Understanding The Origins of Environmentalism

[PoliticalChic]

I'm sorry Stephanie, but if we're sad, it's in response to your severe and seemingly willful ignorance.

Stephanie??


Did you find any errors in any of my posts?

No?

What conclusion is the only possible result?

 

[PoliticalChic]

PoliticalShit reads nothing but creationist and farrightwingnut idiocy. She has never read a real science book in her life.

I have no difficulty believing that.

Yup.

Your posts prove you'll believe anything.

 

[Crick]

You seem to give no thought to the possibility that people might develop concerns about the Earth's environment out of a realization that the health of the environment is crucial to human well being and that it is under threat from numerous human activities. Do you think humans have never polluted the Earth's air and water? Do you deny the existence of smog and acid rain? How about the effects of strip mining, road construction, urban development, the burning of the world's rainforests, the extinction of once healthy species due to habitat destruction; are they all fantasies created by power-mad communists? Do the seas of incorruptible plastic trash floating in our oceans not exist? The brown haze that floats above every city of the planet - that blanket Beijing and Shanghai and force their tens of millions to wear masks and goggles to safely walk the streets - are none of these things real?

What is wrong with you?

 

[PoliticalChic]

You seem to give no thought to the possibility that people might develop concerns about the Earth's environment out of a realization that the health of the environment is crucial to human well being and that it is under threat from numerous human activities. Do you think humans have never polluted the Earth's air and water? Do you deny the existence of smog and acid rain? How about the effects of strip mining, road construction, urban development, the burning of the world's rainforests, the extinction of once healthy species due to habitat destruction; are they all fantasies created by power-mad communists? Do the seas of incorruptible plastic trash floating in our oceans not exist? The brown haze that floats above every city of the planet - that blanket Beijing and Shanghai and force their tens of millions to wear masks and goggles to safely walk the streets - are none of these things real?

What is wrong with you?

"Do you think humans have never polluted the Earth's air and water? "

I'm gonna stick with the theme of this thread....

The Marxist/environmentalist movement used the fake Chief Seattle rant to attack white folks, and capitalism, and- by extension- America.

You've been duped to accept doctrines designed to extend big government controls...the aim of every Leftist philosophy.


So....let's continue to find amusement in the propaganda with which you were so enthralled...


11. Perhaps the greatest blunder, one that is repeated to this day by the most ignorant, is noted in this section:

" Just prior to the section of the speech that is quoted in [Al] Gore's book, Seattle states, “I have seen a thousand rotting buffaloes on the prairie left by the white man who shot them from a passing train,” ...

12.The great chief could not have made such a statement.


a. To begin with, a single person could not have witnessed one individual shoot anywhere near one thousand buffalo from a passing train, given the speed of a train combined with the time that would have been needed to reload and fire a rifle used in 1854 (Not even Amtrak moves that slowly!).

b. There also were no buffalo at the Puget Sound where Seattle lived. Seattle lived over a thousand miles from the Great Plains, and there is no evidence that he ever traveled to the plains.

c. Finally, the transcontinental railroad was not completed until 1869, and the Euro-American bison slaughter did not begin until the 1870s. Seattle gave his speech in 1854, a full 15 years before the railroad was completed and nearly 20 years before whites began to slaughter the remaining buffalo in large numbers. He, therefore, could not possibly have commented on it in his speech.

d. Finally, Seattle died in 1866, making it quite difficult — to say the least! — for him to have witnessed an event that occurred a full decade after his death." http://www.humanecologyreview.org/pastissues/her71/71abruzzi.pdf




Yet....because of how valuable the propaganda is to the Left, it is repeated ad infinitum.



This should make you aware of how you've been deluded.

 

[Crick]

" Just prior to the section of the speech that is quoted in [Al] Gore's book, Seattle states, “I have seen a thousand rotting buffaloes on the prairie left by the white man who shot them from a passing train,” ...

12.The great chief could not have made such a statement.


a. To begin with, a single person could not have witnessed one individual shoot anywhere near one thousand buffalo from a passing train, given the speed of a train combined with the time that would have been needed to reload and fire a rifle used in 1854 (Not even Amtrak moves that slowly!).

The term "the white man" does not refer to an individual.

 

[PoliticalChic]

" Just prior to the section of the speech that is quoted in [Al] Gore's book, Seattle states, “I have seen a thousand rotting buffaloes on the prairie left by the white man who shot them from a passing train,” ...

12.The great chief could not have made such a statement.


a. To begin with, a single person could not have witnessed one individual shoot anywhere near one thousand buffalo from a passing train, given the speed of a train combined with the time that would have been needed to reload and fire a rifle used in 1854 (Not even Amtrak moves that slowly!).

The term "the white man" does not refer to an individual.

A thousand monkeys sitting at typewriters will eventually produce Hamlet, but in the meantime they write your posts

You are truly a fool.

The operative portion of the pretense is this:
"There also were no buffalo at the Puget Sound where Seattle lived. Seattle lived over a thousand miles from the Great Plains, and there is no evidence that he ever traveled to the plains."


Therefore no white man, or white men left "a thousand rotting buffaloes on the prairie..."

Get it now????



May your demise be eons from now...but when that occurs, this will be your epitaph:
"Blissfully unfettered by the ravages of higher intelligence."
RIP

 

[Impenitent]

You seem to give no thought to the possibility that people might develop concerns about the Earth's environment out of a realization that the health of the environment is crucial to human well being and that it is under threat from numerous human activities. Do you think humans have never polluted the Earth's air and water? Do you deny the existence of smog and acid rain? How about the effects of strip mining, road construction, urban development, the burning of the world's rainforests, the extinction of once healthy species due to habitat destruction; are they all fantasies created by power-mad communists? Do the seas of incorruptible plastic trash floating in our oceans not exist? The brown haze that floats above every city of the planet - that blanket Beijing and Shanghai and force their tens of millions to wear masks and goggles to safely walk the streets - are none of these things real?

What is wrong with you?

"Do you think humans have never polluted the Earth's air and water? "

I'm gonna stick with the theme of this thread....

The Marxist/environmentalist movement used the fake Chief Seattle rant to attack white folks, and capitalism, and- by extension- America.

You've been duped to accept doctrines designed to extend big government controls...the aim of every Leftist philosophy.


So....let's continue to find amusement in the propaganda with which you were so enthralled...


11. Perhaps the greatest blunder, one that is repeated to this day by the most ignorant, is noted in this section:

" Just prior to the section of the speech that is quoted in [Al] Gore's book, Seattle states, “I have seen a thousand rotting buffaloes on the prairie left by the white man who shot them from a passing train,” ...

12.The great chief could not have made such a statement.


a. To begin with, a single person could not have witnessed one individual shoot anywhere near one thousand buffalo from a passing train, given the speed of a train combined with the time that would have been needed to reload and fire a rifle used in 1854 (Not even Amtrak moves that slowly!).

b. There also were no buffalo at the Puget Sound where Seattle lived. Seattle lived over a thousand miles from the Great Plains, and there is no evidence that he ever traveled to the plains.

c. Finally, the transcontinental railroad was not completed until 1869, and the Euro-American bison slaughter did not begin until the 1870s. Seattle gave his speech in 1854, a full 15 years before the railroad was completed and nearly 20 years before whites began to slaughter the remaining buffalo in large numbers. He, therefore, could not possibly have commented on it in his speech.

d. Finally, Seattle died in 1866, making it quite difficult — to say the least! — for him to have witnessed an event that occurred a full decade after his death." http://www.humanecologyreview.org/pastissues/her71/71abruzzi.pdf




Yet....because of how valuable the propaganda is to the Left, it is repeated ad infinitum.



This should make you aware of how you've been deluded.

A very common thing to shoot buffalo from a train. Here's an account occurring before the transcontinental railroad existed. If fact, it sounds as if you were there!

"The train is "slowed" to a rate of speed about equal to that of the herd; the passengers get out fire-arms which are provided for the defense of the train against the Indians, and open from the windows and platforms of the cars a fire that resembles a brisk skirmish. Frequently a young bull will turn at bay for a moment. His exhibition of courage is generally his death-warrant, for the whole fire of the train is turned upon him, either killing him or some member of the herd in his immediate vicinity.
When the "hunt" is over the buffaloes which have been killed are secured, and the choice parts placed in the baggage-car, which is at once crowded by passengers, each of whom feels convinced and is ready to assert that his was the shot that brought down the game. Ladies who are passengers on the trains frequently enjoy the sport, and invariably claim all the game as the result of their prowess with the rifle. This solution of the case is, of course, accepted by all gentlemen, and a more excited party of Dianas it would be impossible to imagine."

 

[RollingThunder]

An idiotic fraudulent OP based on some deranged rightwingnut fantasy version of history, started by the retarded troll 'PoliticalPoopchute', and somehow this abortion of a thread is still staggering along? LOLOLOLOLOL.

And ol' PoliticalPoopchute imagines that he is conveying startling new information about how gullible liberals are when, in fact, he/she/it is just demonstrating how gullible and moronic the rightwingnut AGW deniers actually are. This "speech" he cites was in no way the foudation of the modern environmental movement, nor was it "words that inspire the environmental movement today", nor has it been "so loved and reprinted by environmentalists" - those are just bogus rightwingnut propaganda memes. The retard also claims that: "The problem is with the speech as an historical document: it is entirely bogus", but that is also not true - there actually was a historically documented speech by Chief Seattle, but the translation that came down to us may not be accurate, and that original published version was much later rewritten for a movie, creating further confusion. Most environmentalists have never even heard of that speech. Those that have heard of it are mostly aware of its provenance. Nobody ever thought it was all that important to environmentalism, except now these screwball rightwingnut propagandists are making absurd claims about it and fantasizing a 'gotcha' moment. Morons!

from Wikipedia...

The speech attributed to Chief Seattle (Duwamish conventional spelling Si'ahl) concerned the concession of native lands to the settlers. The date, location, and the actual contents of the speech are unclear and disputed.[9] The most common version is that on March 11, 1854, Si’ahl gave a speech at a large outdoor gathering in Seattle. The meeting had been called by Governor Isaac Ingalls Stevens to discuss the surrender or sale of native land to white settlers. Doc Maynard introduced Stevens, who then briefly explained his mission, which was already well understood by all present.[4]

Si’ahl then rose to speak. He rested his hand upon the head of the much smaller Stevens, and declaimed with great dignity for an extended period. No one alive today knows what he said; he spoke in the Lushootseed language, and someone translated his words into Chinook jargon, a limited trading language, and a third person translated that into English.[10]

Some years later, Dr. Henry A. Smith wrote down an English version of the speech, based on Smith's notes. It was a flowery text in which Si’ahl purportedly thanked the white people for their generosity, demanded that any treaty guarantee access to Native burial grounds, and made a contrast between the God of the white people and that of his own. Smith noted that he had recorded "...but a fragment of his [Sealth's] speech". Recent scholarship questions the authenticity of Smith's supposed translation.[11][12][13]

In 1891, Frederick James Grant's History of Seattle, Washington reprinted Smith's version. In 1929, Clarence B. Bagley's History of King County, Washington reprinted Grant's version with some additions. In 1931, John M. Rich reprinted the Bagley version in Chief Seattle's Unanswered Challenge. In the 1960s, articles by William Arrowsmith and the growth of environmentalism revived interest in Si’ahl's speech. Ted Perry introduced anachronistic material, such as shooting buffalo from trains, into a new version for a movie called Home,[2] produced for the Southern Baptist Radio and Television Commission.[12] The original movie sank without a trace, but this newest and most fictional version is the most widely known. Albert Furtwangler analyzes the evolution of Si’ahl's speech in Answering Chief Seattle (1997).[14]

This edition in English published as "Early Reminiscences. Number Ten. Scraps From a Diary. Chief Seattle – A Gentleman by Instinct – His Native Eloquence. Etc., Etc." Seattle Sunday Star, October 29, 1887, p. 3.

(Introduction of the original Seattle Sunday Star article)

Old Chief Seattle was the largest Indian I ever saw, and by far the noblest-looking. He stood 6 feet full in his moccasins, was broad-shouldered, deep-chested, and finely proportioned. His eyes were large, intelligent, expressive and friendly when in repose, and faithfully mirrored the varying moods of the great soul that looked through them. He was usually solemn, silent, and dignified, but on great occasions moved among assembled multitudes like a Titan among Lilliputians, and his lightest word was law.

When rising to speak in council or to tender advice, all eyes were turned upon him, and deep-toned, sonorous, and eloquent sentences rolled from his lips like the ceaseless thunders of cataracts flowing from exhaustless fountains, and his magnificent bearing was as noble as that of the most cultivated military chieftain in command of the forces of a continent. Neither his eloquence, his dignity, or his grace were acquired. They were as native to his manhood as leaves and blossoms are to a flowering almond.

His influence was marvelous. He might have been an emperor but all his instincts were democratic, and he ruled his loyal subjects with kindness and paternal benignity. He was always flattered by marked attention from white men, and never so much as when seated at their tables, and on such occasions he manifested more than anywhere else the genuine instincts of a gentleman.

When Governor Stevens first arrived in Seattle and told the natives he had been appointed commissioner of Indian affairs for Washington Territory, they gave him a demonstrative reception in front of Dr. Maynard's office, near the waterfront on Main Street. The bay swarmed with canoes and the shore was lined with a living mass of swaying, writhing, dusky humanity, until old Chief Seattle's trumpet-toned voice rolled over the immense multitude, like the startling reveille of a bass drum, when silence became as instantaneous and perfect as that which follows a clap of thunder from a clear sky.

The governor was then introduced to the native multitude by Dr. Maynard, and at once commenced, in a conversational, plain, and straightforward style, an explanation of his mission among them, which is too well understood to require recapitulation. When he sat down, Chief Seattle arose with all the dignity of a senator who carries the responsibilities of a great nation on his shoulders. Placing one hand on the governor's head, and slowly pointing heavenward with the index finger of the other, he commenced his memorable address in solemn and impressive tones.

(Chief Seattle's speech)

"Yonder sky has wept tears of compassion on our fathers for centuries untold, and which, to us, looks eternal, may change. Today it is fair, tomorrow it may be overcast with clouds. My words are like the stars that never set. What Seattle says, the great chief, Washington [1], can rely upon, with as much certainty as our pale-face brothers can rely upon the return of the seasons. The son of the white chief says his father sends us greetings of friendship and good will. This is kind, for we know he has little need of our friendship in return, because his people are many. They are like the grass that covers the vast prairies, while my people are few, and resemble the scattering trees of a storm-swept plain. The great, and I presume also good, white chief sends us word that he wants to buy our lands but is willing to allow us to reserve enough to live on comfortably. This indeed appears generous, for the red man no longer has rights that he need respect, and the offer may be wise, also, for we are no longer in need of a great country.

"There was a time when our people covered the whole land, as the waves of a wind-ruffled sea cover its shell-paved floor. But that time has long since passed away with the greatness of tribes now almost forgotten. I will not mourn over our untimely decay, nor reproach my pale-face brothers for hastening it, for we, too, may have been somewhat to blame.

"When our young men grow angry at some real or imaginary wrong, and disfigure their faces with black paint, their hearts, also, are disfigured and turn black, and then their cruelty is relentless and knows no bounds, and our old men are not able to restrain them. But let us hope that hostilities between the red-man and his pale-face brothers may never return. We would have everything to lose and nothing to gain. True it is, that revenge, with our young braves, is considered gain, even at the cost of their own lives, but old men who stay at home in times of war, and old women, who have sons to lose, know better.

"Our great father Washington, for I presume he is now our father as well as yours, since George has moved his boundaries to the north; our great and good father, I say, sends us word by his son, who, no doubt, is a great chief among his people, that if we do as he desires, he will protect us. His brave armies will be to us a bristling wall of strength, and his great ships of war will fill our harbors so that our ancient enemies far to the northward, the Simsiams and Hydas, will no longer frighten our women and old men. Then will he be our father and we will be his children.

"But can this ever be? Your God loves your people and hates mine; he folds his strong arms lovingly around the white man and leads him as a father leads his infant son, but he has forsaken his red children; he makes your people wax strong every day, and soon they will fill all the land; while my people are ebbing away like a fast-receding tide, that will never flow again. The white man's God cannot love his red children or he would protect them. They seem to be orphans and can look nowhere for help. How then can we become brothers? How can your father become our father and bring us prosperity and awaken in us dreams of returning greatness? Your God seems to us to be partial. He came to the white man. We never saw Him; never even heard His voice. He gave the white man laws, but He had no word for His red children whose teeming millions filled this vast continent as the stars fill the firmament. No, we are two distinct races and must ever remain so. There is little in common between us.

"The ashes of our ancestors are sacred and their final resting place is hallowed ground, while you wander away from the tombs of your fathers seemingly without regret. Your religion was written on tablets of stone by the iron finger of an angry God, lest you might forget it. The red man could never remember nor comprehend it. Our religion is the traditions of our ancestors, the dreams of our old men, given them by the great Spirit, and the visions of our sachems, and is written in the hearts of our people. Your dead cease to love you and the homes of their nativity as soon as they pass the portals of the tomb. They wander far off beyond the stars, are soon forgotten, and never return. Our dead never forget the beautiful world that gave them being. They still love its winding rivers, its great mountains and its sequestered vales, and they ever yearn in tenderest affection over the lonely hearted living and often return to visit and comfort them. Day and night cannot dwell together. The red man has ever fled the approach of the white man, as the changing mists on the mountain side flee before the blazing morning sun. However, your proposition seems a just one, and I think that my folks will accept it and will retire to the reservation you offer them, and we will dwell apart in peace, for the words of the great white chief seem to be the voice of nature speaking to my people out of the thick darkness that is fast gathering around them like a dense fog floating inward from a midnight sea.

"It matters but little where we pass the remainder of our days. They are not many. The Indian's night promises to be dark. No bright star hovers about the horizon. Sad-voiced winds moan in the distance. Some grim Nemesis of our race is on the red man's trail, and wherever he goes he will still hear the sure approaching footsteps of the fell destroyer and prepare to meet his doom, as does the wounded doe that hears the approaching footsteps of the hunter.

"A few more moons, a few more winters, and not one of all the mighty hosts that once filled this broad land or that now roam in fragmentary bands through these vast solitudes will remain to weep over the tombs of a people once as powerful and as hopeful as your own. But why should we repine? Why should I murmur at the fate of my people? Tribes are made up of individuals and are no better than they. Men come and go like the waves of the sea. A tear, a tamanamus, a dirge, and they are gone from our longing eyes forever. Even the white man, whose God walked and talked with him, as friend to friend, is not exempt from the common destiny. We may be brothers, after all. We shall see.

"We will ponder your proposition, and when we have decided we will tell you. But should we accept it, I here and now make this the first condition: That we will not be denied the privilege, without molestation, of visiting at will the graves of our ancestors and friends. Every part of this country is sacred to my people. Every hill-side, every valley, every plain and grove has been hallowed by some fond memory or some sad experience of my tribe. Even the rocks that seem to lie dumb as they swelter in the sun along the silent seashore in solemn grandeur thrill with memories of past events connected with the fate of my people, and the very dust under your feet responds more lovingly to our footsteps than to yours, because it is the ashes of our ancestors, and our bare feet are conscious of the sympathetic touch, for the soil is rich with the life of our kindred. The noble braves, and fond mothers, and glad-hearted maidens, and the little children who lived and rejoiced here, and whose very names are now forgotten, still love these solitudes, and their deep fastnesses at eventide grow shadowy with the presence of dusky spirits. And when the last red man shall have perished from the earth and his memory among white men shall have become a myth, these shores shall swarm with the invisible dead of my tribe, and when your children's children shall think themselves alone in the field, the store, the shop, upon the highway or in the silence of the woods they will not be alone. In all the earth there is no place dedicated to solitude. At night, when the streets of your cities and villages shall be silent and you think them deserted, they will throng with the returning hosts that once filled and still love this beautiful land. The white man will never be alone. Let him be just and deal kindly with my people, for the dead are not altogether powerless."

(Conclusion of the original Seattle Sunday Star article)

Other speakers followed, but I took no notes. Governor Stevens' reply was brief. He merely promised to meet them in general council on some future occasion to discuss the proposed treaty. Chief Seattle's promise to adhere to the treaty, should one be ratified, was observed to the letter, for he was ever the unswerving and faithful friend of the white man. The above is but a fragment of his speech, and lacks all the charm lent by the grace and earnestness of the sable old orator, and the occasion.

H.A. Smith.

 

[Amazon]

Oh, I missed reading your posts, Orogenicman!

 

[PoliticalChic]

You seem to give no thought to the possibility that people might develop concerns about the Earth's environment out of a realization that the health of the environment is crucial to human well being and that it is under threat from numerous human activities. Do you think humans have never polluted the Earth's air and water? Do you deny the existence of smog and acid rain? How about the effects of strip mining, road construction, urban development, the burning of the world's rainforests, the extinction of once healthy species due to habitat destruction; are they all fantasies created by power-mad communists? Do the seas of incorruptible plastic trash floating in our oceans not exist? The brown haze that floats above every city of the planet - that blanket Beijing and Shanghai and force their tens of millions to wear masks and goggles to safely walk the streets - are none of these things real?

What is wrong with you?

"Do you think humans have never polluted the Earth's air and water? "

I'm gonna stick with the theme of this thread....

The Marxist/environmentalist movement used the fake Chief Seattle rant to attack white folks, and capitalism, and- by extension- America.

You've been duped to accept doctrines designed to extend big government controls...the aim of every Leftist philosophy.


So....let's continue to find amusement in the propaganda with which you were so enthralled...


11. Perhaps the greatest blunder, one that is repeated to this day by the most ignorant, is noted in this section:

" Just prior to the section of the speech that is quoted in [Al] Gore's book, Seattle states, “I have seen a thousand rotting buffaloes on the prairie left by the white man who shot them from a passing train,” ...

12.The great chief could not have made such a statement.


a. To begin with, a single person could not have witnessed one individual shoot anywhere near one thousand buffalo from a passing train, given the speed of a train combined with the time that would have been needed to reload and fire a rifle used in 1854 (Not even Amtrak moves that slowly!).

b. There also were no buffalo at the Puget Sound where Seattle lived. Seattle lived over a thousand miles from the Great Plains, and there is no evidence that he ever traveled to the plains.

c. Finally, the transcontinental railroad was not completed until 1869, and the Euro-American bison slaughter did not begin until the 1870s. Seattle gave his speech in 1854, a full 15 years before the railroad was completed and nearly 20 years before whites began to slaughter the remaining buffalo in large numbers. He, therefore, could not possibly have commented on it in his speech.

d. Finally, Seattle died in 1866, making it quite difficult — to say the least! — for him to have witnessed an event that occurred a full decade after his death." http://www.humanecologyreview.org/pastissues/her71/71abruzzi.pdf




Yet....because of how valuable the propaganda is to the Left, it is repeated ad infinitum.



This should make you aware of how you've been deluded.

A very common thing to shoot buffalo from a train. Here's an account occurring before the transcontinental railroad existed. If fact, it sounds as if you were there!

"The train is "slowed" to a rate of speed about equal to that of the herd; the passengers get out fire-arms which are provided for the defense of the train against the Indians, and open from the windows and platforms of the cars a fire that resembles a brisk skirmish. Frequently a young bull will turn at bay for a moment. His exhibition of courage is generally his death-warrant, for the whole fire of the train is turned upon him, either killing him or some member of the herd in his immediate vicinity.
When the "hunt" is over the buffaloes which have been killed are secured, and the choice parts placed in the baggage-car, which is at once crowded by passengers, each of whom feels convinced and is ready to assert that his was the shot that brought down the game. Ladies who are passengers on the trains frequently enjoy the sport, and invariably claim all the game as the result of their prowess with the rifle. This solution of the case is, of course, accepted by all gentlemen, and a more excited party of Dianas it would be impossible to imagine."

Let me shout this into your remaining ear:

You seem to have ignored the salient points....a.There were no buffalo
and b. the trains mentioned did not exist.

In short, your post is not, in any way, related to the Chief Seattle speech.

 

[RollingThunder]

You seem to give no thought to the possibility that people might develop concerns about the Earth's environment out of a realization that the health of the environment is crucial to human well being and that it is under threat from numerous human activities. Do you think humans have never polluted the Earth's air and water? Do you deny the existence of smog and acid rain? How about the effects of strip mining, road construction, urban development, the burning of the world's rainforests, the extinction of once healthy species due to habitat destruction; are they all fantasies created by power-mad communists? Do the seas of incorruptible plastic trash floating in our oceans not exist? The brown haze that floats above every city of the planet - that blanket Beijing and Shanghai and force their tens of millions to wear masks and goggles to safely walk the streets - are none of these things real?

What is wrong with you?

"Do you think humans have never polluted the Earth's air and water? "

I'm gonna stick with the theme of this thread....

The Marxist/environmentalist movement used the fake Chief Seattle rant to attack white folks, and capitalism, and- by extension- America.

You've been duped to accept doctrines designed to extend big government controls...the aim of every Leftist philosophy.


So....let's continue to find amusement in the propaganda with which you were so enthralled...


11. Perhaps the greatest blunder, one that is repeated to this day by the most ignorant, is noted in this section:

" Just prior to the section of the speech that is quoted in [Al] Gore's book, Seattle states, “I have seen a thousand rotting buffaloes on the prairie left by the white man who shot them from a passing train,” ...

12.The great chief could not have made such a statement.


a. To begin with, a single person could not have witnessed one individual shoot anywhere near one thousand buffalo from a passing train, given the speed of a train combined with the time that would have been needed to reload and fire a rifle used in 1854 (Not even Amtrak moves that slowly!).

b. There also were no buffalo at the Puget Sound where Seattle lived. Seattle lived over a thousand miles from the Great Plains, and there is no evidence that he ever traveled to the plains.

c. Finally, the transcontinental railroad was not completed until 1869, and the Euro-American bison slaughter did not begin until the 1870s. Seattle gave his speech in 1854, a full 15 years before the railroad was completed and nearly 20 years before whites began to slaughter the remaining buffalo in large numbers. He, therefore, could not possibly have commented on it in his speech.

d. Finally, Seattle died in 1866, making it quite difficult — to say the least! — for him to have witnessed an event that occurred a full decade after his death." http://www.humanecologyreview.org/pastissues/her71/71abruzzi.pdf




Yet....because of how valuable the propaganda is to the Left, it is repeated ad infinitum.



This should make you aware of how you've been deluded.

A very common thing to shoot buffalo from a train. Here's an account occurring before the transcontinental railroad existed. If fact, it sounds as if you were there!

"The train is "slowed" to a rate of speed about equal to that of the herd; the passengers get out fire-arms which are provided for the defense of the train against the Indians, and open from the windows and platforms of the cars a fire that resembles a brisk skirmish. Frequently a young bull will turn at bay for a moment. His exhibition of courage is generally his death-warrant, for the whole fire of the train is turned upon him, either killing him or some member of the herd in his immediate vicinity.
When the "hunt" is over the buffaloes which have been killed are secured, and the choice parts placed in the baggage-car, which is at once crowded by passengers, each of whom feels convinced and is ready to assert that his was the shot that brought down the game. Ladies who are passengers on the trains frequently enjoy the sport, and invariably claim all the game as the result of their prowess with the rifle. This solution of the case is, of course, accepted by all gentlemen, and a more excited party of Dianas it would be impossible to imagine."

Let me shout this into your remaining ear:

You seem to have ignored the salient points....a.There were no buffalo
and b. the trains mentioned did not exist.

In short, your post is not, in any way, related to the Chief Seattle speech.

The "salient points" in this thread are that you are a misinformed, brainwashed rightwingnut retard and your OP amounts to moronic nonsense and silly lies.

 

[PoliticalChic]

You seem to give no thought to the possibility that people might develop concerns about the Earth's environment out of a realization that the health of the environment is crucial to human well being and that it is under threat from numerous human activities. Do you think humans have never polluted the Earth's air and water? Do you deny the existence of smog and acid rain? How about the effects of strip mining, road construction, urban development, the burning of the world's rainforests, the extinction of once healthy species due to habitat destruction; are they all fantasies created by power-mad communists? Do the seas of incorruptible plastic trash floating in our oceans not exist? The brown haze that floats above every city of the planet - that blanket Beijing and Shanghai and force their tens of millions to wear masks and goggles to safely walk the streets - are none of these things real?

What is wrong with you?

"Do you think humans have never polluted the Earth's air and water? "

I'm gonna stick with the theme of this thread....

The Marxist/environmentalist movement used the fake Chief Seattle rant to attack white folks, and capitalism, and- by extension- America.

You've been duped to accept doctrines designed to extend big government controls...the aim of every Leftist philosophy.


So....let's continue to find amusement in the propaganda with which you were so enthralled...


11. Perhaps the greatest blunder, one that is repeated to this day by the most ignorant, is noted in this section:

" Just prior to the section of the speech that is quoted in [Al] Gore's book, Seattle states, “I have seen a thousand rotting buffaloes on the prairie left by the white man who shot them from a passing train,” ...

12.The great chief could not have made such a statement.


a. To begin with, a single person could not have witnessed one individual shoot anywhere near one thousand buffalo from a passing train, given the speed of a train combined with the time that would have been needed to reload and fire a rifle used in 1854 (Not even Amtrak moves that slowly!).

b. There also were no buffalo at the Puget Sound where Seattle lived. Seattle lived over a thousand miles from the Great Plains, and there is no evidence that he ever traveled to the plains.

c. Finally, the transcontinental railroad was not completed until 1869, and the Euro-American bison slaughter did not begin until the 1870s. Seattle gave his speech in 1854, a full 15 years before the railroad was completed and nearly 20 years before whites began to slaughter the remaining buffalo in large numbers. He, therefore, could not possibly have commented on it in his speech.

d. Finally, Seattle died in 1866, making it quite difficult — to say the least! — for him to have witnessed an event that occurred a full decade after his death." http://www.humanecologyreview.org/pastissues/her71/71abruzzi.pdf




Yet....because of how valuable the propaganda is to the Left, it is repeated ad infinitum.



This should make you aware of how you've been deluded.

A very common thing to shoot buffalo from a train. Here's an account occurring before the transcontinental railroad existed. If fact, it sounds as if you were there!

"The train is "slowed" to a rate of speed about equal to that of the herd; the passengers get out fire-arms which are provided for the defense of the train against the Indians, and open from the windows and platforms of the cars a fire that resembles a brisk skirmish. Frequently a young bull will turn at bay for a moment. His exhibition of courage is generally his death-warrant, for the whole fire of the train is turned upon him, either killing him or some member of the herd in his immediate vicinity.
When the "hunt" is over the buffaloes which have been killed are secured, and the choice parts placed in the baggage-car, which is at once crowded by passengers, each of whom feels convinced and is ready to assert that his was the shot that brought down the game. Ladies who are passengers on the trains frequently enjoy the sport, and invariably claim all the game as the result of their prowess with the rifle. This solution of the case is, of course, accepted by all gentlemen, and a more excited party of Dianas it would be impossible to imagine."

Let me shout this into your remaining ear:

You seem to have ignored the salient points....a.There were no buffalo
and b. the trains mentioned did not exist.

In short, your post is not, in any way, related to the Chief Seattle speech.

The "salient points" in this thread are that you are a misinformed, brainwashed rightwingnut retard and your OP amounts to moronic nonsense and silly lies.

Three glaring problems with your post.

1. I never lie.

2. Everything I've posted is correct.

3. You are a low-life fool, and incapable of an honest, correct post.
And as such, one whose talent suggests a future career, along the lines of selling Star Trek memorabilia on the internet.

Don't delay.

 

[RollingThunder]

You seem to give no thought to the possibility that people might develop concerns about the Earth's environment out of a realization that the health of the environment is crucial to human well being and that it is under threat from numerous human activities. Do you think humans have never polluted the Earth's air and water? Do you deny the existence of smog and acid rain? How about the effects of strip mining, road construction, urban development, the burning of the world's rainforests, the extinction of once healthy species due to habitat destruction; are they all fantasies created by power-mad communists? Do the seas of incorruptible plastic trash floating in our oceans not exist? The brown haze that floats above every city of the planet - that blanket Beijing and Shanghai and force their tens of millions to wear masks and goggles to safely walk the streets - are none of these things real?

What is wrong with you?

"Do you think humans have never polluted the Earth's air and water? "

I'm gonna stick with the theme of this thread....

The Marxist/environmentalist movement used the fake Chief Seattle rant to attack white folks, and capitalism, and- by extension- America.

You've been duped to accept doctrines designed to extend big government controls...the aim of every Leftist philosophy.


So....let's continue to find amusement in the propaganda with which you were so enthralled...


11. Perhaps the greatest blunder, one that is repeated to this day by the most ignorant, is noted in this section:

" Just prior to the section of the speech that is quoted in [Al] Gore's book, Seattle states, “I have seen a thousand rotting buffaloes on the prairie left by the white man who shot them from a passing train,” ...

12.The great chief could not have made such a statement.


a. To begin with, a single person could not have witnessed one individual shoot anywhere near one thousand buffalo from a passing train, given the speed of a train combined with the time that would have been needed to reload and fire a rifle used in 1854 (Not even Amtrak moves that slowly!).

b. There also were no buffalo at the Puget Sound where Seattle lived. Seattle lived over a thousand miles from the Great Plains, and there is no evidence that he ever traveled to the plains.

c. Finally, the transcontinental railroad was not completed until 1869, and the Euro-American bison slaughter did not begin until the 1870s. Seattle gave his speech in 1854, a full 15 years before the railroad was completed and nearly 20 years before whites began to slaughter the remaining buffalo in large numbers. He, therefore, could not possibly have commented on it in his speech.

d. Finally, Seattle died in 1866, making it quite difficult — to say the least! — for him to have witnessed an event that occurred a full decade after his death." http://www.humanecologyreview.org/pastissues/her71/71abruzzi.pdf




Yet....because of how valuable the propaganda is to the Left, it is repeated ad infinitum.



This should make you aware of how you've been deluded.

A very common thing to shoot buffalo from a train. Here's an account occurring before the transcontinental railroad existed. If fact, it sounds as if you were there!

"The train is "slowed" to a rate of speed about equal to that of the herd; the passengers get out fire-arms which are provided for the defense of the train against the Indians, and open from the windows and platforms of the cars a fire that resembles a brisk skirmish. Frequently a young bull will turn at bay for a moment. His exhibition of courage is generally his death-warrant, for the whole fire of the train is turned upon him, either killing him or some member of the herd in his immediate vicinity.
When the "hunt" is over the buffaloes which have been killed are secured, and the choice parts placed in the baggage-car, which is at once crowded by passengers, each of whom feels convinced and is ready to assert that his was the shot that brought down the game. Ladies who are passengers on the trains frequently enjoy the sport, and invariably claim all the game as the result of their prowess with the rifle. This solution of the case is, of course, accepted by all gentlemen, and a more excited party of Dianas it would be impossible to imagine."

Let me shout this into your remaining ear:

You seem to have ignored the salient points....a.There were no buffalo
and b. the trains mentioned did not exist.

In short, your post is not, in any way, related to the Chief Seattle speech.

The "salient points" in this thread are that you are a misinformed, brainwashed rightwingnut retard and your OP amounts to moronic nonsense and silly lies.

Three glaring problems with your post.

1. I never lie.

2. Everything I've posted is correct.

3. You are a low-life fool, and incapable of an honest, correct post.
And as such, one whose talent suggests a future career, along the lines of selling Star Trek memorabilia on the internet.

Don't delay.

LOLOL. Laughably desperate nonsense.

Your bogus OP got completely debunked in post #28, troll.

 

[orogenicman]

What is it about this forum that draws such idiots?

Very good question. I think the OP should read the book that actually started the modern environmental movement (Silent Spring, by Rachael Carson).

Actually, I have read the tome.


Everyone knows that Carson was as full of it as you are, you moron.
She was a danger to society....at least intelligent folks ignore you.

1. . British politician Dick Taverne was damning in his criticism of Carson:
Carson didn't seem to take into accountthe vital role (DDT) played in controlling the transmission of malaria by killing the mosquitoes that carry the parasite (...) It is the single most effective agent ever developed for saving human life (...)

Rachel Carson is a warning to us all of the dangers of neglecting the evidence-based approachand the need to weight potential risk against benefit: it can be argued that the anti-DDT campaign she inspired was responsible for almost as many deaths as some of the worst dictators of the last century.
Taverne, Dick (2005). "The Harm That Pressure Groups Can Do".
In Feldman, Stanley; Marks, Vincent. "Panic Nation."

a. Carson’s book was dismissed in ‘Science’ magazineas a “prosecuting attorney’s impassioned plea for action,” not a book based on scientific data.
I.L.Baldwin, “Chemicals and Pests,” Science, September 28, 1962, p.1042-1043.


Again? "...not a book based on scientific data."

b. “Sixty million people have died needlessly of malaria, since the imposition of the 1972 ban on DDT, and hundreds of millions more have suffered from this debilitating disease. The majority of those affected are children.”Bring Back DDT!



2. At it's heart, environmentalist is anti-human being. It sees humans as a virus, to be controlled and eradicated.
"Banning DDT saved thousands of raptors over the past 30 years, but outright bans and misguided fears about the pesticide cost the lives of millions of people who died of insect-borne diseases like malaria. The 500 million people who come down with malaria every year might well wonder what authoritarian made that decision." http://reason.com/archives/2004/01/07/ddt-eggshells-and-me/1


3. . “According to Marjorie Mazel Hecht and [San Jose State University] professor J. Gordon Edwards at 21st Century Home Page DDT is safe and indeed saved and can save human lives, and Rachel Carson's Silent Spring is full of lies. According to them, the banning of DDT was politically motivated and went against the majority of scientific opinion…. No one has conclusively proved that DDT can give you cancer.” The Straight Dope Was Rachel Carson a fraud and is DDT actually safe for humans

The fact is that DDT (which is not safe for many animals) was just the tip of the toxic iceberg with regard to well contamination. And PC, you really should listen to me on this matter because I spent 20 years of my life as an environmental consultant installing thousands of environmental monitoring wells in 13 states, conducting environmental site investigations and implementing remediation plans. If it wasn't for Silent Spring, the regulations that safeguard our water today likely would not exist, though with the brain damage you show us every day, the regulations obviously came too late for you. You do have my sympathy.

Oh, and PC, the fact that the only response you can bring to the table wrt Silent Spring is to quote a right wing British politician is, well, with all due respect, idiotic. Congratulations.

 

[PoliticalChic]

"Do you think humans have never polluted the Earth's air and water? "

I'm gonna stick with the theme of this thread....

The Marxist/environmentalist movement used the fake Chief Seattle rant to attack white folks, and capitalism, and- by extension- America.

You've been duped to accept doctrines designed to extend big government controls...the aim of every Leftist philosophy.


So....let's continue to find amusement in the propaganda with which you were so enthralled...


11. Perhaps the greatest blunder, one that is repeated to this day by the most ignorant, is noted in this section:

" Just prior to the section of the speech that is quoted in [Al] Gore's book, Seattle states, “I have seen a thousand rotting buffaloes on the prairie left by the white man who shot them from a passing train,” ...

12.The great chief could not have made such a statement.


a. To begin with, a single person could not have witnessed one individual shoot anywhere near one thousand buffalo from a passing train, given the speed of a train combined with the time that would have been needed to reload and fire a rifle used in 1854 (Not even Amtrak moves that slowly!).

b. There also were no buffalo at the Puget Sound where Seattle lived. Seattle lived over a thousand miles from the Great Plains, and there is no evidence that he ever traveled to the plains.

c. Finally, the transcontinental railroad was not completed until 1869, and the Euro-American bison slaughter did not begin until the 1870s. Seattle gave his speech in 1854, a full 15 years before the railroad was completed and nearly 20 years before whites began to slaughter the remaining buffalo in large numbers. He, therefore, could not possibly have commented on it in his speech.

d. Finally, Seattle died in 1866, making it quite difficult — to say the least! — for him to have witnessed an event that occurred a full decade after his death." http://www.humanecologyreview.org/pastissues/her71/71abruzzi.pdf




Yet....because of how valuable the propaganda is to the Left, it is repeated ad infinitum.



This should make you aware of how you've been deluded.

A very common thing to shoot buffalo from a train. Here's an account occurring before the transcontinental railroad existed. If fact, it sounds as if you were there!

"The train is "slowed" to a rate of speed about equal to that of the herd; the passengers get out fire-arms which are provided for the defense of the train against the Indians, and open from the windows and platforms of the cars a fire that resembles a brisk skirmish. Frequently a young bull will turn at bay for a moment. His exhibition of courage is generally his death-warrant, for the whole fire of the train is turned upon him, either killing him or some member of the herd in his immediate vicinity.
When the "hunt" is over the buffaloes which have been killed are secured, and the choice parts placed in the baggage-car, which is at once crowded by passengers, each of whom feels convinced and is ready to assert that his was the shot that brought down the game. Ladies who are passengers on the trains frequently enjoy the sport, and invariably claim all the game as the result of their prowess with the rifle. This solution of the case is, of course, accepted by all gentlemen, and a more excited party of Dianas it would be impossible to imagine."

Let me shout this into your remaining ear:

You seem to have ignored the salient points....a.There were no buffalo
and b. the trains mentioned did not exist.

In short, your post is not, in any way, related to the Chief Seattle speech.

The "salient points" in this thread are that you are a misinformed, brainwashed rightwingnut retard and your OP amounts to moronic nonsense and silly lies.

Three glaring problems with your post.

1. I never lie.

2. Everything I've posted is correct.

3. You are a low-life fool, and incapable of an honest, correct post.
And as such, one whose talent suggests a future career, along the lines of selling Star Trek memorabilia on the internet.

Don't delay.

LOLOL. Laughably desperate nonsense.

Your bogus OP got completely debunked in post #28, troll.

You imbecile...you verified what I posted.

You wrote: " there actually was a historically documented speech by Chief Seattle, but the translation that came down to us may not be accurate, and that original published version was much later rewritten for a movie, creating further confusion."

In short.....it was all a great big lie.

 

[orogenicman]

Oh, I missed reading your posts, Orogenicman!

Thanks. Good to see you back in the fight.

 

[PoliticalChic]

First, one dunce claimed he never heard of the Chief Seattle speech...and then Soiled Undies wrote "most environmentalists have never heard of that speech."

Actually, this is the dance of the dupes, running from it when it was revealed as a hoax designed by the movement to advance their agenda.



Of course, it is simple enough to eviscerate their claims with this example.

Seems that there are many who have. This from "the Oregonian":

"A high-ranking federal official showed up in San Francisco a couple of months back and tried to sell some radioactive garbage to a gathering of American Indians. Naturally, he trotted out the Chief Seattle speech. What could be more appropriate to the audience of the topic? Chief Seattle's ringing defense of the natural environment is, after all, touted as one of the great 19th-century American Indian orations.

And David H. Leroy, the federal government's nuclear-waste negotiator, was talking to the National Congress of American Indians about storing nuclear waste on reservation land.
That, he argued, would protect the environment by concentrating waste in one
well-controlled dump.

Leroy's opening was a quote attributed to Chief Seattle that if you "continue to contaminate your bed, you will one night suffocate in your own waste."

Leroy went on to quote heavily from the rest of the speech, which consists of similar sentiments. In fact, Chief Seattle's words appear to be an uncanny forecast of modern environmentalist thinking. The speech touches on the sacred nature of the land, the connectedness of the ecosystem, the importance of living in harmony with nature and the white man's pollution of air and water.

[Here it comes!]
When Leroy borrowed from the speech, he didn't exactly break new ground. These days, the speech is popping up all over the place. Britain's Prince Philip has referred to it. So has the late pop mythologist, Joseph Campbell. And the Jehovah's Witnesses' magazine. And the KLM in-flight publication."
"PUTTING WORDS IN HIS MOUTH: CHIEF SEATTLE'S SPEECH RAISES QUESTIONS ABOUT TREND TO ACCEPT WHAT WE WANT TO HEAR"
by Jack Hart, February 9, 1992, The Oregonian



Yup!

The bogus piece of Leftist/environmentalist propaganda is well known and regularly trotted out because it is designed to hit every talking point of the Left.

They can deny it exists, or its provenance, or that they never heard of it....but the very contrary is the truth.

And I love rubbing their faces in it.

 

[orogenicman]

First, one dunce claimed he never heard of the Chief Seattle speech...and then Soiled Undies wrote "most environmentalists have never heard of that speech."

Actually, this is the dance of the dupes, running from it when it was revealed as a hoax designed by the movement to advance their agenda.



Of course, it is simple enough to eviscerate their claims with this example.

Seems that there are many who have. This from "the Oregonian":

"A high-ranking federal official showed up in San Francisco a couple of months back and tried to sell some radioactive garbage to a gathering of American Indians. Naturally, he trotted out the Chief Seattle speech. What could be more appropriate to the audience of the topic? Chief Seattle's ringing defense of the natural environment is, after all, touted as one of the great 19th-century American Indian orations.

And David H. Leroy, the federal government's nuclear-waste negotiator, was talking to the National Congress of American Indians about storing nuclear waste on reservation land.
That, he argued, would protect the environment by concentrating waste in one
well-controlled dump.

Leroy's opening was a quote attributed to Chief Seattle that if you "continue to contaminate your bed, you will one night suffocate in your own waste."

Leroy went on to quote heavily from the rest of the speech, which consists of similar sentiments. In fact, Chief Seattle's words appear to be an uncanny forecast of modern environmentalist thinking. The speech touches on the sacred nature of the land, the connectedness of the ecosystem, the importance of living in harmony with nature and the white man's pollution of air and water.

[Here it comes!]
When Leroy borrowed from the speech, he didn't exactly break new ground. These days, the speech is popping up all over the place. Britain's Prince Philip has referred to it. So has the late pop mythologist, Joseph Campbell. And the Jehovah's Witnesses' magazine. And the KLM in-flight publication."
"PUTTING WORDS IN HIS MOUTH: CHIEF SEATTLE'S SPEECH RAISES QUESTIONS ABOUT TREND TO ACCEPT WHAT WE WANT TO HEAR"
by Jack Hart, February 9, 1992, The Oregonian



Yup!

The bogus piece of Leftist/environmentalist propaganda is well known and regularly trotted out because it is designed to hit every talking point of the Left.

They can deny it exists, or its provenance, or that they never heard of it....but the very contrary is the truth.

And I love rubbing their faces in it.

And yet you can't find the wherewithal to respond to my post. Perhaps you are to busy obfuscating the issues. No surprises here.

 

[PoliticalChic]

First, one dunce claimed he never heard of the Chief Seattle speech...and then Soiled Undies wrote "most environmentalists have never heard of that speech."

Actually, this is the dance of the dupes, running from it when it was revealed as a hoax designed by the movement to advance their agenda.



Of course, it is simple enough to eviscerate their claims with this example.

Seems that there are many who have. This from "the Oregonian":

"A high-ranking federal official showed up in San Francisco a couple of months back and tried to sell some radioactive garbage to a gathering of American Indians. Naturally, he trotted out the Chief Seattle speech. What could be more appropriate to the audience of the topic? Chief Seattle's ringing defense of the natural environment is, after all, touted as one of the great 19th-century American Indian orations.

And David H. Leroy, the federal government's nuclear-waste negotiator, was talking to the National Congress of American Indians about storing nuclear waste on reservation land.
That, he argued, would protect the environment by concentrating waste in one
well-controlled dump.

Leroy's opening was a quote attributed to Chief Seattle that if you "continue to contaminate your bed, you will one night suffocate in your own waste."

Leroy went on to quote heavily from the rest of the speech, which consists of similar sentiments. In fact, Chief Seattle's words appear to be an uncanny forecast of modern environmentalist thinking. The speech touches on the sacred nature of the land, the connectedness of the ecosystem, the importance of living in harmony with nature and the white man's pollution of air and water.

[Here it comes!]
When Leroy borrowed from the speech, he didn't exactly break new ground. These days, the speech is popping up all over the place. Britain's Prince Philip has referred to it. So has the late pop mythologist, Joseph Campbell. And the Jehovah's Witnesses' magazine. And the KLM in-flight publication."
"PUTTING WORDS IN HIS MOUTH: CHIEF SEATTLE'S SPEECH RAISES QUESTIONS ABOUT TREND TO ACCEPT WHAT WE WANT TO HEAR"
by Jack Hart, February 9, 1992, The Oregonian



Yup!

The bogus piece of Leftist/environmentalist propaganda is well known and regularly trotted out because it is designed to hit every talking point of the Left.

They can deny it exists, or its provenance, or that they never heard of it....but the very contrary is the truth.

And I love rubbing their faces in it.

And yet you can't find the wherewithal to respond to my post. Perhaps you are to busy obfuscating the issues. No surprises here.

Post # 18 rolled you up and smoked you like a Cuban cigar.

 

[Crick]

I have never heard of Chief Seattle or his speech. I'm afraid you simply can't deny that. Neither can you deny that your entire argument here is complete and utter nonsense. Post #28 clearly shows your ignorance, your dishonesty and your propensity for trolling.