Page 3 of 3

Re: Natural vs Artificial

Posted: Fri Jun 28, 2013 10:39 am
by neufer
geckzilla wrote:
All you have to do to find out who else is a groundling is look around you and see who is not sitting on a cushion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groundling wrote:
<<A groundling was a person who frequented the Globe Theatre in the early 17th century and was too poor to pay to be able to sit on one of the three levels of the theatre. By paying one penny, they could stand in "the pit", also called "the yard", just below the stage to watch the play. Standing in the pit was uncomfortable, and people were usually packed in tightly. The groundlings were commoners who were also referred to as stinkards or penny-stinkers. The name 'groundlings' came about after Hamlet referenced them as such when the play was first performed around 1600. At the time, the word had entered the English language to mean a small type of fish with a gaping mouth - this becomes pertinent when we realise that from the vantage point of the actor playing Hamlet, set on a stage raised around 5 feet from the ground, the sea of upturned faces may indeed have registered as something akin to wide-mouthed fish. They were known to misbehave and are commonly believed to have thrown food such as fruit and nuts at characters they did not like.>>

Re: Natural vs Artificial

Posted: Fri Jun 28, 2013 1:32 pm
by henry654
The more we move into the future the less natural things are becoming. The food we are eating, in the future our food will come from generitcally modified sources. We are cutting down all the trees, which in turn kills off the wildlife living in the area, we are farming more fish from the sea than is being replenished, so overtime even fish will become extinct. There is going to be nothing natural left in our future.

Re: Natural vs Artificial

Posted: Fri Jun 28, 2013 1:42 pm
by Beyond
henry654 wrote:The more we move into the future the less natural things are becoming. The food we are eating, in the future our food will come from generitcally modified sources. We are cutting down all the trees, which in turn kills off the wildlife living in the area, we are farming more fish from the sea than is being replenished, so overtime even fish will become extinct. There is going to be nothing natural left in our future.
But then (in the future), that will be what's natural. :mrgreen:

Re: Natural vs Artificial

Posted: Fri Jun 28, 2013 2:09 pm
by BMAONE23
henry654 wrote:The more we move into the future the less natural things are becoming. The food we are eating, in the future our food will come from generitcally modified sources. We are cutting down all the trees, which in turn kills off the wildlife living in the area, we are farming more fish from the sea than is being replenished, so overtime even fish will become extinct. There is going to be nothing natural left in our future.
And a major percentage of that tree removal is being done for Food Crop planting to try to feed a starving world because >40% of the current food crops have been diverted for Biofuel ethanol production

According to WIKI, in 2007 25% of corn crops were being diverted to Biofuel production
Per the Cattlemans Association in 2009 41% of corn crops were diverted
According to the BBC as of 2012 Under US law, 40% of the corn harvest must be used to make biofuel, a quota which the UN says could contribute to a food crisis around the world.

So long as we continue to divert our food sources into fuel production people will continue to remove trees to plant food sources

Re: Natural vs Artificial

Posted: Fri Jun 28, 2013 2:11 pm
by geckzilla
As long as people keep making more people they will continue to remove trees to plant food sources. You can't blame it on biofuel.