or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Greenpeace ranks Apple as greenest electronics maker
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Greenpeace ranks Apple as greenest electronics maker - Page 2

post #41 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by steviet02 View Post

Who's trolling now?

Technically both of us as far as that sub-topic goes. Your question is no different than mine
3.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7 / iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 6 Plus 64GB /iPad with Retina Display 64 GB
Reply
3.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7 / iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 6 Plus 64GB /iPad with Retina Display 64 GB
Reply
post #42 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBell View Post

I do not agree with you,[ and some of the other comments made against Greenpeace]. Most great things happen because of militant activity. The USA was found by militants after the seeking a partnership angle didn't work out.

First, Apple was a fair target by Greenpeace. Apple's campaign was Think Different, and Al Gore sits on Apple's Board. Greenpeace exercised it's first Amendment rights to express it's desire that Apple become more a leader in environmental efforts. Second, Apple seemed to spring into action highlighting Apple's environmental efforts in response to Greenpeace's attacks. In fact, we know that is true because Jobs letter to the public indirectly refers to Greenpeace. Third, the problem with forming partnerships is companies interests are seldomly aligned with doing the right thing. I doubt profit driven companies without the proper motivation are going to produce environmentally responsible policies. If corporations are open to that, then sure partnerships would be great. Fifth, it is hard to find fault with an organization that merely wants corporations to remove toxic materials from the products they manufacturer. I certainly am glad Greenpeace is spending it's time trying to put pressure on corporations. I do not have the time to do it.

With all that said, Greenpeace's initial ranking system was flawed. It was based on corporations ranking on statements of what corporations intended to do in the future. That system worked against Apple because it is more of a take action company as opposed to let us discuss what our future plans may be sort of company. In Greenpeace's defense it probably initially approached companies asking them to disclose their efforts to reduce the toxic materials it uses in their products, and the companies wouldn't cooperate. Accordingly, Greenpeace had to create a system that allowed companies to start thinking about such efforts without making legally binding commitments to actually do anything.

Well said. Steve laid out a plan and program to deal with criticisms and this is the result. Whatever ones feelings towards Greenpeace, this is typical of Apple's ability to plan and act, a great result!
Where are we on the curve? We'll know once it goes asymptotic!
Reply
Where are we on the curve? We'll know once it goes asymptotic!
Reply
post #43 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by lowededwookie View Post

Did you hear that their ship got rammed by Japanese whaling ships and sunk the other day just off of New Zealand?

Now I'm not one for whaling so I'm not in any support of Japan's whaling crap but ...

So, if you are not in support of whaling, what are you doing about it - besides criticising those who are putting themselves between the harpoons and the whales? That is what the boat that was sunk was for specifically, with people on board.
Where are we on the curve? We'll know once it goes asymptotic!
Reply
Where are we on the curve? We'll know once it goes asymptotic!
Reply
post #44 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacTripper View Post

I agree with you, and they ARE terrorists, in the sense that they cause disturbance, fear and hostile acts.

Which is a definition of a terrorist, one who commits terror. They are much like pirates, which is illegal too.

If a bunch of hostile crazies boarded my boat with my little daughter aboard, I certainly would be afraid and so would she.

I would most likely kill them, dump their bodies over board and sink their boat in self defense.

So what if I rot in jail, my daughter would be safe.

My sentiments exactly. They may claim to be pacifists, but when the end result is violence, and they specifically hope for that with their constant video taping, it becomes a bit laughable when they claim such innocence. Their police records speaks differently.

Nonviolent protests have their place, but these folks specifically get in someone's face inciting violence. For instance, sitting in a street with arms linked or whatnot, waiting for the police to come pick them up for disturbing the peace is what I would consider peaceful protest. Breaking into a ship to sabotage equipment and then complaining when the ship crew hits them with rubber hoses while defending their ship is not.

They are responsible for their members, yet don't seem to take proper action other than lip service to reign that sort activity in or they actively encourage it in the hopes that it will evoke violence.
3.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7 / iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 6 Plus 64GB /iPad with Retina Display 64 GB
Reply
3.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7 / iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 6 Plus 64GB /iPad with Retina Display 64 GB
Reply
post #45 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grunt21 View Post

Wow. I thought Apple users were supposed to be a bit more on the ball. Have Greenpeace crossed legal lines? Yes, many times and so I guess that that technically that makes them actual rather than "borderline" criminals. But so have lots of people who want to challenge laws, from Gandhi to MLK to the lone Chinese guy who stood in front of PLA tanks in Tienanman Square to the Fathers of the American Revolution. So what? And dude, seriously, grab the nearest dictionary and look up "pacifist". The comparisons on this board with Islamic "Jihadist terrorists" just make me f'n laugh. I've lived in Saudi Arabia and have worked in the Arabian Gulf; these postersno offense don't have a clue what they're talking about. Apostasy is NOT a capital crime in Greenpeace.


There is a difference between harmless pacifist interference to protest and criminal acts of interference, terrorism, trespassing, property damage and violence.

If your going to overthrow a government or start a war over territory, you better win before firing the first shot and that includes the support of the people involved.

All Greenpeace is doing is acting like terrorists.
The danger is that we sleepwalk into a world where cabals of corporations control not only the mainstream devices and the software on them, but also the entire ecosystem of online services around...
Reply
The danger is that we sleepwalk into a world where cabals of corporations control not only the mainstream devices and the software on them, but also the entire ecosystem of online services around...
Reply
post #46 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJRumpy View Post

My sentiments exactly. They may claim to be pacifists, but when the end result is violence, and they specifically hope for that with their constant video taping, it becomes a bit laughable when they claim such innocence. Their police records speaks differently.

Nonviolent protests have their place, but these folks specifically get in someone's face inciting violence. For instance, sitting in a street with arms linked or whatnot, waiting for the police to come pick them up for disturbing the peace is what I would consider peaceful protest. Breaking into a ship to sabotage equipment and then complaining when the ship crew hits them with rubber hoses while defending their ship is not.

They are responsible for their members, yet don't seem to take proper action other than lip service to reign that sort activity in or they actively encourage it in the hopes that it will evoke violence.


My thoughts exactly.

Except I wouldn't use rubber hoses, I would teach them a lesson and dump their asses overboard.

Greenpeace only survives with these sort of tactics upon the good graces of those they attack.

The open sea is a wild place, anything can happen and dead men tell no tales.
The danger is that we sleepwalk into a world where cabals of corporations control not only the mainstream devices and the software on them, but also the entire ecosystem of online services around...
Reply
The danger is that we sleepwalk into a world where cabals of corporations control not only the mainstream devices and the software on them, but also the entire ecosystem of online services around...
Reply
post #47 of 118
I guess they weren't looking at the plastic waste in packaging in the Magic Mouse.
post #48 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJRumpy View Post

I don't believe I ever called them jihadist terrorists. Please point out the relevant post. I called them borderline criminals. They have been arrested numerous times, and put lives at risk.

They could pursue their goals without inciting violence.


DJRumpy, seriously man, you're your own worst enemy. Again, you either a) have trouble reading or b) let emotion get in the way of a good fact.

What I said was "The comparisons on this board with Islamic "Jihadist terrorists" just make me f'n laugh." Read up the page to MacTripper's 7:40 comment and you'll see it.

Care to cite your original source for where Greenpeace have incited violence against people?
post #49 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by umijin View Post

I guess they weren't looking at the plastic waste in packaging in the Magic Mouse.

I'm curious about this one. It was bundled with my mac, but I'm hearing a lot of horror stories about the packaging when you bought it in the store.

Was it that bad?
3.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7 / iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 6 Plus 64GB /iPad with Retina Display 64 GB
Reply
3.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7 / iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 6 Plus 64GB /iPad with Retina Display 64 GB
Reply
post #50 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grunt21 View Post

DJRumpy, seriously man, you're your own worst enemy. Again, you either a) have trouble reading or b) let emotion get in the way of a good fact.

What I said was "The comparisons on this board with Islamic "Jihadist terrorists" just make me f'n laugh." Read up the page to MacTripper's 7:40 comment and you'll see it.

Care to cite your original source for where Greenpeace have incited violence against people?

I already posted the links. Feel free to read. As to the Jihadist comment, you should have quoted who you were replying to rather than throwing it in a general response to me.
3.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7 / iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 6 Plus 64GB /iPad with Retina Display 64 GB
Reply
3.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7 / iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 6 Plus 64GB /iPad with Retina Display 64 GB
Reply
post #51 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacTripper View Post

I agree with you, and they ARE terrorists, in the sense that they cause disturbance, fear and hostile acts.

Which is a definition of a terrorist, one who commits terror. They are much like pirates, which is illegal too.

If a bunch of hostile crazies boarded my boat with my little daughter aboard, I certainly would be afraid and so would she.

I would most likely kill them, dump their bodies over board and sink their boat in self defense.

So what if I rot in jail, my daughter would be safe.

Dude, waaay too many Rambo movies. Chill pill, fast.
post #52 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBell View Post

...Al Gore sits on Apple's Board.

Al Gore is the biggest environmental blowhard hypocrite the world has ever seen.

He went through all this baloney about global warming and yet his walk doesn't match his talk.


Just look at the facts:

http://www.snopes.com/politics/bush/house.asp


And look at his THREE 30" monitors!

http://www.stefandidak.com/pics/pers...goreoffice.jpg



The past decade of weather is more typical of a "nuclear winter" effect from Saddam burning all those Kuwait oil fields that took years to extinguish. Getting rather cold now isn't it?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saddam

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_winter
The danger is that we sleepwalk into a world where cabals of corporations control not only the mainstream devices and the software on them, but also the entire ecosystem of online services around...
Reply
The danger is that we sleepwalk into a world where cabals of corporations control not only the mainstream devices and the software on them, but also the entire ecosystem of online services around...
Reply
post #53 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJRumpy View Post

I already posted the links. Feel free to read. As to the Jihadist comment, you should have quoted who you were replying to rather than throwing it in a general response to me.

NO, DJRumpy, you should put on your big boy pants and read what people actually write, rather than imagining what isn't there in the first place. I can point you to a good book on personal pronouns, if you like.
post #54 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by IQatEdo View Post

Well said. Steve laid out a plan and program to deal with criticisms and this is the result. Whatever ones feelings towards Greenpeace, this is typical of Apple's ability to plan and act, a great result!


Naw, Steve was afraid Greenpeace would do something radical and derail Apple's public image.

Greenpeace went after Apple because Apple is vulnerable to bad press.

Lets see them take on the PC makers and Microsoft who purposely create disposable PC's by using cheap materials and shoddy programing.

They won't because Microsoft and the PC makers like HP and Dell just don't give a dam what people think of them. Greenpeace knows this, so they don't even bother trying.

That makes Greenpeace bullies. Preying on the weak.
The danger is that we sleepwalk into a world where cabals of corporations control not only the mainstream devices and the software on them, but also the entire ecosystem of online services around...
Reply
The danger is that we sleepwalk into a world where cabals of corporations control not only the mainstream devices and the software on them, but also the entire ecosystem of online services around...
Reply
post #55 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJRumpy View Post

I already posted the links. Feel free to read. As to the Jihadist comment, you should have quoted who you were replying to rather than throwing it in a general response to me.

Is that al you have? Damn, I though I was in for a vivid page-turning account of Violent Greenpeace "Terrorists" stabbing or even shooting a few whalers, or at least doling out a decent roundhouse to the upper cranium. All I got was some reading about these Norwegian whalers who regret that THEY have to resort to violence AGAINST Greenpeace activists in order to stop the latter boarding their boats or trying to cut their lines. And something about a little scuffle ensuing when the Greenpeace guys tried to get past the whaler guys. Not even a single punch thrown, it seems. Again, you imagine what you want to see, not what is actually written. I'm like, man. If any American considers that constitutes terrorism or violence, Osama must be laughing his wacked-out head off about what a nation of girly-men we've become.

So, again DJRumpy, try to cite an original source that shows Greenpeace advocating or doing violence against people. I suggest you try some old Rush Limbaugh webpage.
post #56 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grunt21 View Post

NO, DJRumpy, you should put on your big boy pants and read what people actually write, rather than imagining what isn't there in the first place. I can point you to a good book on personal pronouns, if you like.

You mean about the general statement from you claiming that the 'posters on this board" are saying that Greenpeace are Jihadist Terrorists?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Grunt21 View Post

The comparisons on this board with Islamic "Jihadist terrorists" just make me f'n laugh.

You made such a statement while replying to my post. Perhaps you should take the initiative and indicate WHO you are replying to when making such inflammatory comments, rather than just labeling everyone who posts as making such comments?

You did so well with your last comment to me:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grunt21 View Post

DJRumpy, you should put on your big boy pants

Is is really that difficult to at least be consistent?
3.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7 / iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 6 Plus 64GB /iPad with Retina Display 64 GB
Reply
3.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7 / iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 6 Plus 64GB /iPad with Retina Display 64 GB
Reply
post #57 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grunt21 View Post

Is that al you have? Damn, I though I was in for a vivid page-turning account of Violent Greenpeace "Terrorists" stabbing or even shooting a few whalers, or at least doling out a decent roundhouse to the upper cranium. All I got was some reading about these Norwegian whalers who regret that THEY have to resort to violence AGAINST Greenpeace activists in order to stop the latter boarding their boats or trying to cut their lines. And something about a little scuffle ensuing when the Greenpeace guys tried to get past the whaler guys. Not even a single punch thrown, it seems. Again, you imagine what you want to see, not what is actually written. I'm like, man. If any American considers that constitutes terrorism or violence, Osama must be laughing his wacked-out head off about what a nation of girly-men we've become.

So, again DJRumpy, try to cite an original source that shows Greenpeace advocating or doing violence against people. I suggest you try some old Rush Limbaugh webpage.

You must have conveniently missed the first paragraph of the second link:

Quote:
"Although Greenpeace professes policies of non-violence, their members were in Seattle to protest World Trade Organization (WTO) meetings. Violence played a major role in the protests, which saw looting, burning and more than 500 arrested. Police had to employ tear gas and pepper spray to maintain public safety and the National Guard had to be called in.

Greenpeace Canada's Toxic Campaigner Morag Simpson was spotted by journalists toasting the end of the WTO meetings with a bottle of wine."
3.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7 / iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 6 Plus 64GB /iPad with Retina Display 64 GB
Reply
3.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7 / iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 6 Plus 64GB /iPad with Retina Display 64 GB
Reply
post #58 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacTripper View Post

Naw, Steve was afraid Greenpeace would do something radical and derail Apple's public image.

Greenpeace went after Apple because Apple is vulnerable to bad press.

Lets see them take on the PC makers and Microsoft who purposely create disposable PC's by using cheap materials and shoddy programing.

They won't because Microsoft and the PC makers like HP and Dell just don't give a dam what people think of them. Greenpeace knows this, so they don't even bother trying.

That makes Greenpeace bullies. Preying on the weak.

Incredible what some people actually think is a step back. This is a win-win situation, people. Less pollution in your environment and great publicity and sales for Apple. So what if a few neo-hippies got their way? I'm amazed that some of you let them get to you at all.
post #59 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grunt21 View Post

Incredible what some people actually think is a step back. This is a win-win situation, people. Less pollution in your environment and great publicity and sales for Apple. So what if a few neo-hippies got their way? I'm amazed that some of you let them get to you at all.

Actually I DO think this is a step forward for Apple, and they should be applauded for their efforts. I just disagree with Greenpeace's methods.
3.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7 / iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 6 Plus 64GB /iPad with Retina Display 64 GB
Reply
3.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7 / iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 6 Plus 64GB /iPad with Retina Display 64 GB
Reply
post #60 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJRumpy View Post

You must have conveniently missed the first paragraph of the second link:You must have conveniently missed the first paragraph of the second link:

Quote:
"Although Greenpeace professes policies of non-violence, their members were in Seattle to protest World Trade Organization (WTO) meetings. Violence played a major role in the protests, which saw looting, burning and more than 500 arrested. Police had to employ tear gas and pepper spray to maintain public safety and the National Guard had to be called in.

Greenpeace Canada's Toxic Campaigner Morag Simpson was spotted by journalists toasting the end of the WTO meetings with a bottle of wine."

No, what is says is that 1) Greenpeace were at the WTO protests and B) that there was violence at the protest. Where, exactly, does it say that Greenpeace incited or were involved in dishing out this violence themselves? All I see there is a lame attempt to link two separate facts by putting them in the same sentence. Yet again, you see what you want to see, not what is actually written. And certainly not anything based on fact.

There were likely hundreds of organizations and individuals at the WTO protests. Some were violent, most were not, and it's not impossible that some of the people inciting violence were law enforcement agents themselves (it wouldn't be the first time). And so what if the guy had a bottle of wine? Damn, I'd be in big trouble if that was a crime. Try harder. Schooling you is a) too easy and b) getting boring.
post #61 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJRumpy View Post

Actually I DO think this is a step forward for Apple, and they should be applauded for their efforts. I just disagree with Greenpeace's methods.

Fair 'nuff. Point taken.
post #62 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grunt21 View Post

Incredible what some people actually think is a step back. This is a win-win situation, people. Less pollution in your environment and great publicity and sales for Apple. So what if a few neo-hippies got their way? I'm amazed that some of you let them get to you at all.


Apple doesn't need Greenpeace dictating it's environmental policy, it already has a agenda in that direction by creating computers of higher physical and software quality that reduce turnover and waste, unlike disposable PC's.

Greenpeace attacked Apple because Steve KNOWS the crazy eco-terrorist movement, he socializes with those types.

Greenpeace saw a soft spot and pushed, simple as that, they are bullies.
The danger is that we sleepwalk into a world where cabals of corporations control not only the mainstream devices and the software on them, but also the entire ecosystem of online services around...
Reply
The danger is that we sleepwalk into a world where cabals of corporations control not only the mainstream devices and the software on them, but also the entire ecosystem of online services around...
Reply
post #63 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJRumpy View Post

You mean about the general statement from you claiming that the 'posters on this board" are saying that Greenpeace are Jihadist Terrorists?



You made such a statement while replying to my post. Perhaps you should take the initiative and indicate WHO you are replying to when making such inflammatory comments, rather than just labeling everyone who posts as making such comments?

You did so well with your last comment to me:


Is is really that difficult to at least be consistent?

Dude, you FAIL English 101. May I suggest the Cambridge KET? If you won't read my lips, at least read my words. "SOME POSTERS ON THIS BOARD" is not equal to "YOU" in any version of English I know of. I referred to YOUR claims first, and then, with the words "SOME POSTERS ON THIS BOARD (aka SOME POSTERS ON THIS BOARD) to ANOTHER claim by "SOME POSTERS ON THIS BOARD." I then specifically pointed you to MacTripper's comment.

F'n amazing how thick you continue to be. I do hope that not all Americans are as incredibly, unbelievably, slow as you. Actually, I KNOW they're not, you're just one of those embarrassing anomalies. And no, IS IS not.

The end.
post #64 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacTripper View Post

Apple doesn't need Greenpeace dictating it's environmental policy, it already has a agenda in that direction by creating computers of higher physical and software quality that reduce turnover and waste, unlike disposable PC's.

Greenpeace attacked Apple because Steve KNOWS the crazy eco-terrorist movement, he socializes with those types.

Greenpeace saw a soft spot and pushed, simple as that, they are bullies.

Who the hell cares? Either way, it's a good result. Good for the environment, great for Apple. If you have problems with the Apple getting a bit greener, just boycott them or write to Steve. As for me, I think this is progress and don't really care which "eco-terrorist" group "dictates" that to Apple. I'm sure Steve is a big enough boy to not be bullied and to do what HE thinks is right for his company and our planet (or, his planet ).
post #65 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grunt21 View Post

Dude, you FAIL English 101. May I suggest the Cambridge KET? If you won't read my lips, at least read my words. "SOME POSTERS ON THIS BOARD" is not equal to "YOU" in any version of English I know of. I referred to YOUR claims first, and then, with the words "SOME POSTERS ON THIS BOARD (aka SOME POSTERS ON THIS BOARD) to ANOTHER claim by "SOME POSTERS ON THIS BOARD." I then specifically pointed you to MacTripper's comment.

F'n amazing how thick you continue to be. I do hope that not all Americans are as incredibly, unbelievably, slow as you. Actually, I KNOW they're not, you're just one of those embarrassing anomalies. And no, IS IS not.

The end.

You did not 'specifically point to MacTripper's" comment. Here is your post in it's entirety. I don't see any reference to MacTripper in here. You only indicated it was MacTripper when I called you out on it on the next page.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Grunt21 View Post

Wow. I thought Apple users were supposed to be a bit more on the ball. Have Greenpeace crossed legal lines? Yes, many times and so I guess that that technically that makes them actual rather than "borderline" criminals. But so have lots of people who want to challenge laws, from Gandhi to MLK to the lone Chinese guy who stood in front of PLA tanks in Tienanman Square to the Fathers of the American Revolution. So what? And dude, seriously, grab the nearest dictionary and look up "pacifist". The comparisons on this board with Islamic "Jihadist terrorists" just make me f'n laugh. I've lived in Saudi Arabia and have worked in the Arabian Gulf; these posters—no offense— don't have a clue what they're talking about. Apostasy is NOT a capital crime in Greenpeace.
3.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7 / iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 6 Plus 64GB /iPad with Retina Display 64 GB
Reply
3.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7 / iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 6 Plus 64GB /iPad with Retina Display 64 GB
Reply
post #66 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJRumpy View Post

You did not 'specifically point to MacTripper's" comment. Here is your post in it's entirety. I don't see any reference to MacTripper in here. You only indicated it was MacTripper when I called you out on it.

DJRumpy, seriously man, you're your own worst enemy. Again, you either a) have trouble reading or b) let emotion get in the way of a good fact.

What I said was "The comparisons on this board with Islamic "Jihadist terrorists" just make me f'n laugh." Read up the page to MacTripper's 7:40 comment and you'll see it.

Care to cite your original source for where Greenpeace have incited violence against people?

Oh, Jesus H. I pointed it out to you when you couldn't distinguish between "YOU" and "SOME POSTERS ON THIS BOARD"! LOL. Ever hear the expression "flogging a dead horse."? It's dead.
post #67 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grunt21 View Post

Oh, Jesus H. I pointed it out to you when you couldn't distinguish between "YOU" and "SOME POSTERS ON THIS BOARD"! LOL. Ever hear the expression "flogging a dead horse."? It's dead.

Can you not even read your own post? You didn't say "Some users on this board" either.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Grunt21 View Post

The comparisons on this board with Islamic "Jihadist terrorists" just make me f'n laugh.
3.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7 / iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 6 Plus 64GB /iPad with Retina Display 64 GB
Reply
3.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7 / iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 6 Plus 64GB /iPad with Retina Display 64 GB
Reply
post #68 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by IQatEdo View Post

So, if you are not in support of whaling, what are you doing about it - besides criticising those who are putting themselves between the harpoons and the whales? That is what the boat that was sunk was for specifically, with people on board.

Exactly.
post #69 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJRumpy View Post

Can you not even read your own post? You didn't say "Some users on this board" either.

Care to distinguish the meaning between the two? Or better yet, can you please tell us how either one refers to YOU specifically? No, you can't.
post #70 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grunt21 View Post

Care to distinguish the meaning between the two? Or better yet, can you please tell us how either one refers to YOU specifically? No, you can't.

Had I responded to your post above while quoting you with a direct reply like "My god the douche bags on this board are amazing", it implies I am referring to you.

(note that unlike you, I have not resorted to calling you anything like "Thick", "Dense", "Slow", or any other personal attack, I'm simply putting this here as an example)

If I had responded to your post with "My god some of the douchebags on this board are amazing", while quoting you in my reply, it would still give the appearance that I was referring to you directly since you and I were having an argument.

Now if I had said something like "My god Grunt21, you are an amazing douchebag", then it would be very clear who I was referring to, with no ambiguity whatsoever. It would be impossible to misunderstand my intent or who it was directed to, while the first two are very easy to misunderstand.

Again these are just examples. I won't resort to name calling as you have already done.
3.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7 / iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 6 Plus 64GB /iPad with Retina Display 64 GB
Reply
3.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7 / iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 6 Plus 64GB /iPad with Retina Display 64 GB
Reply
post #71 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grunt21 View Post

Care to distinguish the meaning between the two? Or better yet, can you please tell us how either one refers to YOU specifically? No, you can't.

Still waiting. Now, we all make typos from time to time but your continued insistence on rewriting the basics of English grammar is a bit disturbing. If you're reaching for a good grammar book may I suggest Michael Swan's Practical English Usage. It has all kinds of cool sh*t like you, I, he/she/it and probably even something similar to Some posters. Let me know when you've rewritten the rule book and have made you (singular) into some posters (plural).
post #72 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJRumpy View Post

You should have just pissed on her..the human rights equivalent of blood. They could save a lot of carbon footprint just by killing themselves.

It's nice that you didn't resort to calling me names. But given the above statements, I'm not convinced that there isn't something wrong with you. And you have the gall to suggest that Greenpeace have a problem with violence? Like, .
post #73 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grunt21 View Post

It's nice that you didn't resort to calling me names. But given the above statements, I'm not convinced that there isn't something wrong with you. And you have the gall to suggest that Greenpeace have a problem with violence? Like, .

Notice in the above statement, this isn't a direct attack on you or anyone else in the conversation. It's my opinion about a 3rd party.

And yes, I would piss on this person had they done such a thing to me
3.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7 / iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 6 Plus 64GB /iPad with Retina Display 64 GB
Reply
3.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7 / iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 6 Plus 64GB /iPad with Retina Display 64 GB
Reply
post #74 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJRumpy View Post

Had I responded to your post above while quoting you with a direct reply like "My god the douche bags on this board are amazing", it implies I am referring to you.

(note that unlike you, I have not resorted to calling you anything like "Thick", "Dense", "Slow", or any other personal attack, I'm simply putting this here as an example)

If I had responded to your post with "My god some of the douchebags on this board are amazing", while quoting you in my reply, it would still give the appearance that I was referring to you directly since you and I were having an argument.

Now if I had said something like "My god Grunt21, you are an amazing douchebag", then it would be very clear who I was referring to, with no ambiguity whatsoever. It would be impossible to misunderstand my intent or who it was directed to, while the first two are very easy to misunderstand.

Again these are just examples. I won't resort to name calling as you have already done.

See ya DJRumpy. If you want to go look at those grammar books, maybe I'll check back some other time to see how you're coming along with your study.
post #75 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJRumpy View Post

Notice in the above statement, this isn't a direct attack on you or anyone else in the conversation. It's my opinion about a 3rd party.

And yes, I would piss on this person had they done such a thing to me

That's soooo comforting.
post #76 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by grunt21 View Post

that's soooo comforting.

lol

I never claimed to be a pacifist...
3.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7 / iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 6 Plus 64GB /iPad with Retina Display 64 GB
Reply
3.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7 / iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 6 Plus 64GB /iPad with Retina Display 64 GB
Reply
post #77 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacTripper View Post


The past decade of weather is more typical of a "nuclear winter" effect from Saddam burning all those Kuwait oil fields that took years to extinguish. Getting rather cold now isn't it?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saddam

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_winter

Don't spout nonsense. Inform yourself, please, instead of providing just some Wiki links (that lack credibility on politically-charged topics such as these, since anyone can go in and say anything).

The 10-year period 2000-2009 is the warmest -- yes, warmest -- on record. Go to the source (the World Meteorogical Organization) and read the report (the link to which can be found here): http://www.wmo.int/pages/mediacentre...pr_869_en.html
post #78 of 118
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vzNZD_KlVMc

http://www.sirc.org/articles/tide_ag...reenpeace.html

http://www.larouchepac.com/node/12819

http://www.furcommission.com/resource/perspect999bm.htm

http://www.ping.be/chlorophiles/en/en_gp_cl2.html

Just search some of these for Greenpeace as they also contain info on ELF which is not and never claimed to be pacifist, so you have to filter out the ELF info.
3.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7 / iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 6 Plus 64GB /iPad with Retina Display 64 GB
Reply
3.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7 / iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 6 Plus 64GB /iPad with Retina Display 64 GB
Reply
post #79 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Don't spout nonsense. Inform yourself, please, instead of providing just some Wiki links (that lack credibility on politically-charged topics such as these, since anyone can go in and say anything).

The 10-year period 2000-2009 is the warmest -- yes, warmest -- on record. Go to the source (the World Meteorogical Organization) and read the report (the link to which can be found here): http://www.wmo.int/pages/mediacentre...pr_869_en.html

This warming will make for some horrible storms over the next few years if the trend continues. The trends themselves are hard to ignore, whether they are man made or not, I'll leave to the scientists to decide, but the creep in global temperate and the pace that it's creeping up is a bit scary.
3.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7 / iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 6 Plus 64GB /iPad with Retina Display 64 GB
Reply
3.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7 / iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 6 Plus 64GB /iPad with Retina Display 64 GB
Reply
post #80 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacTripper View Post

Once they realize a family dog has twice the carbon footprint of a SUV they will come stalk Rover with chocolate and poisoned hamburger.

I don't care about Greenpeace, but that statistic is a bit dishonest.

First, that was an NZ study based on a 6,250-mile year, far below average American SUV usage. Second, they use an 80 pound dog as their control, which is well above the average canine weight. Finally, the carbon footprint is based solely on the amount of meat consumed. It factors in the resources needed from slaughterhouses or factory farms. So really, any person or pet who eats meat of any kind is equally as guilty. It all depends on volume. The numbers themselves are really just napkin calculations and thus should be taken with a big grain of salt.

Anyway, I'm not sure I see your point -- even if one thing was technically worse than the other, that doesn't mean we should abandon all efforts, does it?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Greenpeace ranks Apple as greenest electronics maker