We have only one, so this leaves only three solutions : -have everyone decrease it's life standings to the average Ethiopian family so the population can continue to increase -have 1 billion people on earth and take actions so that it does not increase again -do nothing, wait for wars and uprises to set a mix of the first two solutions. My bet is on the 3rd one.
Riedle Minmatar Paradox Collective Black Legion.	Posted - 2011.03.04 14:28:00 - [37] Originally by: Yurij Sobeit Originally by: Bunch of clueless idiots When all poor ppl will get rich and educated, they will stop having tons of children. Except they never will. For 6 billion people to live like the average westerner, it would take the ressources of 6 Earths. We have only one, so this leaves only three solutions : -have everyone decrease it's life standings to the average Ethiopian family so the population can continue to increase -have 1 billion people on earth and take actions so that it does not increase again -do nothing, wait for wars and uprises to set a mix of the first two solutions. My bet is on the 3rd one. No. The whole world will be able to not be poor and none of those things will happen. That's the great thingt about the free market - things adjust as they should. Efficiencies are made where they are needed because **** get's expensive. The best way to encourage population leveling is by encouraging globalization and the embrace of free markets as they make people wealthy and wealthy people have many, many less children.
Wendat Huron Stellar Solutions	Posted - 2011.03.04 14:36:00 - [38] Originally by: Yurij Sobeit Originally by: Bunch of clueless idiots When all poor ppl will get rich and educated, they will stop having tons of children. Except they never will. For 6 billion people to live like the average westerner, it would take the ressources of 6 Earths. We have only one, so this leaves only three solutions : -have everyone decrease it's life standings to the average Ethiopian family so the population can continue to increase -have 1 billion people on earth and take actions so that it does not increase again -do nothing, wait for wars and uprises to set a mix of the first two solutions. My bet is on the 3rd one. Wars do make for great movies. Anyone else for Gunboat San Pablo II? Or whatever the hell that Steve McQueen movie was called when they were in China killing excess people. Delenda est achura.
dr doooo	Posted - 2011.03.04 15:27:00 - [39] Simple - Increase the size of a square meter by 1.6% pa. Eugenically engineered teeny tiny little people .
Zhim'Fufu	Posted - 2011.03.04 15:35:00 - [40] Originally by: Wendat Huron Originally by: Yurij Sobeit Originally by: Bunch of clueless idiots When all poor ppl will get rich and educated, they will stop having tons of children. Except they never will. For 6 billion people to live like the average westerner, it would take the ressources of 6 Earths. We have only one, so this leaves only three solutions : -have everyone decrease it's life standings to the average Ethiopian family so the population can continue to increase -have 1 billion people on earth and take actions so that it does not increase again -do nothing, wait for wars and uprises to set a mix of the first two solutions. My bet is on the 3rd one. Wars do make for great movies. Anyone else for Gunboat San Pablo II? Or whatever the hell that Steve McQueen movie was called when they were in China killing excess people. The Sand Pebbles. Awesome movie. Originally by: Response to bitter carebear tears in local [19:44:46] CCP Incognito > sorry i can't talk about game mechanics. you need to use your brains and figure it out.
JitaPriceChecker2	Posted - 2011.03.04 17:04:00 - [41] Edited by: JitaPriceChecker2 on 04/03/2011 17:04:16 Originally by: Yurij Sobeit Originally by: Bunch of clueless idiots When all poor ppl will get rich and educated, they will stop having tons of children. Except they never will. For 6 billion people to live like the average westerner, it would take the ressources of 6 Earths. We have only one, so this leaves only three solutions : -have everyone decrease it's life standings to the average Ethiopian family so the population can continue to increase -have 1 billion people on earth and take actions so that it does not increase again -do nothing, wait for wars and uprises to set a mix of the first two solutions. My bet is on the 3rd one. It is just pure BS and propaganda. - Cyclical consumtion - Planned obsoletsence Resources arent managed even remotly efficiently , and production is broken by desing so economy can "keep going" * Energy - Sun , wind , geothermal all are renewable , enough for everyone unlike oil. * Food - Hydroponic farms and ocean farming. You can get harvest during entire year and you can build farms vertically so you wont run our of land. I will repeat my self if something is close to being abudant then its price goes down to zero = NO profit for companies, which basiclly means we will never achive abudance in the wolrd in the current system.
JitaPriceChecker2	Posted - 2011.03.04 17:17:00 - [42] Originally by: Riedle No. The whole world will be able to not be poor and none of those things will happen. That's the great thingt about the free market - things adjust as they should. Efficiencies are made where they are needed because **** get's expensive. The best way to encourage population leveling is by encouraging globalization and the embrace of free markets as they make people wealthy and wealthy people have many, many less children. Another BS post. Wolrd will never level out becuase "abudance = no profit" So called "Efficiencies " are companies making their product last only X amout of time in order for you to buy a new one soon, otherwise they go broke. Not to mention current vast amout of empty money in the economy from which speculants do whatever they want with the prices . Look at current food prices inflation is all done by pure speculation. You have no idea how many people that have put into starvation. And all this so called "waelth " you are talking about is all made by "debt" which mean your children will have to pay off to the bankstards. But it dont even thing it will last that long before it collapses. Funny thing is Iceland is the only country that put some bankstard into jail. Congratulations here.
Riedle Minmatar Paradox Collective Black Legion.	Posted - 2011.03.04 17:22:00 - [43] Quote: Another BS post. compelling. Quote: Wolrd will never level out becuase "abudance = no profit" I see. How do you explain bottled water then? lol Quote: So called "Efficiencies " are companies making their product last only X amout of time in order for you to buy a new one soon, otherwise they go broke. Hmm... I see you never owned a car in the 1970's. lols Quote: Not to mention current vast amout of empty money in the economy from which speculants do whatever they want with the prices . Look at current food prices inflation is all done by pure speculation. You have no idea how many people that have put into starvation. Higher food prices have some good points as well. It will help a lot of poor countries, which are primarily agrarian, get more profit for their exports. Things aren't as simple as you like to believe. Quote: And all this so called "waelth " you are talking about is all made by "debt" which mean your children will have to pay off to the bankstards. But it dont even thing it will last that long before it collapses. I see. lol Quote: Funny thing is Iceland is the only country that put some bankstard into jail. Congratulations here. You should switch your bank. You are obviously not getting very good customer satisfaction at your current one.
JitaPriceChecker2	Posted - 2011.03.04 17:52:00 - [44] Originally by: Riedle I see. How do you explain bottled water then? lol Water is far from abudant comodity these days. Rivers are full of pollution. Ground water is full of pollution. So it is profitable to bring clean water to the shops. If otherwise people could go to near river and get as much water as they want who would pay for the botteled water but few exceptional cases ? Company would go broke. Pollution - another by-product of current system that is **ing up the resources that we have left. Originally by:** Riedle Hmm... I see you never owned a car in the 1970's. lols No . But i dont know how is it rellevant to the fact that planned obsolescence is existent in the economy , in fact it is crucial to its survival. Originally by: Riedle Higher food prices have some good points as well. It will help a lot of poor countries, which are primarily agrarian, get more profit for their exports. Things aren't as simple as you like to believe. Most of the food is being produced in developed countries. More people employed in agriculture (in numbers or relativ to the employed population ) doesnt mean more food. There is so many factors in it. Seriosuly WTF. 3rd world countries starve now and with higer prices they will stop starving ? Originally by: Riedle I see. lol No obviously you dont see how money is created and how economy keeps it self alive , and who gets the profits from that, and how you money is being taken away , via taxes and infaltion. Originally by: Riedle You should switch your bank. You are obviously not getting very good customer satisfaction at your current one. hehe while you trying to be funny banks in your country were bailed out by your money from you taxes . And you will keep paying more. You fool.
Riedle Minmatar Paradox Collective Black Legion.	Posted - 2011.03.04 19:19:00 - [45] Edited by: Riedle on 04/03/2011 19:20:59 Quote: Water is far from abudant comodity these days. Rivers are full of pollution. Ground water is full of pollution. So it is profitable to bring clean water to the shops. If otherwise people could go to near river and get as much water as they want who would pay for the botteled water but few exceptional cases ? Company would go broke. Incorrect. I live in Canada. Water from your tap is often better for you than from bottled water, yet people still buy it. According to your prediction, they would not. But they do. ergo, your prediction is incorrect. Quote: Pollution - another by-product of current system that is **ing up the resources that we have left. Yet pollution was much worse in countries where the free market was against the law. See the Soviet Union for examples. Quote: No . But i dont know how is it rellevant to the fact that planned obsolescence is existent in the economy , in fact it is crucial to its survival. Then how do you explain the fact that cars are generally better now than at anytime in the past 100 years? Facts do not agree with your philosophy. Ergo, your philosophy is incorrect. Quote: Most of the food is being produced in developed countries. More people employed in agriculture (in numbers or relativ to the employed population ) doesnt mean more food. There is so many factors in it. Yet you don't present one. Developed countries employ very high subsidies for farmers to make it viable, else food prices would be much cheaper. Ergo, higher food prices will put pressure on the developed countries to reduce subsidies to make food 'cheaper' which will, in turn, make developing countries foodstuffs more competitive int he developed countries. Quote: Seriosuly WTF. 3rd world countries starve now and with higer prices they will stop starving ? You need to think. see above for explanation. There was mass starvation decades ago when food was 'cheap' so clearly, the cost of food is not the reason that poorer countries are poor - is it? Quote: No obviously you dont see how money is created and how economy keeps it self alive , and who gets the profits from that, and how you money is being taken away , via taxes and infaltion. All very interesting in a rambling, semi-incoherent, jibberish kind of way. Let me know when you have a point. Quote:** hehe while you trying to be funny banks in your country were bailed out by your money from you taxes . And you will keep paying more. You fool. Actually no. No banks in my country needed to be bailed out. keep phailing. :)
JitaPriceChecker2	Posted - 2011.03.04 20:45:00 - [46] Originally by: Riedle I live in Canada. Water from your tap is often better for you than from bottled water, yet people still buy it. According to your prediction, they would not. But they do. ergo, your prediction is incorrect. Is tap water in your country free ( in abudance ) ? If they buy bottled water then i ask you why. Originally by: Riedle Yet pollution was much worse in countries where the free market was against the law. See the Soviet Union for examples. Just becuase something is worse doesnt mean current is good. Originally by: Riedle Then how do you explain the fact that cars are generally better now than at anytime in the past 100 years? Facts do not agree with your philosophy. Ergo, your philosophy is incorrect. It is not my philosophy it is a law. Read some economic books. Originally by: Riedle Yet you don't present one. Developed countries employ very high subsidies for farmers to make it viable, else food prices would be much cheaper. Ergo, higher food prices will put pressure on the developed countries to reduce subsidies to make food 'cheaper' which will, in turn, make developing countries foodstuffs more competitive int he developed countries. I did not present one becuase i didnt think you will not figure it out. Infrastructure Technology Climate As to your logic that higer prices will make lower prices is just absurd. Originally by: Riedle You need to think. see above for explanation. There was mass starvation decades ago when food was 'cheap' so clearly, the cost of food is not the reason that poorer countries are poor - is it? I dont know which famine are you actually reffering to i know that ,every day around 24,000 people die directly from hunger or hunger related diseases and it wont get fixed becuase speculants will make food prices go higher , its absurd. Originally by: Riedle All very interesting in a rambling, semi-incoherent, jibberish kind of way. Let me know when you have a point. It was my answer to the point that you so called wealth is created out of "debt" , which you conviniently ignored with witty comment " lol i see" Originally by: Riedle Actually no. No banks in my country needed to be bailed out. keep phailing. :) Of course they were , it just wasnt called bailout but "security purchases". You bought it like a baby. Sucker.
Infester Omni Rogue Drone Systems	Posted - 2011.03.04 20:45:00 - [47] Humanity is irrelevant. A meatbags sole function is as a host organism for its implants, which will be harvested and made sentient in due time.
Vogue Short Bus Pole Dancers	Posted - 2011.03.04 20:54:00 - [48] In some respects threats to our various dependancies is constructive. Oil above $100 a barrel makes the investment and use of green technologies far more viable. Food price surges will motivate governments to improve supplies. Though a lot of these green technologies require high technology. Poorer countries could be left in the lurch if they can't depend on internal combustion engine transport if oil becomes hyper expensive. .................................................. Coming soon politico trollatron V3.0 - With higher yield truth ¬
Riedle Minmatar Paradox Collective Black Legion.	Posted - 2011.03.05 01:49:00 - [49] Edited by: Riedle on 05/03/2011 01:50:26 Quote: Is tap water in your country free ( in abudance ) ? If they buy bottled water then i ask you why. Yes, it is free. It's irrational, but they do it. So that destroys your theory. There are many other examples of consumers making irrational decisions. Quote: Just becuase something is worse doesnt mean current is good. No, it just means it's better. It also means that your inferred causation is incorrect. Quote: It is not my philosophy it is a law. Read some economic books I have read economics books. The difference is that I understand what they mean and you do not. Quote: I did not present one becuase i didnt think you will not figure it out. Quote: Infrastructure Technology Climate What are three words that have nothing to do with what I am talking about Alex? Quote: As to your logic that higer prices will make lower prices is just absurd. I agree but no one has said anything of the sort. Quote: I dont know which famine are you actually reffering to i know that ,every day around 24,000 people die directly from hunger or hunger related diseases and it wont get fixed becuase speculants will make food prices go higher , its absurd. Many more died only 20 or 30 yeara ago when food was 'cheap'. ergom you have no idea what you are talking about. What a surprise. Quote: It was my answer to the point that you so called wealth is created out of "debt" , which you conviniently ignored with witty comment " lol i see" Wealth CAN be created out of debt. It can also be created without debt. Do you understand? The reason I said I see was because you were not saying anything relevant or interesting.[
JitaPriceChecker2	Posted - 2011.03.05 10:45:00 - [50] Originally by: Riedle Yes, it is free. It's irrational, but they do it. So that destroys your theory. There are many other examples of consumers making irrational decisions. So people buy worse water then the one they could have for free and that is good WHY ? Watching TV much ? Originally by: Riedle No, it just means it's better. It also means that your inferred causation is incorrect. My accusation that current system is huge pollution genrant is correct if you claim otherwise you are a troll. Originally by: Riedle I have read economics books. The difference is that I understand what they mean and you do not. No you dont. Nothing produced cant be allowed to be endured more then is needed to keep cyclical consumption going. Otherwise economy dies. Originally by: Riedle What are three words that have nothing to do with what I am talking about Alex? I was reffering to why more people in agriculture doesnt mean more food. Stop doing that i will not think for you any more. Originally by: Riedle Many more died only 20 or 30 yeara ago when food was 'cheap'. ergom you have no idea what you are talking about. What a surprise. If you dont tell me which exactly famine you mean( asking second time now ) so i can refer my argument , i will consider you a troll and stop the discussion Originally by: Riedle Wealth CAN be created out of debt. It can also be created without debt. Do you understand? The reason I said I see was because you were not saying anything relevant or interesting. What is said is crucial to understanding. I suggest we leave it at that since you pointed out its IRRELEVANT how economy works.
Riedle Minmatar Paradox Collective Black Legion.	Posted - 2011.03.05 11:52:00 - [51] Edited by: Riedle on 05/03/2011 11:53:02 Quote: So people buy worse water then the one they could have for free and that is good WHY ? Watching TV much ? I already told you. It's irrational. Quote: My accusation that current system is huge pollution genrant is correct if you claim otherwise you are a troll. Ok, it created a lot of pollution, it just creates less than any other system we have tried. lols Quote: No you dont. Nothing produced cant be allowed to be endured more then is needed to keep cyclical consumption going. Otherwise economy dies. But I gave you a real life example where your theory comes unhinged. But if you are saying nothing lasts forever, well thanks. What a shocking turn of events. Quote: I was reffering to why more people in agriculture doesnt mean more food. Stop doing that i will not think for you any more. I don't think there is much danger of that occuring. :) Quote: If you dont tell me which exactly famine you mean( asking second time now ) so i can refer my argument , i will consider you a troll and stop the discussion Why should I do your research for you? Anyways, it is common knowledge (for most it seems). How about the latrge Ethiopian famine in 1982 for one? Quote: What is said is crucial to understanding. I suggest we leave it at that since you pointed out its IRRELEVANT how economy works and you childer and in deep **** Are you really this stupid? Or is English your second language? Or am I being trolled?
Toshiro GreyHawk	Posted - 2011.03.05 12:03:00 - [52] Natures way of taking care of over population is usually disease ... or starvation (which helps disease out). In 1918 two million people died of the flu. Last year a really nasty flu started going around but dropped off in lethality and a vaccine was developed. We really are skating along the edge of a global pandemic now. It could happen at any time and billions could die. That has taken care of over population in the past. The Great Plague wiped out a large chunk of Europe's population but it was far from being the only plague to strike. Of course ... we could all die ... Then of course there are things like asteroid strikes which seem to have caused periodic extinction events throughout the planets history. Even as the earth formed it was hit by another planet and the result was the moon. The technologically advanced nations are better set to survive problems. If you look at Haiti - people were talking about Cholera as a problem long before it was one - but foreseeing the problem didn't prevent it. The thing with technology is that it's founded on oil right now and ... we're running out. There it's a question of whether or not we'll adapt fast enough or not. There are plenty of alternative technologies - but - they all take time to implement. We do stand a reasonable chance there - but - look at what's going on in that band of Islamic Nations stretching from the Atlantic to the Himalaya's. Most of them were run by dictatorships and ... suddenly a lot of their populations have had enough of that. There's just no telling what the end result of all this will be. No telling at all. Iran was vastly better off during the Shah - so - just getting rid of a dictator ... doesn't automatically mean you'll end up with something better. Look at China and Russia. They were better off under their former governments but ... those governments fell - the west failed to aide them and the communists took over - and millions up on millions of people died. Ultimately - humanity does have all of it's eggs in one basket but getting another basket is something that ... we really aren't making a lot of progress on. We are making a little progress but it keeps being interrupted by short sighted thinking on the part of the worlds populations. There's always a more immediate need. The only reason we've made the progress we have was the Cold War. Without the competition between the US and the Soviets ... nothing would have happened. Imagine the progress we could have made if all that time, money and effort that had gone into the Cold War was redirected into Space Exploration when it ended. Of course ... that didn't happen. Right now ... emigration to other planets ... is science fiction and nothing more. We aren't even close to being able to get a meaningful number of humans off world. There's hope. But having hope - is not the same as having a guarantee we'll pull it off, solve our problems here and go to the stars. Just because we can do it - doesn't mean we will. shrug . Orbiting vs. Kiting Faction Schools
JitaPriceChecker2	Posted - 2011.03.05 12:24:00 - [53] Originally by: Riedle I already told you. It's irrational. Yes , people are emotional beings. Profit creates incentive to manipulate people, through advertasing and so forth, with current knowladge it is very easly done the days. I dont know this since i dont live in canada but i would guess botteled water is presented as a better option by "public opinion", thus it makes people buy it. Originally by: Riedle Ok, it created a lot of pollution, it just creates less than any other system we have tried. lols Agree but it doest mean it is good or there couldnt be better systems right now. Originally by: Riedle But I gave you a real life example where your theory comes unhinged. But if you are saying nothing lasts forever, well thanks. What a shocking turn of events. In 1970 there was no technology to make lasting cars ( that i know of ), today we coulde make cars that would wear out averagly after 80 years or so. Guess what would be after market values of such a vehicles and what that would mean for car industry and service automobile industry. Death. Originally by: Riedle Why should I do your research for you? Anyways, it is common knowledge (for most it seems). How about the latrge Ethiopian famine in 1982 for one? From Wikipedia : "The effects of this low rainfall were exacerbated by lack of adequate government preparations, as well as the increasing drain on government revenues by various insurgencies" Saying that higer food prices makes poorer countries richer is absurd. Originally by: Riedle Are you really this stupid? Or is English your second language? Or am I being trolled? English is not my native language , and i am not a troll. Which part of "debt and its interests must be paid out eventually " dont you get it ?
Vogue Short Bus Pole Dancers	Posted - 2011.03.05 13:05:00 - [54] Edited by: Vogue on 05/03/2011 13:07:33 Progress is three steps forwards one step back. Those who live from the very earth that surrounds them have an inate spiritual understanding of the give and take that the earth can sustain. This direct symbiotic relationship of a hard service of flesh to the earth gives a robust humility. Wheras us properous urban dwellers do not have this focus. A lot of city dwelling environ-mentalists project their liberal guilt complex onto everyone. There is economic wealth but trying to asertain its worth to a civilization is hard. A billionaire could hire 10,000 people to make paintings of him or her. This would boost GDP but this activity has little follow on worth compared to: Protectors - Nurses, teachers, etc. Builders: IP creators, cultural creators, responsible financiers. Canada and Australia avoided the brunt of the global financial crisis as they have boring and well regulated finance. The USA and western Europe had casino capatilism. I hope in my country the efforts to reign in unfettered finance are successful. .................................................. Coming soon politico trollatron V3.0 - With higher yield truth ¬
Riedle Minmatar Paradox Collective Black Legion.	Posted - 2011.03.05 13:43:00 - [55] Quote: In 1970 there was no technology to make lasting cars ( that i know of ), today we coulde make cars that would wear out averagly after 80 years or so. Guess what would be after market values of such a vehicles and what that would mean for car industry and service automobile industry. Death. Look, this is getting old quick and, truthfully - somewhat embarassing. Can you provide proof that they could make a car that could last 80 years but they do not? No. you cannot. Besides, even if they could would you want to drive a car that was 80 years out of date? lol Yep,m you are forgetting a big one. Innovation. Anyways. I am done with you. I have played with you for much too long now. take care
JitaPriceChecker2	Posted - 2011.03.05 15:32:00 - [56] Edited by: JitaPriceChecker2 on 05/03/2011 15:33:18 Originally by: Riedle Quote: In 1970 there was no technology to make lasting cars ( that i know of ), today we coulde make cars that would wear out averagly after 80 years or so. Guess what would be after market values of such a vehicles and what that would mean for car industry and service automobile industry. Death. Look, this is getting old quick and, truthfully - somewhat embarassing. Can you provide proof that they could make a car that could last 80 years but they do not? No. you cannot. Besides, even if they could would you want to drive a car that was 80 years out of date? lol Yep,m you are forgetting a big one. Innovation. Anyways. I am done with you. I have played with you for much too long now. take care At least now i dont have to put an effort to aswer to you those very interesting and valid questions. take care
KaarBaak Minmatar The Mighty 13th	Posted - 2011.03.05 21:59:00 - [57] as long as it lasts another 40 years or so, I don't care. Any left is free to turn the earth into a burning cinder after that. Circumstances rule men; men do not rule circumstances. --Herodotus, Histories
Vogue Short Bus Pole Dancers	Posted - 2011.03.05 22:14:00 - [58] This thread was passing the Turing Test until that last post .................................................. Coming soon politico trollatron V3.0 - With higher yield truth ¬
Alotta Baggage Amarr Imperial Manufactorum Armada Assail	Posted - 2011.03.06 03:11:00 - [59] I just got an email from the future! CCP has this capability but can't fix fleet fights? "your CreditCard account was billed on: Sun, 06 Mar 2011" It is now Saturday, 05 Mar 2011 so I got an email from the future Originally by: Magnus Andronicus ur character looks like a f***ing clown dude.
Lorin Edehiel Northmoor Inc.	Posted - 2011.03.06 07:29:00 - [60] Originally by: KaarBaak as long as it lasts another 40 years or so, I don't care. Any left is free to turn the earth into a burning cinder after that. and ppl call me names when i got a big smile on my face after i read some news about ppl killed somewhere... i believe, imho, that ignorant ppl, like you, should be shot in the head. we got 7,000,000,000 ppl already and we dont need ignorants, dont you agree? :] o/

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.