>suck so much
They dont. They do the best they can with the limited respources they have. They have very different purpose and goals than the NF and BLM. Taken together all 3 are great.
>NPS goals are sight seeing
They aren't. There is only one goal: land preservation. The idea that forests exist for the amusement and profit of man is a core tenant of the demon worshipers.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>profit
you might be confused
3 months ago
Anonymous
>profit >forests >confused
You have yet to make a coherent point so the only thing that would confuse is if you were actually able to describe any sort of coherent idea: which you can't.
3 months ago
Anonymous
i wasn't the other anon, but the NPS isn't profitable. hence, my only (and unquivocally correct) point is that you are confused when you suggest that national parks "exist for the... profit of man"
3 months ago
Anonymous
>no link >no source
ahahahhahaha
Aahhahahahahhahah
hahahhahah
hahah
wait, ok, what? again were you talking about?
3 months ago
Anonymous
uppon further review I think you replied to the wrong post.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>is hereby reserved and withdrawn from settlement, occupancy, or sale under the laws of the United States, and dedicated and set apart as a public park or pleasuring-ground for the benefit and enjoyment of the people >which purpose is to conserve the scenery and the natural and historic objects and the wild life therein and to provide for the enjoyment of the same in such manner and by such means as will leave them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations.
you're wrong bud
3 months ago
Anonymous
>no link >no source
you're serious?
3 months ago
Anonymous
those are quotes from the act that established yellowstone and the national park service, respectively. if only there were a way for you to highlight that text, enter it into some sort of tool that searches a world wide web, and determine where it may have come from. of course, such a function doesn't exist, otherwise you'd very obviously be comically obtuse
3 months ago
Anonymous
>no link no source
go back to reddlt.
I'm not looking shit up that you clearly cant even do yourself.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>maybe if i say the super based oldgay line, people won't recognize how stupid i'm being
also, i clearly did look it up myself
3 months ago
Anonymous
>demands a link to readily accessible public documents >tells others to go back
Pot calling the kettle black.
2 months ago
Anonymous
the source was explicitly provided. asking for a link when you've been given a source, then complaining that it wasn't sourced? lmao
>mogged
First, you're clearly an idiot that's never been anywhere.
Second: you very obviously live on the east coast.
BLM is awful--it all should be rolled over to national parks. Everything you think you know about forestry is a corporate lie.
>limited resources
WTF do you think they need moron? The whole purpose of the NPS was to set aside land to be left the frick alone. The less services the better--frick tourists crying about no cell service and not being able to take doggo anywhere off trail.
the source was explicitly provided. asking for a link when you've been given a source, then complaining that it wasn't sourced? lmao
>demands a link to readily accessible public documents >tells others to go back
Pot calling the kettle black.
>maybe if i say the super based oldgay line, people won't recognize how stupid i'm being
also, i clearly did look it up myself
those are quotes from the act that established yellowstone and the national park service, respectively. if only there were a way for you to highlight that text, enter it into some sort of tool that searches a world wide web, and determine where it may have come from. of course, such a function doesn't exist, otherwise you'd very obviously be comically obtuse
>no link >no source
I love that nothing makes you morons seeth more than asking for the source of something you quoted. My guess is you pulled it from an exerpt from a website and never read the actual document which is why I'm asking for the source.
If you cant support your argument: don't bother making it and lying about where you got the information from.
2 months ago
Anonymous
hey moron, you were told where the quotes came from. that's what a source is. you're using words that you don't understand. you're btfo yourself
2 months ago
Anonymous
Why don't you stop "guessing" and Google it instead of demanding a source and not looking into it like a homosexual Redditor.
2 months ago
Anonymous
>Just source and proove my argument for me bro
Thanks for conceding you're moronic and don't have an argument.
>WTF do you think they need moron?
Money. There is a huge backlog of repairs and maintenence. moron.
>Forest repairs are expensive!!!
.. gr8 b8
2 months ago
Anonymous
You were given a source, just not a link. Lazy Redditor.
2 months ago
Anonymous
>I don't know how to link a source: the post
The quote was pulled from god knows where. The fact that you cant link it but link your source proves you're an idiot.
I get it--you don't have a clue how to vet sources and quoted wikepedia because you're a moron.
2 months ago
Anonymous
Since nobody else will placate your autism, here you go little guy.
https://www.nps.gov/parkhistory/online_books/anps/anps_1c.htm
https://www.nps.gov/pipe/learn/management/nps-organic-act-of-1916.htm
While I do agree that the core goal should be land preservation, it is specifically outlined in establishing documents that the amusement of the public is a principal of the NPS.
2 months ago
Anonymous
I think he was doing the thing where you double down and pretend to be especially moronic instead of just admitting that you were wrong
2 months ago
Anonymous
Not them but if you make a claim and don't post the source you're an imbacil by every metric. This is just you coping with being a midwit.
You're literally making the "just substantiate my argument for me" and pretending it doesn't make you look moronic.
2 months ago
Anonymous
He was given a source, just not a link. The anon cited which documents they were from when asked. PrepHole isn't an academic paper you pseud.
2 months ago
Anonymous
Source was cited. Quotes were searchable. Have a hard time believing more than one anon is this desperate/stupid
2 months ago
Anonymous
Fun fact
Most of you idiots pull quotes from magazines and Wikipedia without ever reading the source material.
I see why dude asked for the original source and you don't even realize you just got dabbed on and proved dude right.
Pottery.
I suggest you actually read this lamo
I'm embarrassed for you
2 months ago
Anonymous
How did I get "dabbed on?" I gave him exactly what he wanted an proved his original argument wrong.
2 months ago
Anonymous
My friend just ignore the morons. They're infesting the board, but if you don't give them what they want, they go away.
2 months ago
Anonymous
You type like a moron.
2 months ago
Anonymous
i haven't seen someone post this poorly in a while. whether it's shitposting, pretending to be stupid, or actually being stupid. just embarassing
2 months ago
Anonymous
>I can quote something and not link the source
Lol
Holy shit you're a Black person aren't you.
2 months ago
Anonymous
Why are you still going? You've been dismantled and mocked by multiple posters
>That kinda goes against the core principles of conservation doesnt it?
no. The NPS goal is preservation not conservation. Thats why things like Alcatraz are part of the NPS holdings.
>Just source and proove my argument for me bro
Thanks for conceding you're moronic and don't have an argument.
[...] >Forest repairs are expensive!!!
.. gr8 b8
>Forest repairs are expensive!!!
frick off with your disingenous bullshit. There is infrastucture that needs to me repaired and maintained.
>NPS goals are sight seeing
They aren't. There is only one goal: land preservation. The idea that forests exist for the amusement and profit of man is a core tenant of the demon worshipers.
>They aren't. There is only one goal: land preservation.
Bullshit. This is the mission of the NPS:
Our Mission
The National Park Service preserves unimpaired the natural and cultural resources and values of the National Park System for the enjoyment, education, and inspiration of this and future generations. The National Park Service cooperates with partners to extend the benefits of natural and cultural resource conservation and outdoor recreation throughout this country and the world.
For the enjoyment and benefit of the People- except morons like you.
>They hype diversity and inclusion
So? only white people are allowed to work? Whats wrong with including people? why do you care about someone's skin color so much?
>instead of hiring white people who want to work in parks
Bullshit. The NPS is 85% white. I worked in Yellowstone. it was 98% white.
Are really this cucked by your own insecurities that this what you complain about?
Look at their social media platforms, they push diversity/climate change propaganda set down by the white house instead of doing their job as a steward of the land. Giving them funding is a mistake because they'll spend it on inconsequential bullshit other than maintaining the parks for the large crowds they drive in.
There's some very fundamental reasons to not want a "diverse" environment. There's millions of dollars in tax payer resources that go to paying the salaries of diversity tsars that do jack shit. It's all just anti-white propaganda. If we were truly equal there wouldn't need to be quotas and handicaps for them to be accepted. They're different.
Hey I'm familiar with the story on the right.
The pile of frick in the picture was 16 or 17 at the time of arrest. He wasn't charged as an adult. Since this case happened in Minnesota, if you're not tried as an adult, the default is to close your criminal record at the age of 18. So he was given that sentence as part of a plea deal. Said plea deal included the strictest piece of probation as an adult you could ever consider, going on until he's cold in the ground. AKA that if he gets so much as a parking ticket or blows a 0.01 on his daily scheduled breathalyzer, his ass is looking at 30 years in the state's "frick-you-in-the-ass" prison.
>It's all just anti-white propaganda.
as opposed to the meme you posted lol
2 months ago
Anonymous
>n-no you
He's right. "Diversity" simply means fewer white people. If there are too many white people, it's not diverse enough. If there are no white people, it's extremely diverse, even if it's 100% some other race. You know this. Why deny it?
2 months ago
Anonymous
>fewer white people
So? why are you so cucked by skin color?
>how was the meme he posted anti-white propaganda?
I didnt clarify...he posted his own propaganda while complaining about propaganda. Its hypocritical and moronic
2 months ago
Anonymous
>So?
So you know what it is, stop pretending you don't.
>why are you so cucked by skin color?
Your question makes no sense.
2 months ago
Anonymous
>You know what it is
Yes, your fear of others who have different skin color than you. >Your question makes no sense. >t.smoothbrain
lmao
2 months ago
Anonymous
>minority that thinks asking a hypothetical question is the epitome of intellect
2 months ago
Anonymous
You're not smart enough to play these sorts of games. Clearly some bad genetics at play here.
>coping this hard
lmao
2 months ago
Anonymous
I don't think you know what that word means
2 months ago
Anonymous
>doubles down on moron
your opinion doesnt matter.
2 months ago
Anonymous
You're not smart enough to play these sorts of games. Clearly some bad genetics at play here.
2 months ago
Anonymous
I thought diversity hires meant hires not based on merit but rather skin color and gender. At its core, the idea is rotten. Minorities shouldn't just be given free jobs. That's stupid and leaves the land in incompotent hands(which reinforces racist and sexist stereotypes, btw). They should be given free education for said jobs instead. It's not one or the other. You can have a diverse workforce and an economically stable one. They don't need to be unskilled. However, everybody likes the quick bandaid "let's just force jobs instead" solution so the politicians can cover their asses. It's pathetic slow-everybody-else-down-and-push-over-old-ladies-to-win-the-race behavior.
>But anon! Education is the same thing! You're getting in the way of more qualified white people from getting educated!
This is still a better solution than having people with two brain cells getting jobs they cannot handle for the sake of diversity. At least with education if they frick it up, then they're not ruining the outdoors in the process.
2 months ago
Anonymous
>let's handicap our most capable people because muh social inequality
Any non-merit based system is race to the bottom. Chopping off your leg is hardly better than chopping off your arm.
2 months ago
Anonymous
...how was the meme he posted anti-white propaganda?
The point is to highlight that anti-white propaganda exists.
Not to BE anti-white propaganda.
Bro, if they'll "spend it in inconsequential bullshit other than maintaining the parks" then why are the parks currently maintained? Riddle me that, you fricking dip.
I was at Zion last week and it isn't the garbage infested hellhole that your moron brain imagined it was when you saw them talking about climate change
>They hype diversity and inclusion
So? only white people are allowed to work? Whats wrong with including people? why do you care about someone's skin color so much?
>instead of hiring white people who want to work in parks
Bullshit. The NPS is 85% white. I worked in Yellowstone. it was 98% white.
Are really this cucked by your own insecurities that this what you complain about?
Look at their social media platforms, they push diversity/climate change propaganda set down by the white house instead of doing their job as a steward of the land. Giving them funding is a mistake because they'll spend it on inconsequential bullshit other than maintaining the parks for the large crowds they drive in.
fair, but the NPS goals is lame. they're literally just designed around sightseeing
They are underfunded, they offer an unrealistic wage to their employees, they operate on a budget that would've been considered outdated forty years ago, and they're a department devoted to land conservation (a political topic that no party truly gives a frick about).
Jfc you guys are idiots.
Should be renamed the No Phun Service, I hate these frickers so much. >Welcome to your public land, that'll be $35 plus tip >Oh sorry, we're closed between 5 PM and 9 AM. >That trail? No it's closed because it rained 2 weeks ago and morons might get hurt. >That trail's closed too, we're paving it to make it wheelchair accessible.
Define southwest. People seem to love Abiquiu in NM and Alamo Lake in AZ, but I'm in CA so I have not been to the southwestern USACE properties. USBR only has decent properties in CA, they've contracted out the rest to NPS or third parties.
Pic unrelated, just a different USACE project near me.
I'm in Utah, anywhere in the Four Corners or Nevada is a reasonable drive. I haven't been to Abiquiu or Alamo Lake but I'll have to check them out. Thanks, anon.
"The service thus established shall promote and regulate the use of the Federal areas known as national parks, monuments, and reservations hereinafter specified by such means and measures as conform to the fundamental purpose of the said parks, monuments, and reservations, which purpose is to conserve the scenery and the natural and historic objects and the wild life therein and to provide for the enjoyment of the same in such manner and by such means as will leave them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations."
Lol, imagine being ESL and thinking this isn't a conservation commitment. If you read the subsequent articles of the legislation it is all about not doing material extraction. Thanks for still not posting a source for the legislation and just a reference to the thing you're quoiting. Public education clearly doesn't teach you morons how to vet information--which is why I asked where you got it.
Imagine being ESL and not realizing that nobody argued that conservation wasn't explicitly one of the goals of the NPS. Your own quote unambiguously states that it's not the only goal. You've confused yourself it seems. Have a lovely evening.
The dudes whole point was the NPS was established for sight seeing. The you're moronic and the irony is palpable.
>is hereby reserved and withdrawn from settlement, occupancy, or sale under the laws of the United States, and dedicated and set apart as a public park or pleasuring-ground for the benefit and enjoyment of the people >which purpose is to conserve the scenery and the natural and historic objects and the wild life therein and to provide for the enjoyment of the same in such manner and by such means as will leave them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations.
you're wrong bud
purpose is to conserve the scenery and the natural and historic objects and the wild life therein and to provide for the enjoyment of the same in such manner and by such means as will leave them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations.
This is about conservation you mouth breathing moron. I asked you to post the source because the legislation makes it even more obvious.
>NPS goals are sight seeing
They aren't. There is only one goal: land preservation. The idea that forests exist for the amusement and profit of man is a core tenant of the demon worshipers.
) which unambiguously claims that land preservation is the only goal. That's incorrect, and even your own sources corroborate that. NPS is meant to preserve land for the enjoyment of people, which is incompatible with your claim in the cited post. I wasn't the anon who brought up sight-seeing. Obviously parks aren't equivalent of roadside attractions, but they are meant to offer accesss to mostly undisturbed nature.
Your claim was as follows. >There is only one goal: land preservation. The idea that forests exist for the amusement and profit of man is a core tenant of the demon worshipers.
The quote and subsequent links was never to argue that conservation and preservation is not a goal of the NPS. It was to counter your claim that it was the only goal, and that amusement was not a goal. This claim has been soundly debunked.
If you think nps.gov is not a sufficient source for discussing the nps, you are a complete pseudointellectual. It's embarrassing. The reason I even placate your desire for a link is because I wanted to see what you would do with it. I expected the goalpost to shift, but denying your own words and the validity of the source is pathetic.
The moron pulled a quote from thin air and when I asked for where he got it--for this very reason--bitches started crying like Black folk asked to pay taxes.
tl;dr The NPS was established for preservation and the rest is brown people and children spewing reddlt tier "logic"
So National parks aren't for conservation? I missed the part where you used your adult words to actually communicate anything relevant to that assertation.
I already did and you ignored everything I said because of your bruised ego. You've shifted the goal post from "there is only one goal" to pretending that anyone but one idiot is saying that conservation isn't a goal at all. Everybody agrees that that is a goal. Your claim that was challenged was that the NPS does not also serve to amuse the public, which is wrong.
I really can't tell if you are either a manipulative, compulsive liar or deeply stupid.
2 months ago
Anonymous
>no YOU"RE SHIFTING THE GOAL POSTS
nice projection.
so national parks aren't for conservation?
try again.
2 months ago
Anonymous
>ignored almost everything I said once again
I'll make this as clear as possible so you can't deny and ignore then.
Your claim then >national parks are only for conservation
Your claim now >national parks are for conservationan
The keyword here is the only difference anybody cared about and you know it. I see what you're doing you ASPD specimen.
>suck so much
They dont. They do the best they can with the limited respources they have. They have very different purpose and goals than the NF and BLM. Taken together all 3 are great.
fair, but the NPS goals is lame. they're literally just designed around sightseeing
Which keeps a great deal of normies off of BLM and USFS lands, it's perfect.
You're worse than stupid: you're cancer.
nice argument, idiot
>Argument
Seems more an astute observation.
shitty observation, idiot
>NPS goals are sight seeing
They aren't. There is only one goal: land preservation. The idea that forests exist for the amusement and profit of man is a core tenant of the demon worshipers.
>profit
you might be confused
>profit
>forests
>confused
You have yet to make a coherent point so the only thing that would confuse is if you were actually able to describe any sort of coherent idea: which you can't.
i wasn't the other anon, but the NPS isn't profitable. hence, my only (and unquivocally correct) point is that you are confused when you suggest that national parks "exist for the... profit of man"
>no link
>no source
ahahahhahaha
Aahhahahahahhahah
hahahhahah
hahah
wait, ok, what? again were you talking about?
uppon further review I think you replied to the wrong post.
>is hereby reserved and withdrawn from settlement, occupancy, or sale under the laws of the United States, and dedicated and set apart as a public park or pleasuring-ground for the benefit and enjoyment of the people
>which purpose is to conserve the scenery and the natural and historic objects and the wild life therein and to provide for the enjoyment of the same in such manner and by such means as will leave them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations.
you're wrong bud
>no link
>no source
you're serious?
those are quotes from the act that established yellowstone and the national park service, respectively. if only there were a way for you to highlight that text, enter it into some sort of tool that searches a world wide web, and determine where it may have come from. of course, such a function doesn't exist, otherwise you'd very obviously be comically obtuse
>no link no source
go back to reddlt.
I'm not looking shit up that you clearly cant even do yourself.
>maybe if i say the super based oldgay line, people won't recognize how stupid i'm being
also, i clearly did look it up myself
>demands a link to readily accessible public documents
>tells others to go back
Pot calling the kettle black.
the source was explicitly provided. asking for a link when you've been given a source, then complaining that it wasn't sourced? lmao
>mogged
First, you're clearly an idiot that's never been anywhere.
Second: you very obviously live on the east coast.
BLM is awful--it all should be rolled over to national parks. Everything you think you know about forestry is a corporate lie.
>limited resources
WTF do you think they need moron? The whole purpose of the NPS was to set aside land to be left the frick alone. The less services the better--frick tourists crying about no cell service and not being able to take doggo anywhere off trail.
>Everything you think you know about forestry is a corporate lie.
ATTENTION! THIS IS THE HEMP CONCRETE homosexual. DO NOT REPLY TO HIS HIPPIE SCHIZO POSTS.
BLM by and large just leaves shit alone where I live.
>leaves shit alone
Until they don't
What's wrong with Hemp Concrete mrs. reddlt spacing?
>Paragraph break
>Reddit spacing
You have to go back
>no link
>no source
I love that nothing makes you morons seeth more than asking for the source of something you quoted. My guess is you pulled it from an exerpt from a website and never read the actual document which is why I'm asking for the source.
If you cant support your argument: don't bother making it and lying about where you got the information from.
hey moron, you were told where the quotes came from. that's what a source is. you're using words that you don't understand. you're btfo yourself
Why don't you stop "guessing" and Google it instead of demanding a source and not looking into it like a homosexual Redditor.
>Just source and proove my argument for me bro
Thanks for conceding you're moronic and don't have an argument.
>Forest repairs are expensive!!!
.. gr8 b8
You were given a source, just not a link. Lazy Redditor.
>I don't know how to link a source: the post
The quote was pulled from god knows where. The fact that you cant link it but link your source proves you're an idiot.
I get it--you don't have a clue how to vet sources and quoted wikepedia because you're a moron.
Since nobody else will placate your autism, here you go little guy.
https://www.nps.gov/parkhistory/online_books/anps/anps_1c.htm
https://www.nps.gov/pipe/learn/management/nps-organic-act-of-1916.htm
While I do agree that the core goal should be land preservation, it is specifically outlined in establishing documents that the amusement of the public is a principal of the NPS.
I think he was doing the thing where you double down and pretend to be especially moronic instead of just admitting that you were wrong
Not them but if you make a claim and don't post the source you're an imbacil by every metric. This is just you coping with being a midwit.
You're literally making the "just substantiate my argument for me" and pretending it doesn't make you look moronic.
He was given a source, just not a link. The anon cited which documents they were from when asked. PrepHole isn't an academic paper you pseud.
Source was cited. Quotes were searchable. Have a hard time believing more than one anon is this desperate/stupid
Fun fact
Most of you idiots pull quotes from magazines and Wikipedia without ever reading the source material.
I see why dude asked for the original source and you don't even realize you just got dabbed on and proved dude right.
Pottery.
I suggest you actually read this lamo
I'm embarrassed for you
How did I get "dabbed on?" I gave him exactly what he wanted an proved his original argument wrong.
My friend just ignore the morons. They're infesting the board, but if you don't give them what they want, they go away.
You type like a moron.
i haven't seen someone post this poorly in a while. whether it's shitposting, pretending to be stupid, or actually being stupid. just embarassing
>I can quote something and not link the source
Lol
Holy shit you're a Black person aren't you.
Why are you still going? You've been dismantled and mocked by multiple posters
>WTF do you think they need moron?
Money. There is a huge backlog of repairs and maintenence. moron.
>we need money repair nature's potholes!
that kinda goes against the core principles of conservation doesnt it?
>That kinda goes against the core principles of conservation doesnt it?
no. The NPS goal is preservation not conservation. Thats why things like Alcatraz are part of the NPS holdings.
>Forest repairs are expensive!!!
frick off with your disingenous bullshit. There is infrastucture that needs to me repaired and maintained.
https://www.nps.gov/subjects/infrastructure/maintenance-backlog.htm
>They aren't. There is only one goal: land preservation.
Bullshit. This is the mission of the NPS:
Our Mission
The National Park Service preserves unimpaired the natural and cultural resources and values of the National Park System for the enjoyment, education, and inspiration of this and future generations. The National Park Service cooperates with partners to extend the benefits of natural and cultural resource conservation and outdoor recreation throughout this country and the world.
For the enjoyment and benefit of the People- except morons like you.
Because all three agencies serve different purposes?
FPBP
They hype diversity and inclusion garbage instead of hiring white people who want to work in parks. Look at the demographics of a FS fire team.
>They hype diversity and inclusion
So? only white people are allowed to work? Whats wrong with including people? why do you care about someone's skin color so much?
>instead of hiring white people who want to work in parks
Bullshit. The NPS is 85% white. I worked in Yellowstone. it was 98% white.
Are really this cucked by your own insecurities that this what you complain about?
Look at their social media platforms, they push diversity/climate change propaganda set down by the white house instead of doing their job as a steward of the land. Giving them funding is a mistake because they'll spend it on inconsequential bullshit other than maintaining the parks for the large crowds they drive in.
>they push diversity/climate change
So?
>instead of doing their job as a steward of the land.
Bullshit. Thats just moronic reeeeeing on your part.
Go back
>derps out cope
frick off
lel @ u
There's some very fundamental reasons to not want a "diverse" environment. There's millions of dollars in tax payer resources that go to paying the salaries of diversity tsars that do jack shit. It's all just anti-white propaganda. If we were truly equal there wouldn't need to be quotas and handicaps for them to be accepted. They're different.
Hey I'm familiar with the story on the right.
The pile of frick in the picture was 16 or 17 at the time of arrest. He wasn't charged as an adult. Since this case happened in Minnesota, if you're not tried as an adult, the default is to close your criminal record at the age of 18. So he was given that sentence as part of a plea deal. Said plea deal included the strictest piece of probation as an adult you could ever consider, going on until he's cold in the ground. AKA that if he gets so much as a parking ticket or blows a 0.01 on his daily scheduled breathalyzer, his ass is looking at 30 years in the state's "frick-you-in-the-ass" prison.
>It's all just anti-white propaganda.
as opposed to the meme you posted lol
>n-no you
He's right. "Diversity" simply means fewer white people. If there are too many white people, it's not diverse enough. If there are no white people, it's extremely diverse, even if it's 100% some other race. You know this. Why deny it?
>fewer white people
So? why are you so cucked by skin color?
>how was the meme he posted anti-white propaganda?
I didnt clarify...he posted his own propaganda while complaining about propaganda. Its hypocritical and moronic
>So?
So you know what it is, stop pretending you don't.
>why are you so cucked by skin color?
Your question makes no sense.
>You know what it is
Yes, your fear of others who have different skin color than you.
>Your question makes no sense.
>t.smoothbrain
lmao
>minority that thinks asking a hypothetical question is the epitome of intellect
>coping this hard
lmao
I don't think you know what that word means
>doubles down on moron
your opinion doesnt matter.
You're not smart enough to play these sorts of games. Clearly some bad genetics at play here.
I thought diversity hires meant hires not based on merit but rather skin color and gender. At its core, the idea is rotten. Minorities shouldn't just be given free jobs. That's stupid and leaves the land in incompotent hands(which reinforces racist and sexist stereotypes, btw). They should be given free education for said jobs instead. It's not one or the other. You can have a diverse workforce and an economically stable one. They don't need to be unskilled. However, everybody likes the quick bandaid "let's just force jobs instead" solution so the politicians can cover their asses. It's pathetic slow-everybody-else-down-and-push-over-old-ladies-to-win-the-race behavior.
>But anon! Education is the same thing! You're getting in the way of more qualified white people from getting educated!
This is still a better solution than having people with two brain cells getting jobs they cannot handle for the sake of diversity. At least with education if they frick it up, then they're not ruining the outdoors in the process.
>let's handicap our most capable people because muh social inequality
Any non-merit based system is race to the bottom. Chopping off your leg is hardly better than chopping off your arm.
...how was the meme he posted anti-white propaganda?
The point is to highlight that anti-white propaganda exists.
Not to BE anti-white propaganda.
The people maintaining the parks aren't the ones running social media accounts.
>climate change propaganda
moron.
Bro, if they'll "spend it in inconsequential bullshit other than maintaining the parks" then why are the parks currently maintained? Riddle me that, you fricking dip.
I was at Zion last week and it isn't the garbage infested hellhole that your moron brain imagined it was when you saw them talking about climate change
They are underfunded, they offer an unrealistic wage to their employees, they operate on a budget that would've been considered outdated forty years ago, and they're a department devoted to land conservation (a political topic that no party truly gives a frick about).
Jfc you guys are idiots.
i see you making this claim but not really backing it up with anything
The NPS could be almost entirely run by volunteers. Yes, that's why the NPS exists at all is land conservation.
Most park rangers get paid next to nothing and you have to pay for your own LEO training if you dont have it if that tells you anything lmao
You already know the answer
they're both cute
I don't see the problem with either
i think the girl on the left is actually cuter. probably less likely to be a thot too.
The one on the right was hired as a barracks bunny 100%
Should be renamed the No Phun Service, I hate these frickers so much.
>Welcome to your public land, that'll be $35 plus tip
>Oh sorry, we're closed between 5 PM and 9 AM.
>That trail? No it's closed because it rained 2 weeks ago and morons might get hurt.
>That trail's closed too, we're paving it to make it wheelchair accessible.
Everyone forgets about USACE and USBR public lands... we exist! We're better than the fat ugly women at NPS!
Any USACE or USBR lands in the southwest you'd recommend?
Define southwest. People seem to love Abiquiu in NM and Alamo Lake in AZ, but I'm in CA so I have not been to the southwestern USACE properties. USBR only has decent properties in CA, they've contracted out the rest to NPS or third parties.
Pic unrelated, just a different USACE project near me.
I'm in Utah, anywhere in the Four Corners or Nevada is a reasonable drive. I haven't been to Abiquiu or Alamo Lake but I'll have to check them out. Thanks, anon.
"The service thus established shall promote and regulate the use of the Federal areas known as national parks, monuments, and reservations hereinafter specified by such means and measures as conform to the fundamental purpose of the said parks, monuments, and reservations, which purpose is to conserve the scenery and the natural and historic objects and the wild life therein and to provide for the enjoyment of the same in such manner and by such means as will leave them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations."
Lol, imagine being ESL and thinking this isn't a conservation commitment. If you read the subsequent articles of the legislation it is all about not doing material extraction. Thanks for still not posting a source for the legislation and just a reference to the thing you're quoiting. Public education clearly doesn't teach you morons how to vet information--which is why I asked where you got it.
Imagine being ESL and not realizing that nobody argued that conservation wasn't explicitly one of the goals of the NPS. Your own quote unambiguously states that it's not the only goal. You've confused yourself it seems. Have a lovely evening.
In some fairness to him, the post he originally responded to did make the claim that THE goal was sight-seeing.
However, nobody past that point made any such claim and was instead focused on his own point about them having a singular goal.
The dudes whole point was the NPS was established for sight seeing. The you're moronic and the irony is palpable.
purpose is to conserve the scenery and the natural and historic objects and the wild life therein and to provide for the enjoyment of the same in such manner and by such means as will leave them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations.
This is about conservation you mouth breathing moron. I asked you to post the source because the legislation makes it even more obvious.
So this is me dabbing on a moron yet again.
i was only responding in relation to this post (
) which unambiguously claims that land preservation is the only goal. That's incorrect, and even your own sources corroborate that. NPS is meant to preserve land for the enjoyment of people, which is incompatible with your claim in the cited post. I wasn't the anon who brought up sight-seeing. Obviously parks aren't equivalent of roadside attractions, but they are meant to offer accesss to mostly undisturbed nature.
Your claim was as follows.
>There is only one goal: land preservation. The idea that forests exist for the amusement and profit of man is a core tenant of the demon worshipers.
The quote and subsequent links was never to argue that conservation and preservation is not a goal of the NPS. It was to counter your claim that it was the only goal, and that amusement was not a goal. This claim has been soundly debunked.
If you think nps.gov is not a sufficient source for discussing the nps, you are a complete pseudointellectual. It's embarrassing. The reason I even placate your desire for a link is because I wanted to see what you would do with it. I expected the goalpost to shift, but denying your own words and the validity of the source is pathetic.
I love that you're agreeing with me.
The moron pulled a quote from thin air and when I asked for where he got it--for this very reason--bitches started crying like Black folk asked to pay taxes.
tl;dr The NPS was established for preservation and the rest is brown people and children spewing reddlt tier "logic"
Your ability to comprehend and communicate is truly subhuman.
So National parks aren't for conservation? I missed the part where you used your adult words to actually communicate anything relevant to that assertation.
I already did and you ignored everything I said because of your bruised ego. You've shifted the goal post from "there is only one goal" to pretending that anyone but one idiot is saying that conservation isn't a goal at all. Everybody agrees that that is a goal. Your claim that was challenged was that the NPS does not also serve to amuse the public, which is wrong.
I really can't tell if you are either a manipulative, compulsive liar or deeply stupid.
>no YOU"RE SHIFTING THE GOAL POSTS
nice projection.
so national parks aren't for conservation?
try again.
>ignored almost everything I said once again
I'll make this as clear as possible so you can't deny and ignore then.
Your claim then
>national parks are only for conservation
Your claim now
>national parks are for conservationan
The keyword here is the only difference anybody cared about and you know it. I see what you're doing you ASPD specimen.