IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New Why not cut to the chase?
Since it is now apparent:
(after 50+ years' writings on population growth, the differences between geometric / other growth curves)

- that No one deems it possible even to rationally discuss the idea of an ~optimum biped-load/m\ufffd.

- that, even if 'discussed' - corporate religio will never concede the necessity of changing anything about its Perfectly-Revealed laissez-faire non-plan, since 'planetary survival' is irrelevant when you have 17 virgins waiting - Real Soon.

- that: simply, the species is unlikely to attempt any solution whatsoever, shall remain preoccupied with married homos and shopping - -

Isn't it about time to follow the blueprint already drawn (and with Jenny Agutter, yet?)

[link|http://imdb.com/title/tt0074812/| Logan's Run]


No problemo with the {truly} 'palm-sized' Indicator. Ez-peasy now.
30 may be a bit short - if anyone is to be ept enough to run the machines.

OK, nuke at 40: don't need no steenkin geriatrists: you get to live fast, die young and have a good looking corpse. Oh: number heard en passant, recently --
out of 98.000 US physician grads in 1998: 384 were geriatrists.


Clearly ... this ratio demonstrates conclusively that Logan's Run is already being worked-up for Operation Terrestrial Lebensraum. Rest case.


(Perhaps commenced just after the Captains of Industry emerge from the bunker, a few years after the Great ME<>Murican War - just a minor skirmish though; no major effect on the growth curve, so OTL resumes. The Animatronic Pope Altruism the First goes along.)

There: a Solution.


opTy

Collapse Edited by Ashton Aug. 12, 2007, 02:50:20 AM EDT
Why not cut to the chase?
Since it is now apparent:
(after 50+ years' writings on population growth, the differences between geometric / other growth curves)

- that No one deems it possible even to rationally discuss the idea of an ~optimum biped-load/m².

- that, even if 'discussed' - corporate religio will never concede the necessity of changing anything about its Perfectly-Revealed laissez-faire non-plan, since 'planetary survival' is irrelevant when you have 17 virgins waiting - Real Soon.

- that: simply, the species is unlikely to attempt any solution whatsoever, shall remain preoccupied with married homos and shopping - -

Isn't it about time to follow the blueprint already drawn (and with Jenny Agutter, yet?)

[link|http://imdb.com/title/tt0074812/| Logan's Run]


No problemo with the {truly} 'palm-sized' Indicator. Ez-peasy now.
30 may be a bit short - if anyone is to be ept enough to run the machines.

OK, nuke at 40: don't need no steenkin geriatrists: you get to live fast, die young and have a good looking corpse. Oh: number heard en passant, recently --
out of 98.000 US physician grads in 1998: 384) were geriatrists.


Clearly ... this ratio demonstrates conclusively that Logan's Run is already being worked-up for Operation Terrestrial Lebesraum. Rest case.


(Perhaps commenced just after the Captains of Industry emerge from the bunker, a few years after the Great ME<>Murican War - just a minor skirmish though; no major effect on the growth curve, so OTL resumes. The Animatronic Pope Altruism the First goes along.)

There: a Solution.

     Smart Tax Policy??? - (bepatient) - (20)
         Still worth it. - (Andrew Grygus)
         How can reducing smoking be a bad thing to be vetoed? -NT - (warmachine) - (13)
             Not the point - (bepatient) - (12)
                 Reducing smoking reduces healthcare costs - (warmachine) - (11)
                     Once again - (bepatient) - (5)
                         Clearly the solution is to . . . - (Andrew Grygus) - (2)
                             That is a plan . - (bepatient)
                             Why not cut to the chase? - (Ashton)
                         So what does Bush know? - (warmachine) - (1)
                             you will spend more in the long run - (boxley)
                     Not so fast! - (danreck) - (4)
                         Well, you're right - (jake123)
                         You hold on, too! - (Another Scott) - (1)
                             Re: You hold on, too! - (danreck)
                         Maybe - (warmachine)
         Bush is binary on taxes-He rationalizes the reason post hoc. -NT - (Another Scott)
         Possibly - (JayMehaffey) - (3)
             Secret? - (bepatient) - (2)
                 Bush is going a lot further right now - (JayMehaffey) - (1)
                     just reversing the bush tax cuts would be the biggest -NT - (boxley)

They may disagree on who is an idiot, but they agree that most are.
90 ms