Michael Coslo wrote:

...
To be completely fair, they relied on cause and effect, which is to say
that they noticed a lot of people who smoked and chewed ended up with
these diseases.

But deep pockets kept tangling things up until testing came along that
not only showed that they caused the diseases, but the pathways, and
how, and in a 100 percent unambiguous way.

If we were to apply the same rationale and proof to say, falling out of
airplanes at 30 thousand feet, the argument would be " Well, can you
prove that the person died form the fall, or did they perhaps die of
fright on the way down? Can you testify with a certainty that is what
happened? As if the exact mechanism being indeterminate means the
activity should be promoted, when we all know that whatever the exact
cause of death, if you do fall out at that height, it ain't gonna be too
happy of an ending.

- 73 de Mike N3LI -

You are quite correct, as are the others comments in the same direction(s.)

Now, having been "burnt", in the past, by gov't, medicine, big money,
power and "the media", can you look around and see these exact same
tactics in use today? And, what percentage of the population is so
stupid they make no use of past history which recorded these lies and so
sadly demonstrated those lies ability to do much damage and death?

I will give you this--I feel it is a HIGH percentage!

"But you tell me
Over and over and over again, my friend
Ah, you don’t believe
We’re on the eve
of destruction." -- Barry McGuire, Eve of Destruction.

Regards,
JS

On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 23:19:56 -0400, "Ed Cregger"
wrote:


"John Smith" wrote in message
...
Ed Cregger wrote:

...
snip
---------

The more people that want a piece of the pie, the smaller the pieces will
be. Our main, number #1 problem is over population for the resources we have
remaining and the lifestyle we wish to live. But you know that.

Nature culls its creatures occasionally. Will it be by disease/plague? By
wars? By things we cannot even imagine? No one knows. Enjoy the party while
it is going on. Analyze later. Worrying hurts no one but you and those
around you. I have given up worrying about it all. It is now in God's hands.
I surrender.

Ed, NM2K

back to antennas


How about taking a look at a population density map.

"JosephKK" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 23:19:56 -0400, "Ed Cregger"
wrote:


"John Smith" wrote in message
...
Ed Cregger wrote:

...
snip
---------

The more people that want a piece of the pie, the smaller the pieces will
be. Our main, number #1 problem is over population for the resources we
have
remaining and the lifestyle we wish to live. But you know that.

Nature culls its creatures occasionally. Will it be by disease/plague? By
wars? By things we cannot even imagine? No one knows. Enjoy the party
while
it is going on. Analyze later. Worrying hurts no one but you and those
around you. I have given up worrying about it all. It is now in God's
hands.
I surrender.

Ed, NM2K

back to antennas


How about taking a look at a population density map.

---------------

How about giving me a clue? What is your point?

Ed Cregger

Ed Cregger wrote:
"JosephKK" wrote in message


How about taking a look at a population density map.

---------------

How about giving me a clue? What is your point?


It's probably the old "How can there be too many people when there are
so many empty spaces"? Chestnut, used by some to imply that we have
alot of room to expand. The answer is simple.

If the land is crowded, you can't grow the crops.

If the land is in the middle of the Sahara, you can't have many people
living on it.

Same goes for Death Vally, Antarctica, The Canadian Arctic, jungles and
on and on.

In our area, Many farmers have sold off prime agricultural land for
housing development. After all, "someone else" will grow the food.
Problem is, the someone else sold off his land too.

When the places that are inhospitible to life are taken out of the
picture, it doesn't look quite so happy.

- 73 de Mike N3LI -

Michael Coslo wrote:

...
It's probably the old "How can there be too many people when there are
so many empty spaces"? Chestnut, used by some to imply that we have alot
of room to expand. The answer is simple.

If the land is crowded, you can't grow the crops.

If the land is in the middle of the Sahara, you can't have many people
living on it.

Same goes for Death Vally, Antarctica, The Canadian Arctic, jungles and
on and on.

In our area, Many farmers have sold off prime agricultural land for
housing development. After all, "someone else" will grow the food.
Problem is, the someone else sold off his land too.

When the places that are inhospitible to life are taken out of the
picture, it doesn't look quite so happy.

- 73 de Mike N3LI -

"Gad Dummit Man"; get off that soap box, QUICK!

Next they will be demanding we depart from our "antenna farms" and begin
raising vegetables! LOL!

Regards,
JS

John Smith wrote:
Michael Coslo wrote:

...
It's probably the old "How can there be too many people when there are
so many empty spaces"? Chestnut, used by some to imply that we have
alot of room to expand. The answer is simple.

If the land is crowded, you can't grow the crops.

If the land is in the middle of the Sahara, you can't have many people
living on it.

Same goes for Death Vally, Antarctica, The Canadian Arctic, jungles
and on and on.

In our area, Many farmers have sold off prime agricultural land for
housing development. After all, "someone else" will grow the food.
Problem is, the someone else sold off his land too.

When the places that are inhospitible to life are taken out of the
picture, it doesn't look quite so happy.

- 73 de Mike N3LI -

"Gad Dummit Man"; get off that soap box, QUICK!

Next they will be demanding we depart from our "antenna farms" and begin
raising vegetables! LOL!

How about we propose some experiments in which we put up a tower, and
grow crops around it, to see if the radio waves promote the crop growth?

I'll try the experiment with Barley and hops.... ;^)


- 73 d eMike N3LI -

"Michael Coslo" wrote in message
...
John Smith wrote:
Michael Coslo wrote:

...
It's probably the old "How can there be too many people when there are
so many empty spaces"? Chestnut, used by some to imply that we have alot
of room to expand. The answer is simple.

If the land is crowded, you can't grow the crops.

If the land is in the middle of the Sahara, you can't have many people
living on it.

Same goes for Death Vally, Antarctica, The Canadian Arctic, jungles and
on and on.

In our area, Many farmers have sold off prime agricultural land for
housing development. After all, "someone else" will grow the food.
Problem is, the someone else sold off his land too.

When the places that are inhospitible to life are taken out of the
picture, it doesn't look quite so happy.

- 73 de Mike N3LI -

"Gad Dummit Man"; get off that soap box, QUICK!

Next they will be demanding we depart from our "antenna farms" and begin
raising vegetables! LOL!

How about we propose some experiments in which we put up a tower, and grow
crops around it, to see if the radio waves promote the crop growth?

I'll try the experiment with Barley and hops.... ;^)


- 73 d eMike N3LI -

-------------

Or how about genetically engineering a tree to actually be an antenna tree?
Just for kicks, we could patch in some genes to apple, peach and pear trees
too, so it wouldn't be a total ecological loss.

Ed, NM2K

On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 23:38:31 -0400, "Ed Cregger"
wrote:


"JosephKK" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 23:19:56 -0400, "Ed Cregger"
wrote:


"John Smith" wrote in message
...
Ed Cregger wrote:

...
snip
---------

The more people that want a piece of the pie, the smaller the pieces will
be. Our main, number #1 problem is over population for the resources we
have
remaining and the lifestyle we wish to live. But you know that.

Nature culls its creatures occasionally. Will it be by disease/plague? By
wars? By things we cannot even imagine? No one knows. Enjoy the party
while
it is going on. Analyze later. Worrying hurts no one but you and those
around you. I have given up worrying about it all. It is now in God's
hands.
I surrender.

Ed, NM2K

back to antennas


How about taking a look at a population density map.

---------------

How about giving me a clue? What is your point?

Ed Cregger


Without looking any further, it is on the map Ed.

"JosephKK" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 23:38:31 -0400, "Ed Cregger"
wrote:


"JosephKK" wrote in message
. ..
On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 23:19:56 -0400, "Ed Cregger"
wrote:


"John Smith" wrote in message
...
Ed Cregger wrote:

...
snip
---------

The more people that want a piece of the pie, the smaller the pieces
will
be. Our main, number #1 problem is over population for the resources we
have
remaining and the lifestyle we wish to live. But you know that.

Nature culls its creatures occasionally. Will it be by disease/plague?
By
wars? By things we cannot even imagine? No one knows. Enjoy the party
while
it is going on. Analyze later. Worrying hurts no one but you and those
around you. I have given up worrying about it all. It is now in God's
hands.
I surrender.

Ed, NM2K

back to antennas


How about taking a look at a population density map.

---------------

How about giving me a clue? What is your point?

Ed Cregger


Without looking any further, it is on the map Ed.


----------------

When I left home for the first time in 1966, I was headed for Lackland AFB
in San Antonio, TX. It was my first passenger jet experience and was a
direct flight from Philadelphia (yeah, I'm that old). I was astounded at all
of the open land beneath the plane and as far as I could see. All thoughts
of over population left my mind for a few decades.

Now a days, I have a little better idea of how much Earth it takes to
support just one average American living our current average life styles. It
takes a lot of land to support one of us when you factor in all of the
things that we consume. Me, I don't want to give up a single damned thing.
So, the answer seems obvious to me. We must put a halt to our expanding
population until our technology advances more and provides us with some
solutions. Is this written in stone? Of course not. Would I restrict anyone
else's ability to procreate, based upon my impression? No, not at all. But I
think it would be nice if we could at least talk it over on the net and on
TV without the religious folks becoming rabid and incensed (sp?). As though
that could ever happen...8)

Ed Cregger