Page 3 of 4 [ 51 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

loudmouth
Snowy Owl
Snowy Owl

User avatar

Joined: 13 Sep 2007
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 155
Location: Garden City, MI

17 Oct 2007, 10:40 pm

it will take multiple milenia to run out of oil and coal if not way more as mining technology progresses so do way ot find it. in all honesty you seem to listen to Greenpeace way too much when it's founding VP quits agnowledging it's become a political orginization and not an environmental one that's a bad sign. At nay rate Like I said I'm more than likely of the on the unpopular side of this issue. At any rate I'll just agree to dis-agree this is bound to become a circular conversation.



sinsboldly
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Nov 2006
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,488
Location: Bandon-by-the-Sea, Oregon

17 Oct 2007, 11:21 pm

loudmouth wrote:
it will take multiple milenia to run out of oil and coal if not way more as mining technology progresses so do way ot find it. in all honesty you seem to listen to Greenpeace way too much when it's founding VP quits agnowledging it's become a political orginization and not an environmental one that's a bad sign. At nay rate Like I said I'm more than likely of the on the unpopular side of this issue. At any rate I'll just agree to dis-agree this is bound to become a circular conversation.



It's called a 'straw man' argument. You first say what you think I am influenced by and then attack that influence and we are to marvel at your astuteness, with out realizing I never thought that way in the first place, you just said I did.

sorry, loudmouth, I don't have to have to subscribe to any philosophy and tout any "ism" or voodoo. I did learn to think for myself. I chose to live in a very environmentally conscious country and it is how our local town and county government works. We don't even allow styrofoam cups or plastic shopping bags here. Water, power, electric renewable energy is all very important to our rural area here.

I suppose it is different elsewhere.



Inventor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,014
Location: New Orleans

20 Oct 2007, 11:19 pm

If Green Peace can be discounted for being political, good, for who is not political?

Coal and oil are dirty, but controllable, and that means profitable. Where does energy come from? Recent discoveries show that the bottom of the oceans are covered in pools of Hydrate, liquid natural gas, a clean fuel, and an endless supply.

It seems to flow through rock, gathering other things, and form pools of oil and gas.

So why when we discover endless energy, the cleanest of fuels, is it being ignored? Politics, profits, and for all the talk and politics, there is always gas at the pump, and talk raises the price. Nothing is as political as the oil companies. They own a President.

They also own our national energy policy, they bought the rights to coal, and have a right to profit by it, even if it is a planet killing old technology, its money.

Well drilling, mining, atomic power, can be controlled, it is political. It can be bought.

The government funding a few thousand square miles of solor electric would bring the cost way down, within the range of all users. That would be an energy policy. It is clean, long lasting, and useful.

It is political, and the coal and oil folks think it would look funny, people getting free energy. It is just not right. They are the meter lobby, everything must have a meter.

We The People are the voice to be heard, and more are speaking out. Coal is best left where it is. Atomic power creates leftovers that last longer than humans have.

Killing people and selling their organs is profitable, but not allowed, slowy killing the planet should also not be allowed. Products should be priced at their actual total cost to life, which means coal, oil, atomic, would be very expensive energy, and photo electric, ocean hydrates, would be very cheap.

Politice is humans being humans, and corporate politics is telling them to shut up.



sinsboldly
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Nov 2006
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,488
Location: Bandon-by-the-Sea, Oregon

21 Oct 2007, 10:09 am

What is it about Mr. Gore that drives right-wingers insane?" asks New York Times columnist Paul Krugman.
"Partly it's a reaction to what happened in 2000, when the American people chose Mr. Gore but his opponent somehow ended up in the White House. Both the personality cult the right tried to build around President Bush and the often hysterical denigration of Mr. Gore were, I believe, largely motivated by the desire to expunge the stain of illegitimacy from the Bush administration."


Writing online for The Atlantic Monthly, James Fallows likens the criticism of Gore's Nobel Prize to the heat the Nobel committee took when it awarded the Peace Prize to civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr. in 1964. Mr. Fallows explains:

"... in retrospect the criticisms of [Dr.] King look very small, and – without equating the stature of the two men – I think something similar will be true regarding Gore. Like him or not, he has turned his efforts to an important cause, under historical and political circumstances that would have tempted many people to drown themselves in drink or move to Bhutan."

But why did an environmental activist win the world's most prestigious peace prize? In an online article for Slate, Stephan Faris argues that peace has a lot to do with global warming:

"... [A] look back through the last thousand years shows how quickly even a mild, natural shift in the climate can produce a period of cataclysmic violence."

That's just what a prominent group of retired generals and admirals warned of earlier this year in the report "National Security and the Threat of Climate Change." That report concludes:

"Projected climate change will seriously exacerbate already marginal living standards in many Asian, African, and Middle Eastern nations, causing widespread political instability and the likelihood of failed states.... The chaos that results can be an incubator of civil strife, genocide, and the growth of terrorism."

A new study by University of Maryland researchers, meanwhile, buttresses Gore's position that dire economic effects of climate change warrant quick action. It warns that "the range of climatic changes anticipated in the United States ... will have real impacts on the ... environment as well as human-made infrastructures and their ability to contribute to economic activity and quality of life." It concludes:

"... climate change will directly or indirectly affect all economic sectors and regions of the country ... the costs of climate change rapidly exceed benefits and place major strains on public sector budgets, personal income, and job security."



UncleBeer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Nov 2004
Age: 64
Gender: Male
Posts: 683
Location: temporarily trapped in Holland

21 Oct 2007, 10:18 am

sinsboldly wrote:
What is it about Mr. Gore that drives right-wingers insane?" asks New York Times columnist Paul Krugman.
"Partly it's a reaction to what happened in 2000, when the American people chose Mr. Gore but his opponent somehow ended up in the White House.

Don't like how the US Constitution works? Work to change it. :roll:

For all the sore losers who are still wringing their hands about the 2000 election, I'm afraid there's only one proper way to show your righteous indignation: martyrdom. :lol:



sinsboldly
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Nov 2006
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,488
Location: Bandon-by-the-Sea, Oregon

27 Oct 2007, 1:43 pm

UncleBeer wrote:
sinsboldly wrote:
What is it about Mr. Gore that drives right-wingers insane?" asks New York Times columnist Paul Krugman.
"Partly it's a reaction to what happened in 2000, when the American people chose Mr. Gore but his opponent somehow ended up in the White House.

Don't like how the US Constitution works? Work to change it. :roll:

For all the sore losers who are still wringing their hands about the 2000 election, I'm afraid there's only one proper way to show your righteous indignation: martyrdom. :lol:


oh, sorry, forgot to laugh