_The Japan We Never Knew_, by David Suzuki and Keibo Oiwa

02-08-2007, 05:05 PM

This eloquent look at the social and ecological status of several of
the minorities and aboriginal peoples of Japan shows exactly why
diversity should be valued: such peoples often have a clearer view,
and more sustainable practices, than the majority culture. This is not
just a book about Japan, but one with truly urgent and timeless value
for all of humanity.

"Many of the large, industrialized cities of Japan are ecological
nightmares, biological deserts entombed in concrete and asphalt, with
rivers choking on industrial sludge and garbage, air thick with
exhaust fumes and factory emissions. The pollution became more intense
the closer we got to Tokyo. The problems here can be seen as [as] much
a failure of education as of politics and business. ... Around the
world, social structures are collapsing under the weight of explosive
population growth and massive shifts in where this population lives.
There are enormous pressures of widespread poverty, ecological
collapse, civil strife, and the increase in new and old diseases --
AIDS, malaria, tuberculosis. Highly industrialized countries like
Japan, which depend on global resources and markets, are beginning to
confront the reality of their dependence on renewable and nonrenewable
products, of the planet's finite limits, and of the ecological and
social unsustainability of our high consumption lifestyle. It is from
the turmoil within the Japan that we now see that new paradigms,
priorities, lifestyles, and goals are emerging. They provide an
important source of new ways of perceiving, thinking, and acting for
all of us in the global village who strive to find ways to achieve
social, economic, and environmental balance." pp.303-4
===
I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)

Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are fond of!

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

02-08-2007, 05:56 PM

Mike Vandeman wrote:
> This eloquent look at the social and ecological status of several of
> the minorities and aboriginal peoples of Japan shows exactly why
> diversity should be valued: such peoples often have a clearer view,
> and more sustainable practices, than the majority culture. This is not
> just a book about Japan, but one with truly urgent and timeless value
> for all of humanity.
>

Mike, this has **** all to do with mountain biking, you tool. Why don't
you go to Japan and study how they eat?

02-08-2007, 06:00 PM

Mike Vandeman wrote:

Something just as on topic as always. At least this time he's stealing
from folks who know way way more then he ever will. I'm sure Mr. Suzuki
will be quite surprised to see his data misused this way.

02-09-2007, 04:26 PM

On Thu, 08 Feb 2007 18:56:01 -0800, cc <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

>Mike Vandeman wrote:
>> This eloquent look at the social and ecological status of several of
>> the minorities and aboriginal peoples of Japan shows exactly why
>> diversity should be valued: such peoples often have a clearer view,
>> and more sustainable practices, than the majority culture. This is not
>> just a book about Japan, but one with truly urgent and timeless value
>> for all of humanity.
>>
>
>Mike, this has **** all to do with mountain biking, you tool. Why don't
>you go to Japan and study how they eat?

Ask your mommy what "sustainable" means, and what it has to do with
mountain biking, an unsustainable extreme sport.
===
I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)

Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are fond of!

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

02-09-2007, 04:27 PM

On Thu, 08 Feb 2007 23:00:53 -0400, jason <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>
wrote:

>Mike Vandeman wrote:
>
>Something just as on topic as always.

Ask your mommy what "sustainable" means, and what it has to do with
mountain biking, an unsustainable extreme sport.

At least this time he's stealing
>from folks who know way way more then he ever will. I'm sure Mr. Suzuki
>will be quite surprised to see his data misused this way.
===
I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)

Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are fond of!

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

02-09-2007, 04:41 PM

Mike Vandeman wrote:
> On Thu, 08 Feb 2007 18:56:01 -0800, cc <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>
>> Mike Vandeman wrote:
>>> This eloquent look at the social and ecological status of several of
>>> the minorities and aboriginal peoples of Japan shows exactly why
>>> diversity should be valued: such peoples often have a clearer view,
>>> and more sustainable practices, than the majority culture. This is not
>>> just a book about Japan, but one with truly urgent and timeless value
>>> for all of humanity.
>>>
>> Mike, this has **** all to do with mountain biking, you tool. Why don't
>> you go to Japan and study how they eat?
>
> Ask your mommy what "sustainable" means, and what it has to do with
> mountain biking, an unsustainable extreme sport.

Yeah, now that you mention it, it's even simpler than that! PEOPLE
mountain bike, and they're talking about PEOPLE in the article. What was
I thinking?

In reality, the only connection is one that YOU have made with your
OPINIONS as usual. Dimwit.

02-10-2007, 08:15 AM

On Fri, 09 Feb 2007 17:41:24 -0800, cc <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

>Mike Vandeman wrote:
>> On Thu, 08 Feb 2007 18:56:01 -0800, cc <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>>
>>> Mike Vandeman wrote:
>>>> This eloquent look at the social and ecological status of several of
>>>> the minorities and aboriginal peoples of Japan shows exactly why
>>>> diversity should be valued: such peoples often have a clearer view,
>>>> and more sustainable practices, than the majority culture. This is not
>>>> just a book about Japan, but one with truly urgent and timeless value
>>>> for all of humanity.
>>>>
>>> Mike, this has **** all to do with mountain biking, you tool. Why don't
>>> you go to Japan and study how they eat?
>>
>> Ask your mommy what "sustainable" means, and what it has to do with
>> mountain biking, an unsustainable extreme sport.
>
>Yeah, now that you mention it, it's even simpler than that! PEOPLE
>mountain bike, and they're talking about PEOPLE in the article.

And the ENVIRONMENTAL impact of people. DUH!

What was
>I thinking?
>
>In reality, the only connection is one that YOU have made with your
>OPINIONS as usual. Dimwit.
===
I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)

Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are fond of!

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

02-12-2007, 07:03 AM

On 11 Feb 2007 23:11:39 -0800, [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] (Bill Z.)
wrote:

>Mike Vandeman <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> writes:
>
>> On 11 Feb 2007 17:44:06 -0800, [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] (Bill Z.)
>> wrote:
>>
>> >"Jeff Strickland" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> writes:
>> >
>> >> "Mike Vandeman" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
>> >> news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]...
>> >> > Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you
>> >> > are fond of!
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> What happens if I put my cell phone next to a part of yoru body that
>> >> I'm not fond of?
>> >
>> >Nothing in either case.
>> ><http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/12/061206085942.htm>
>>
>> That article is only about CANCER, idiot. It says NOTHING about all
>> the other impacts of cell phone use. Why don't mountain bikers EVER do
>> their own homework?
>
>Did I claim to be a mountain biker

Did I say you are? But then why do you act like one?

(I don't even subscribe to a
>mountain-bike newsgroup)? Did you infer that from all the
>groups you cross posted this to?
>
>Before calling people "idiots"

You implied that no cancer means no harm. How can that be
characterized as other than idiotic?

you might read your own friggin posts
>where you whined and whined about cancer.

You are LYING -- another clue that you must be a closet mountain
biker. A 2-second Google search will show you that I only quoted
others.

The latest results are a
>fairly strong indication that you were 100% wrong. I'm sure you'll
>make a fool of yourself once again dreaming up some other bogus claim.
>
>My guess is that the main risks for using a cell phone are either
>being distracted while driving or being punched in the nose if you
>take a call and yack in a loud voice in a theater (or otherwise use
>the gadgets in some inappropriate way). You might add the very
>rare cases of a defective battery that overheats (although it seems
>that this is more typically the result of buying cheap batteries
>that are not up to the standards the cell-phone manufacturers have).
>I guess you could also drop one off of a cliff or tall building and
>bean someone.

Do you also belong to the Flat Earth Society?
===
I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)

Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are fond of!

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

02-12-2007, 02:02 PM

Mike Vandeman <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> writes:

> On 11 Feb 2007 23:11:39 -0800, [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] (Bill Z.)
> wrote:
>
> >Mike Vandeman <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> writes:
> >
> >> On 11 Feb 2007 17:44:06 -0800, [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] (Bill Z.)
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >"Jeff Strickland" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> writes:
> >> >
> >> >> "Mike Vandeman" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
> >> >> news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]...
> >> >> > Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you
> >> >> > are fond of!
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> What happens if I put my cell phone next to a part of yoru body that
> >> >> I'm not fond of?
> >> >
> >> >Nothing in either case.
> >> ><http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/12/061206085942.htm>
> >>
> >> That article is only about CANCER, idiot. It says NOTHING about all
> >> the other impacts of cell phone use. Why don't mountain bikers EVER do
> >> their own homework?
> >
> >Did I claim to be a mountain biker
>
> Did I say you are? But then why do you act like one?

What am I supposed to assume you meant by "Why don't mountain bikers
EVER do their own homework" in a reply to my post?

> (I don't even subscribe to a
> >mountain-bike newsgroup)? Did you infer that from all the
> >groups you cross posted this to?
> >
> >Before calling people "idiots"
>
> You implied that no cancer means no harm. How can that be
> characterized as other than idiotic?

Cancer was the only "harm" you whined about the last time we
had a discussion about it, where you made a fool of yourself
by showing a complete lack of understanding of classical
electrodynamics.

>
> you might read your own friggin posts where you whined and whined
> about cancer.
>
> You are LYING -- another clue that you must be a closet mountain
> biker. A 2-second Google search will show you that I only quoted
> others.

LOL! You quoted them as evidence to back your claims about cell
phones being 'bad'. Now you are trying to weasel out of it.

> >My guess is that the main risks for using a cell phone are either
> >being distracted while driving or being punched in the nose if you
> >take a call and yack in a loud voice in a theater (or otherwise use
> >the gadgets in some inappropriate way). You might add the very
> >rare cases of a defective battery that overheats (although it seems
> >that this is more typically the result of buying cheap batteries
> >that are not up to the standards the cell-phone manufacturers have).
> >I guess you could also drop one off of a cliff or tall building and
> >bean someone.
>
> Do you also belong to the Flat Earth Society?

Do you think Dorothy's taking you to see the wizard to get a brain?

--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB

02-12-2007, 07:45 PM

On Mon, 12 Feb 2007 23:02:00 GMT, [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] (Bill Z.)
wrote:

>Mike Vandeman <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> writes:
>
>> On 11 Feb 2007 23:11:39 -0800, [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] (Bill Z.)
>> wrote:
>>
>> >Mike Vandeman <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> writes:
>> >
>> >> On 11 Feb 2007 17:44:06 -0800, [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] (Bill Z.)
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >"Jeff Strickland" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> writes:
>> >> >
>> >> >> "Mike Vandeman" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
>> >> >> news:[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]...
>> >> >> > Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you
>> >> >> > are fond of!
>> >> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >> What happens if I put my cell phone next to a part of yoru body that
>> >> >> I'm not fond of?
>> >> >
>> >> >Nothing in either case.
>> >> ><http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/12/061206085942.htm>
>> >>
>> >> That article is only about CANCER, idiot. It says NOTHING about all
>> >> the other impacts of cell phone use. Why don't mountain bikers EVER do
>> >> their own homework?
>> >
>> >Did I claim to be a mountain biker
>>
>> Did I say you are? But then why do you act like one?
>
>What am I supposed to assume you meant by "Why don't mountain bikers
>EVER do their own homework" in a reply to my post?

That you must be a mountain biker, because you act just like them.

>> (I don't even subscribe to a
>> >mountain-bike newsgroup)? Did you infer that from all the
>> >groups you cross posted this to?
>> >
>> >Before calling people "idiots"
>>
>> You implied that no cancer means no harm. How can that be
>> characterized as other than idiotic?
>
>Cancer was the only "harm" you whined about the last time we
>had a discussion about it, where you made a fool of yourself
>by showing a complete lack of understanding of classical
>electrodynamics.

Nonsense. I couldn't have said "cancer". because there's no evidence
for that. There IS evidence of "benign tumors on the auditory nerve".
You probably are thinking of something I quoted about cancer.

How do you explain the benign tumors, Mr. "classical electrodynamics"?

>> you might read your own friggin posts where you whined and whined
>> about cancer.
>>
>> You are LYING -- another clue that you must be a closet mountain
>> biker. A 2-second Google search will show you that I only quoted
>> others.
>
>LOL! You quoted them as evidence to back your claims about cell
>phones being 'bad'. Now you are trying to weasel out of it.

BS. They ARE bad. But I never said it had anything to do with cancer.

>> >My guess is that the main risks for using a cell phone are either
>> >being distracted while driving or being punched in the nose if you
>> >take a call and yack in a loud voice in a theater (or otherwise use
>> >the gadgets in some inappropriate way). You might add the very
>> >rare cases of a defective battery that overheats (although it seems
>> >that this is more typically the result of buying cheap batteries
>> >that are not up to the standards the cell-phone manufacturers have).
>> >I guess you could also drop one off of a cliff or tall building and
>> >bean someone.
>>
>> Do you also belong to the Flat Earth Society?
>
>Do you think Dorothy's taking you to see the wizard to get a brain?

Cute, but irrelevant.
===
I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)

Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are fond of!

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]