Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Luke_Prowler]

Yeah, let's totally burn through Earth's resources without restraint or forethougth, we'd still have 7 other planets left

As I have stated before, even if America turns into the greenest piece of national park this side of whatever, it is not going to make a difference.  Why?  Oh, well.. THE WORLD?  Man, good luck convincing:  China, Russia, Canada, Mexico, all of South America, all of Africa, Europe, Japan, Australia, etc etc etc..

 I mean, is it really that hard to understand the need to actually use the resources you have available to be able to provide a better standard of living for your people so your actually able to transition into alternative energy sources without a huge amount of disruption?

Problem is no one is actually supporting alternative energy, because they don't believe anything bad will happen. You cannot support bread and circuses when our resources are becoming smaller and smaller by the day. Coperations are not going to stop until it "no longer profitable" and by then it will be too late. There's will be a disruption, it doesn't matter how, and it better be now while we still can rather when we're tearing at each other's throats for a gallon of gas

[NinjaBoot]

Yeah, let's totally burn through Earth's resources without restraint or forethougth, we'd still have 7 other planets left

As I have stated before, even if America turns into the greenest piece of national park this side of whatever, it is not going to make a difference.  Why?  Oh, well.. THE WORLD?  Man, good luck convincing:  China, Russia, Canada, Mexico, all of South America, all of Africa, Europe, Japan, Australia, etc etc etc..

 I mean, is it really that hard to understand the need to actually use the resources you have available to be able to provide a better standard of living for your people so your actually able to transition into alternative energy sources without a huge amount of disruption?

Problem is no one is actually supporting alternative energy, because they don't believe anything bad will happen. You cannot support bread and circuses when our resources are becoming smaller and smaller by the day. Coperations are not going to stop until it "no longer profitable" and by then it will be too late. There's will be a disruption, it doesn't matter how, and it better be now while we still can rather when we're tearing at each other's throats for a gallon of gas

And why is nobody supporting alternative energy?

Because nobody wants to make the individual sacrifices to do so!  Better to pull everybody down with us!

What are any of you doing to help "prevent global warming"?  Are any of you deciding to not drive a car?  What about forgoing the heating of your homes when it is cold?  What about supporting whatever individual alternative energy source company through donations or contributions through actually using their services? 

Its one thing to talk about making other people sacrifice for the good of global warming, it is entirely another to actually, you know, do something about it.  If you are unable to even do the basic things to help fight global warming, then how can you argue for making other people sacrifice for it? 

[Zangi]

^ Oil should be nationalized as a strategic resource...  Not left in the hands of multinational corporations who's ultimate goal is self profit.

[Sirus]

Hey NinjaBoot, why are you sitting in your warm house, posting on the Internet? There are millions of people out there who don't even have clean water! Quick, go save them with oil production! Surely you must be willing to make sacrifices, right?

[NinjaBoot]

Hey NinjaBoot, why are you sitting in your warm house, posting on the Internet? There are millions of people out there who don't even have clean water! Quick, go save them with oil production! Surely you must be willing to make sacrifices, right?

Care to elaborate? 

I'm not the one here expecting other people to make sacrifices for something I believe in.  You don't hear me talking about tanking the current economy so changes can happen that may benefit(?) society somehow. 

I am fairly certain not all of you are extreme like Luke_Prowler, at least, I hope not.   

[Luke_Prowler]

You're deflecting the blame. And calling me extreme. Awesome

I carpool, I recycle, I wear a sweater rather than turing up the heat, there are a hundred things I do everyday as sacrifice, and so do millions of other people. But those millions of things don't mean squat when a single company decides to dump it's toxic waste in a river, or drag nets through the ocean, or wipe another speices off the map. We don't want these things to happen, and the law is the only thing a corperation will flat out listen too, brcause they certinaly don't care about us

[Sirus]

You seem so concerned about the billions who will suffer untold death and destruction when oil is instantly and forever banned. I figured you should know that there are already plenty of people who could benefit from your noble compassion, and you should run off and help them right away.

[NinjaBoot]

You seem so concerned about the billions who will suffer untold death and destruction when oil is instantly and forever banned. I figured you should know that there are already plenty of people who could benefit from your noble compassion, and you should run off and help them right away.

You seem to have confused the rhetoric I used in describing the ultimate environmentalist policy with my stance on not wanting to tank the economy for the sake of an ideology. 

I suppose this makes me a LAWFUL-GOOD Paladin with 32 charisma (+11 bonus!?) wanting to save each and everyone out there, FOR THE GOOD OF TYR! 

Seriously though, all I am advocating for is some sanity when it comes to these issues.  Drill for oil and gas, get off importing foreign oil, turn your economy around, and provide people with a cheaper energy bill.  I don't see how these are somehow shilling for Big Oil and Gas. 

Why is that?  Because you assume that the acceptance of those facts seems to mean the automatic and complete dismissal and/or shutdown of any and all alternative energy sources.  No, that is not the case.  At worst it would be to stop funding alternative sources of energy through the government because they have proven to be a huge sink-hole for public money.  At best, it would involve following the guidelines already in place to determine which investments are sound.  Unfortunately with Solyndra, the current administration decided to throw out all those redflags and give an Obama donor a nice $535 million loan with no strings attached (private investors got their money in the bankruptcy, government (re: taxpayers), didn't). 

[Luke_Prowler]

All we're asking is for sanity, that long term effects be considered and some precausion taken.

And if you want to start talking about stupid loans that screwed over taxpayers, how about we talk about Bush's bank bailout

[NinjaBoot]

All we're asking is for sanity, that long term effects be considered and some precausion taken.

What long term effects? 

The melting ice cap?  Well, gee, instead of worrying about it melting, how about planning for the eventual melting, cause, uh.. its going to melt one way or the other, and thus, the sea level is going to rise, and alot of coastal cities are going to be submerged. 

Climate change?  You mean something that occurs naturally?  Oh, we affect the severity of it.  Well, as I have already stated before, good luck convincing the rest of the world to follow suit.  All you can do is plan for its changes and hope for the best. 

Destroying the environment?  You don't think there are companies out there that actually do care for how they conduct their business in the environment?  Not every single company or corporation is destroying the environment and leaving it utterly barren.  Some companies do actually care about public perception and don't like the negative press associated with destroying the environment.  Call it what you will, but they do see the need to "play nice" with the environment. 

Is there any other major environmental disaster I have left out?

And if you want to start talking about stupid loans that screwed over taxpayers, how about we talk about Bush's bank bailout

Hey, if it was that cut and dry, then you would have a point.   Unfortunately it would require another thread for us to argue on which party to blame (both!).  Suffice to say, it wouldn't have even been a problem if government didn't keep messing with private industry, thus creating the conditions for this shit to actually happen.  Social engineering has a very nasty habit of back-firing.

[Leafsnail]

Frankly, even if only the US started cutting carbon emissions it would make a big difference since the US contributes so much to global warming.  Although the fact is a lot of countries already are making efforts to also bring theirs down and would probably be encouraged to see a large contender do the same.

[jester]

fairly sure this whole thread is one giant coil of trollbait

[Criptfeind]

Everyone knows most of the world is still trying to pretend to be the US, at least the policy makers, not the people. If the US did take a harder approach against pollution it would have a huge impact simply because most of the world would do the same.

[mainiac]

If the US took a strongly pro-green energy stance then the rest of the world would follow because we'd be making those technologies cheaper and thus more attractive to them.  In fact that is exactly what happened with solar energy.  PV solar cells were developed by an American company and the technology was nursed by NASA for use in the space program.  The technology matured in the 70s and 80s thanks to US government support and synergy with the US microchip industry.  Then when it finally comes to maturity in the past decade who makes us of it?  The Europeans and Chinese of course.  50 years of American ingenuity, support and investment and we just shrug our shoulders when it comes time to actually make use of all that hard work.

[NinjaBoot]

Frankly, even if only the US started cutting carbon emissions it would make a big difference since the US contributes so much to global warming.  Although the fact is a lot of countries already are making efforts to also bring theirs down and would probably be encouraged to see a large contender do the same.

Again, who is to say that cutting carbon emissions will accomplish anything? 

As I have already pointed out, and I don't care how many times I have to, but even if you turn all energy sources into green energy, you still have the problem of 1) transportation vehicles (planes, trains and automobiles.. and watercraft) 2) humans naturally producing "pollution", 3) huge farming operations producing a shit-ton of "pollution", 4) people heating their homes when it is cold.

Are we going to charge individuals who fart too much?  What about a heating your home tax?  How about a starting your car up tax, and idling your engine tax, and a driving it around tax?  What about a tax for buying products from businesses that operate in such a manner as to produce large quantities of "pollution" (a tax for those who support those heavy polluters!")  What about a children tax, cause creating more humans is only compounding the problem!

Wait, no.. lets just tax the companies who are in the oil and gas industry, that sounds more logical!