Re: My Tweets, on Twitter
(David P.)
The death rate should be brought more in line with the birth rate.
We should stop making flu vaccines & stop killing infected animals.
===============
Influenza & pneumonia are the old man's friend.
===============
The black market undermines/subverts/weakens legitimate markets.
We need to legalize marijuana to curb the black market.
===============
Egypt/Libya/Syria/Tunisia/Yemen/Bahrain uprisings are caused by
failure to follow the Golden Rule.
===============
When a leader is free to speak, trade and travel, but doesn't allow
his people the same freedoms, he's breaking the Rule.
===============
.
.
--
huhie
"(David P.)" <imb...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:a0de7e41-5628-41e5...@gu8g2000vbb.googlegroups.com...
what a load of stupid sappy shit, are you stoned?
(David P.)
> "(David P.)" <imb...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> > ===============
> > The death rate should be brought more in line with the birth rate.
> > We should stop making flu vaccines & stop killing infected animals.
> > ===============
> > Influenza & pneumonia are the old man's friend.
> > ===============
> > The black market undermines/subverts/weakens legitimate markets.
> > We need to legalize marijuana to curb the black market.
> > ===============
> > Egypt/Libya/Syria/Tunisia/Yemen/Bahrain uprisings are caused by
> > failure to follow the Golden Rule.
> > ===============
> > When a leader is free to speak, trade and travel, but doesn't allow
> > his people the same freedoms, he's breaking the Rule.
> > ===============
>
===============
We should increase the death rate, using influenza, like it or not.
We don't like to pay taxes, too, but still gotta do it.
===============
.
.
--
porky_...@my-deja.com
When imbeciles are free to tweet ... well, that's what you get.
(David P.)
I'm looking at the big picture; you're just thinking of yourself!
.
.
--
Rod Speed
> "porky_pig...@my-deja.com" <porky_pig...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>> David Urine pissed
>>> "We should increase the death rate, using influenza, like it or not.
>>> We don't like to pay taxes, too, but still gotta do it."
>> When imbeciles are free to tweet ... well, that's what you get.
> I'm looking at the big picture;
You wouldnt know what the real big picture was if it fell on your drug crazed head, child.
(David P.)
> David P. wrote:
> > "porky_pig...@my-deja.com" <porky_pig...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> >> David P. wrote:
> >>> "We should increase the death rate, using influenza, like it or not.
> >>> We don't like to pay taxes, too, but still gotta do it."
> >>
> >> When imbeciles are free to tweet ... well, that's what you get.
> >
> > I'm looking at the big picture;
>
> You wouldnt know what the real big picture was if it fell
> on your drug crazed head, child.
What's your plan to provide for 9 billion people?
Didn't think so.
.
.
--
Rod Speed
> Rod Speed <rod.sp....@gmail.com> spat:
>> David Urine pissed
>>>>> "We should increase the death rate, using influenza, like it
>>>>> or not. We don't like to pay taxes, too, but still gotta do it."
>>>> When imbeciles are free to tweet ... well, that's what you get.
>>> I'm looking at the big picture;
>> You wouldnt know what the real big picture was if it fell on your drug crazed head, child.
> What's your plan to provide for 9 billion people?
Just keep doing what we have always done, works fine.
> Didn't think
Yeah, thats the problem with drug crazed heads, thought isnt even possible.
(David P.)
> >> David P. wrote:
> >>> <porky_pig...@my-deja.com> wrote
> >>>> David Urine pissed
> >>>>> "We should increase the death rate, using influenza, like it
> >>>>> or not. We don't like to pay taxes, too, but still gotta do it."
> >>>> When imbeciles are free to tweet ... well, that's what you get.
> >>> I'm looking at the big picture;
> >> You wouldnt know what the real big picture was
> >> if it fell on your drug crazed head, child.
> > What's your plan to provide for 9 billion people?
>
> Just keep doing what we have always done, works fine.
We can't even provide for 7 billion, stupid.
You're just thinking of yourself.
I can name that tune in 3 notes: "Me Me Me".
.
.
--
Rod Speed
> Rod Speed <rod.sp....@gmail.com> wrote
>> David Urine pissed
>>> Rod Speed <rod.sp....@gmail.com> wrote
>>>> David Urine pissed
>>>>>>> "We should increase the death rate, using influenza, like it
>>>>>>> or not. We don't like to pay taxes, too, but still gotta do it."
>>>>>> When imbeciles are free to tweet ... well, that's what you get.
>>>>> I'm looking at the big picture;
>>>> You wouldnt know what the real big picture was
>>>> if it fell on your drug crazed head, child.
>>> What's your plan to provide for 9 billion people?
>> Just keep doing what we have always done, works fine.
> We can't even provide for 7 billion, stupid.
Wrong, cretin.
> You're just thinking of yourself.
Wrong. I have noticed that not one modern first world country is
even self replacing on population now if you take out immigration,
that thats true of most second world countrys and with the most
populous country you dont even need to take out immigration.
And that fertility rates continue to drop almost everywhere except
in a few countrys that are way below the replacement rate already.
There is no problem with population except in a few armpits of the world
that havent got a fucking clue about what makes sense numbers of kids wise.
(David P.)
> David P. wrote:
> > Rod Spittle <rod.sp....@gmail.com> spat:
> >>>>>> David P. wrote:
> >>>>>>> "We should increase the death rate, using influenza, like it
> >>>>>>> or not. We don't like to pay taxes, too, but still gotta do it."
> >>>>>> When imbeciles are free to tweet ... well, that's what you get.
> >>>>> I'm looking at the big picture;
> >>>> You wouldnt know what the real big picture was
> >>>> if it fell on your drug crazed head, child.
> >>> What's your plan to provide for 9 billion people?
> >> Just keep doing what we have always done, works fine.
> > We can't even provide for 7 billion, stupid.
>
We had influenza for all of history up to WWII,
and everything worked fine. Since then, nothing
but big problems.
> > You're just thinking of yourself.
>
> Wrong. I've noticed that not one modern first world country is
> even self replacing on population now if you take out immigration,
> [...]
> And that fertility rates continue to drop [...]
> There is no problem with population except in [...]
Birth rates are just one aspect of it. There's also total
population, how much resources are being used,
life span, and the effects on the environment, etc.
Your mantra is way too simplistic.
.
.
--
Rod Speed
> Rod Speed <rod.sp....@gmail.com> wrote
>> David Urine pissed
>>> Rod Speed <rod.sp....@gmail.com> wrote
>>>> David Urine pissed
>>>>> Rod Speed <rod.sp....@gmail.com> wrote
>>>>>> David Urine pissed
>>>>>>>> David Urine pissed
>>>>>>>>> "We should increase the death rate, using influenza, like it
>>>>>>>>> or not. We don't like to pay taxes, too, but still gotta do it."
>>>>>>>> When imbeciles are free to tweet ... well, that's what you get.
>>>>>>> I'm looking at the big picture;
>>>>>> You wouldnt know what the real big picture was if it fell on your drug crazed head, child.
>>>>> What's your plan to provide for 9 billion people?
>>>> Just keep doing what we have always done, works fine.
>>> We can't even provide for 7 billion, stupid.
>> Wrong.
> We had influenza for all of history up to WWII, and everything worked fine.
Yeah, we didnt see hordes of healthy people killed just after WW1 by the spanish flu.
> Since then, nothing but big problems.
You're always free to hang yourself any time you decide you dont like it.
>>> You're just thinking of yourself.
>> Wrong. I have noticed that not one modern first world country is
>> even self replacing on population now if you take out immigration,
>> that thats true of most second world countrys and with the most
>> populous country you dont even need to take out immigration.
>> And that fertility rates continue to drop almost everywhere except
>> in a few countrys that are way below the replacement rate already.
>> There is no problem with population except in a few armpits of the world
>> that havent got a fucking clue about what makes sense numbers of kids wise.
> Birth rates are just one aspect of it.
Thats why I wrote the first para, fuckwit.
> There's also total population,
We've clearly worked out how to do something about that.
> how much resources are being used,
None of those have run out.
> life span,
You're always free to hang yourself any time you dont like yours.
> and the effects on the environment, etc.
The environment is doing fine.
> Your mantra is way too simplistic.
Whereas your pathetic little mantra isnt anything like that, eh child ?
(David P.)
> >>>> Just keep doing what we have always done, works fine.
> >>> We can't even provide for 7 billion, stupid.
> >> Wrong.
> > We had influenza for all of history up to WWII, and everything worked fine.
>
> Yeah, we didnt see hordes of healthy people killed
> just after WW1 by the spanish flu.
2% death rate. Par for the course.
.
.
--
Rod Speed
>>>> Wrong.
> 2% death rate.
Another bare faced pig ignorant lie. It got to 40% in some places
and even the 2% isnt normally seen with HEALTHY people.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_flu#Mortality
> Par for the course.
Another bare faced pig ignorant lie.
(David P.)
> >> we didnt see hordes killed just after WW1 by spanish flu.
> > 2% death rate.
>
> Another lie. It got to 40% in some places & even 2% isnt normally
http://www.census.gov/popest/archives/pre-1980/PE-11-1918.pdf
"Population of U.S. = 103,208,000"
==========
http://virus.stanford.edu/uda/
"It infected 28% of all Americans (Tice). An est. 675,000
Americans died of influenza during the pandemic, [...]
The effect of the epidemic was so severe that the average
life span in the US was depressed by 10 years. The virus
had a profound virulence, with a mortality rate at 2.5%
compared to the previous epidemics, which were < 0.1%.
===========
103,208,000 X 28% = 28,898,240.
675,000 / 28,898,240 = 0.0233578
===========
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_flu#Mortality
"In the U.S., about 28% of the population suffered,
and 500,000 to 675,000 died.[31]"
===========
500,000 / 28,898,240 = 0.017302
.
.
--
lessgovt
> We should increase the death rate, using influenza, like it or not.
> We don't like to pay taxes, too, but still gotta do it.
> ===============
A Lot of People Don't Know When to Stop Eating.
A Lot Also Don't Know When to Stop Living.
==============
Stopping the Suppression of Influenza Will Help
Solve Both Problems. Stop Making Flu Vaccines &
Stop Killing Infected Animals.
==============
What's the plan for providing for 9 billion people?
We can't even do 7!
===============
We should increase the death rate, using influenza,
like it or not. We don't like to pay taxes, too,
but still gotta do it.
.
.
--
Rod Speed
>>>>> We had flu for all of history up to WWII, everything worked fine.
>>>> we didnt see hordes killed just after WW1 by spanish flu.
>>> 2% death rate.
>> Another lie. It got to 40% in some places & even
>> 2% isnt normally seen with HEALTHY people.
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_flu#Mortality
> http://www.census.gov/popest/archives/pre-1980/PE-11-1918.pdf
> "Population of U.S. = 103,208,000"
> ==========
> http://virus.stanford.edu/uda/
> "It infected 28% of all Americans (Tice). An est. 675,000
> Americans died of influenza during the pandemic, [...]
> The effect of the epidemic was so severe that the average
> life span in the US was depressed by 10 years. The virus
> had a profound virulence, with a mortality rate at 2.5%
> compared to the previous epidemics, which were < 0.1%.
Pity about the places where the DEATH rate was 40%
> ===========
> 103,208,000 X 28% = 28,898,240.
> 675,000 / 28,898,240 = 0.0233578
> ===========
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_flu#Mortality
> "In the U.S., about 28% of the population suffered,
> and 500,000 to 675,000 died.[31]"
> ===========
> 500,000 / 28,898,240 = 0.017302
Even someone as stupid as you should have noticed that the US aint anything like the entire world.
(David P.)
So, ONE epidemic had high rates, while all the others thruout
history were .01%. Average it out. You're like the anti-nukers
who say "Don't look at the big picture. Just lookee 3-Mile-Island,
Chernobyl & Fukushima!"
.
.
--
Rod Speed
>>>>> 2% death rate.
No thanks, its the epidemic that matters with epidemics that serious.
Your shit is as mindless as claiming that everyone will die sometime,
so why bother with any illness or injury, just let them all die.
For some strange reason hardly anyone is that stupid.
(David P.)
While WWI didn't cause the flu, the close troop quarters &
massive troop movements hastened the pandemic & probably
both increased transmission & augmented mutation; it may
also have increased the lethality of the virus. Some speculate
that soldiers' immune systems were weakened by malnourish-
ment as well as the stresses of combat and chemical attacks,
increasing their susceptibility.[12]
.
.
--
Rod Speed
>>>>> 2% death rate.
And now we routinely move far more people just for holidays etc instead.
> it may also have increased the lethality of the virus.
Nope, that isnt biologically possible.
> Some speculate that soldiers' immune systems were weakened
> by malnourishment as well as the stresses of combat and chemical
> attacks, increasing their susceptibility.[12]
Doesnt explain the massive devestation seen with no troops.
Some places saw death rates of 40%
(David P.)
> > & massive troop movements hastened the pandemic &
> > probably both increased transmission & augmented mutation;
> > attacks, increasing their susceptibility.[12]
>
> Some places saw death rates of 40%
That's still the exception rather than the rule,
and the use of flu is still better than having
human death panels decide who & when.
.
.
--
Rod Speed
>>> While WWI didn't cause the flu, the close troop quarters
>>> & massive troop movements hastened the pandemic &
>>> probably both increased transmission & augmented mutation;
>>> Some speculate that soldiers' immune systems were weakened
>>> by malnourishment as well as the stresses of combat & chemical
>>> attacks, increasing their susceptibility.[12]
>> Doesnt explain the massive devastation seen with non troops.
>> Some places saw death rates of 40%
>
> That's still the exception rather than the rule,
It was nothing like an exception that we saw massive death rates amounts non troops.
> and the use of flu is still better than having
> human death panels decide who & when.
Much better to have neither, fool.
(David P.)
> >>> & massive troop movements hastened the pandemic &
> >>> probably both increased transmission & augmented mutation;
> >>> Some speculate that soldiers' immune systems were weakened
> >>> by malnourishment as well as the stresses of combat & chemical
> >>> attacks, increasing their susceptibility.[12]
> >> Doesnt explain the massive devastation seen with non troops.
> >> Some places saw death rates of 40%
>
> > That's still the exception rather than the rule,
>
> It was nothing like an exception that we saw massive
> death rates amounts non troops.
All of the pandemics affected primarily the elderly,
except the 1918 Spanish Flu. That's why you
brought the exception up.
> > and the use of flu is still better than having
> > human death panels decide who & when.
>
> Much better to have neither.
You won't be around when the population is 9 billion,
so you don't give a shite.
.
.
--
Rod Speed
>>>>> While WWI didn't cause the flu, the close troop quarters
>>>>> & massive troop movements hastened the pandemic &
>>>>> probably both increased transmission & augmented mutation;
>>>>> Some speculate that soldiers' immune systems were weakened
>>>>> by malnourishment as well as the stresses of combat & chemical
>>>>> attacks, increasing their susceptibility.[12]
>>>> Doesnt explain the massive devastation seen with non troops.
>>>> Some places saw death rates of 40%
>>> That's still the exception rather than the rule,
>> It was nothing like an exception that we saw
>> massive death rates amoungst non troops.
> All of the pandemics affected primarily the elderly, except the 1918 Spanish Flu.
Thats just plain wrong too.
> That's why you brought the exception up.
Nope, I did so because it blows your stupid pig ignorant claim completely out of the fucking water.
>>> and the use of flu is still better than having
>>> human death panels decide who & when.
>> Much better to have neither.
> You won't be around when the population is 9 billion,
It remains to be seen if anyone is.
> so you don't give a shite.
Wrong, as always.
(David P.)
> >>>>>>> or not. We don't like to pay taxes, too, but still gotta do it."
> >>>>>> When imbeciles are free to tweet ... well, that's what you get.
> >>>>> I'm looking at the big picture;
> >>>> You wouldnt know what the real big picture was
> >>>> if it fell on your drug crazed head, child.
> >>> What's your plan to provide for 9 billion people?
> >> Just keep doing what we have always done, works fine.
> > We can't even provide for 7 billion, stupid.
>
> Wrong, cretin.
>
> > You're just thinking of yourself.
>
> Wrong. I have noticed that not one modern first world country is
> even self replacing on population now if you take out immigration,
And the population will be 4.5 billion if you take out women.
Less even, if you take out kids.
.
.
--
Rod Speed
>>>>>>>>> "We should increase the death rate, using influenza, like it
>>>>>>>>> or not. We don't like to pay taxes, too, but still gotta do it."
>>>>>>>> When imbeciles are free to tweet ... well, that's what you get.
>>>>>>> I'm looking at the big picture;
>>>>>> You wouldnt know what the real big picture was
>>>>>> if it fell on your drug crazed head, child.
>>>>> What's your plan to provide for 9 billion people?
>>>> Just keep doing what we have always done, works fine.
>>> We can't even provide for 7 billion, stupid.
>> Wrong, cretin.
>>> You're just thinking of yourself.
>> Wrong. I have noticed that not one modern first world country is
>> even self replacing on population now if you take out immigration,
>> that thats true of most second world countrys and with the most
>> populous country you dont even need to take out immigration.
>> And that fertility rates continue to drop almost everywhere except
>> in a few countrys that are way below the replacement rate already.
>> There is no problem with population except in a few armpits of the world
>> that havent got a fucking clue about what makes sense numbers of kids wise.
> And the population will be 4.5 billion if you take out women.
Much less than that, actually, fool.
> Less even, if you take out kids.
Even less if you take out drunken drug addicts.
(David P.)
> >>>>>>>>> or not. We don't like taxes, too, but still gotta do it."
> >>>>>>>> When u r are free to tweet ... well, that's what you get.
> >>>>>>> I'm looking at the big picture;
> >>>>>> You wouldnt know what the real big picture was
> >>>>>> if it fell on your drug crazed head, child.
> >>>>> What's your plan to provide for 9 billion people?
> >>>> Just keep doing what we have always done, works fine.
> >>> We can't even provide for 7 billion, stupid.
> >> Wrong, cretin.
> >>> You're just thinking of yourself.
> >> Wrong. I have noticed that not one modern first world country is
> >> even self replacing on population now if you take out immigration,
> >> that thats true of most second world countrys and with the most
> >> populous country you dont even need to take out immigration.
> >> And that fertility rates continue to drop almost everywhere except
> >> in a few countrys that are way below the replacement rate already.
> >> that havent got a clue on what makes sense numbers of kids wise.
> > And the population will be 4.5 billion if you take out women.
>
> Much less than that, actually, fool.
>
> > Less even, if you take out kids.
>
> Even less if you take out drunken drug addicts.
Even less if you take out "The Quibbler".
.
.
--