|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
What do liberal policy "intellectuals" do (personally) aboutclimate change?
On Thursday, April 9, 2015 at 9:34:56 AM UTC-4, Mike Collins wrote:
wsnell01 wrote: Liberal greenies hate nuclear. They hate coal too, and oil and gas. They hate all energy use by others, especially those with whom they disagree. They think that driving a hybrid makes up for their air travel. Rubbish! They think correctly that driving a hybrid uses less petrol. Less "petrol" than what? Walking? Riding a bike? Most people own neither a car nor a bike. They like the comforts and conveniences provided by fossil fuel use, but don't see themselves in any way responsible for the downsides. Again rubbish. But they know that all that would be accomplished by returning to the Stone Age would allow people who think like you to use fossil fuels even faster. No one has suggested a return to the stone age. A greenie giving up his car (hybrid or not) has no bearing on whether anyone else is going to "use fossil fuels even faster." Only concerted action can avert the crisis. Is this the "concerted action" about which you speak? http://www.bloomberg.com/ss/10/05/05...riences/14.htm http://yeinjee.com/bangladesh-bishwa...crowded-train/ They blame the oil companies, the Kochs and the Republicans instead. They buy carbon indulgences, hypocrites all. Carbon offsets are capitalist crap designed to allow US industry to pollute more. And the greenies fall for it. They rightly blame the oil industry in the USA and their shills in the Republican Party and the media. Democrats take in quite a bit in donations from oil companies. Have you checked your stock portfolio for oil companies? Do you ever make any unnecessary trips, such as to see solar eclipses? |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
What do liberal policy "intellectuals" do (personally) aboutclimate change?
On Thursday, April 9, 2015 at 9:41:22 AM UTC-4, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Thu, 9 Apr 2015 13:33:59 +0000 (UTC), Mike Collins wrote: Rubbish! They think correctly that driving a hybrid uses less petrol. It's also true that early adopters of this technology are helping to build both the technology and the market for cars which are not fueled by fossil fuels. There's value in that. Not really. 100 year old electric car: http://www.popularmechanics.com/cars/a1609/4215940/ Move along folks... |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
What do liberal policy "intellectuals" do (personally) about climate change?
wrote:
On Thursday, April 9, 2015 at 9:34:56 AM UTC-4, Mike Collins wrote: wsnell01 wrote: Liberal greenies hate nuclear. They hate coal too, and oil and gas. They hate all energy use by others, especially those with whom they disagree. They think that driving a hybrid makes up for their air travel. Rubbish! They think correctly that driving a hybrid uses less petrol. Less "petrol" than what? Walking? Riding a bike? Most people own neither a car nor a bike. They like the comforts and conveniences provided by fossil fuel use, but don't see themselves in any way responsible for the downsides. Again rubbish. But they know that all that would be accomplished by returning to the Stone Age would allow people who think like you to use fossil fuels even faster. No one has suggested a return to the stone age. A greenie giving up his car (hybrid or not) has no bearing on whether anyone else is going to "use fossil fuels even faster." Only concerted action can avert the crisis. Is this the "concerted action" about which you speak? http://www.bloomberg.com/ss/10/05/05...riences/14.htm http://yeinjee.com/bangladesh-bishwa...crowded-train/ What would you write if somebody posted something so irrelevant to to the discussion. Would it be "Strawman"? They blame the oil companies, the Kochs and the Republicans instead. They buy carbon indulgences, hypocrites all. Carbon offsets are capitalist crap designed to allow US industry to pollute more. And the greenies fall for it. Only the stupid or capitalist ones. They rightly blame the oil industry in the USA and their shills in the Republican Party and the media. Democrats take in quite a bit in donations from oil companies. Have you checked your stock portfolio for oil companies? Do you ever make any unnecessary trips, such as to see solar eclipses? What stock portfolio is that? I worked for the NHS for over 40 years. I have a government pension. My savings are not in stocks and shares. If they were I would be using ethical investments which generally perform better than general. |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
What do conservative policy intellectuals think about climate change?
On Thursday, April 9, 2015 at 4:28:40 PM UTC-4, Lord Vath wrote:
On Thu, 09 Apr 2015 07:37:12 -0600, Chris L Peterson wrote this crap: On Thu, 09 Apr 2015 02:15:32 -0400, Lord Vath wrote: That's mostly bull****. I agree that gas plants are now easier and cheaper to produce. But the cost will change. Government regulations make nuclear power plants more expensive. And in the US there is now a war on coal so no coal plants can ever get licensed. So far we lack the technology to make safe and economical use of coal, natural gas, and nuclear. How the economics of these three unsafe technologies play out against each other is complex and it's very difficult to predict how they will change in the future. I've always thought you were crazy, but now I'm sure of it. Colorado gets almost two-thirds of its electricity from coal, and much of the rest from nat gas. Maybe it will have enough windmills Real Soon Now. peterson owns a car. He faces a long drive to his astro club meetings. Maybe there's a charging station at the club's meeting site, not that there's any point in it having one. |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
What do liberal policy "intellectuals" do (personally) about climate change?
wrote:
On Thursday, April 9, 2015 at 9:41:22 AM UTC-4, Chris L Peterson wrote: On Thu, 9 Apr 2015 13:33:59 +0000 (UTC), Mike Collins wrote: Rubbish! They think correctly that driving a hybrid uses less petrol. It's also true that early adopters of this technology are helping to build both the technology and the market for cars which are not fueled by fossil fuels. There's value in that. Not really. 100 year old electric car: http://www.popularmechanics.com/cars/a1609/4215940/ Move along folks... http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milk_float |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
What do liberal policy "intellectuals" do (personally) aboutclimate change?
On Friday, April 10, 2015 at 6:09:49 AM UTC-4, Mike Collins wrote:
wsnell01 wrote: On Thursday, April 9, 2015 at 9:34:56 AM UTC-4, Mike Collins wrote: Only concerted action can avert the crisis. Is this the "concerted action" about which you speak? http://www.bloomberg.com/ss/10/05/05...riences/14.htm http://yeinjee.com/bangladesh-bishwa...crowded-train/ What would you write if somebody posted something so irrelevant to to the discussion. Would it be "Strawman"? The people on those trains probably have carbon footprints a very small fraction of yours. Carbon offsets are capitalist crap designed to allow US industry to pollute more. And the greenies fall for it. Only the stupid or capitalist ones. Sure most of them are stupid, but how many are capitalists? They rightly blame the oil industry in the USA and their shills in the Republican Party and the media. Democrats take in quite a bit in donations from oil companies. Have you checked your stock portfolio for oil companies? Do you ever make any unnecessary trips, such as to see solar eclipses? What stock portfolio is that? I worked for the NHS for over 40 years. I have a government pension. My savings are not in stocks and shares. If they were I would be using ethical investments which generally perform better than general. So you wouldn't invest in oil companies because oil harms the environment, but you still use oil even though it harms the environment? |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
What do liberal policy "intellectuals" do (personally) about climate change?
wrote:
On Friday, April 10, 2015 at 6:09:49 AM UTC-4, Mike Collins wrote: wsnell01 wrote: On Thursday, April 9, 2015 at 9:34:56 AM UTC-4, Mike Collins wrote: Only concerted action can avert the crisis. Is this the "concerted action" about which you speak? http://www.bloomberg.com/ss/10/05/05...riences/14.htm http://yeinjee.com/bangladesh-bishwa...crowded-train/ What would you write if somebody posted something so irrelevant to to the discussion. Would it be "Strawman"? The people on those trains probably have carbon footprints a very small fraction of yours. Carbon offsets are capitalist crap designed to allow US industry to pollute more. And the greenies fall for it. Only the stupid or capitalist ones. Sure most of them are stupid, but how many are capitalists? They rightly blame the oil industry in the USA and their shills in the Republican Party and the media. Democrats take in quite a bit in donations from oil companies. Have you checked your stock portfolio for oil companies? Do you ever make any unnecessary trips, such as to see solar eclipses? What stock portfolio is that? I worked for the NHS for over 40 years. I have a government pension. My savings are not in stocks and shares. If they were I would be using ethical investments which generally perform better than general. So you wouldn't invest in oil companies because oil harms the environment, but you still use oil even though it harms the environment? I wouldn't invest in US oil or mining companies. Other oil companies are more enlightened. |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
What do liberal policy "intellectuals" do (personally) aboutclimate change?
On Friday, April 10, 2015 at 6:21:40 AM UTC-4, Mike Collins wrote:
wsnell01 wrote: On Thursday, April 9, 2015 at 9:41:22 AM UTC-4, Chris L Peterson wrote: On Thu, 9 Apr 2015 13:33:59 +0000 (UTC), Mike Collins wrote: Rubbish! They think correctly that driving a hybrid uses less petrol. It's also true that early adopters of this technology are helping to build both the technology and the market for cars which are not fueled by fossil fuels. There's value in that. Not really. 100 year old electric car: http://www.popularmechanics.com/cars/a1609/4215940/ Move along folks... http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milk_float That won't make it out to peterson's place without a recharge, but maybe he doesn't drink milk anyway. I used to walk to the grocery store. But after figuring out that greenies rarely did that, I drove instead. |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
What do liberal policy "intellectuals" do (personally) aboutclimate change?
On Friday, April 10, 2015 at 6:29:33 AM UTC-4, Mike Collins wrote:
wsnell01 wrote: So you wouldn't invest in oil companies because oil harms the environment, but you still use oil even though it harms the environment? I wouldn't invest in US oil or mining companies. Other oil companies are more enlightened. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deepwat...izon_oil_spill http://www.bloomberg.com/bw/articles...climate-change |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
What do liberal policy "intellectuals" do (personally) aboutclimate change?
On Thursday, April 9, 2015 at 9:34:56 AM UTC-4, Mike Collins wrote:
wsnell01 wrote: They like the comforts and conveniences provided by fossil fuel use, but don't see themselves in any way responsible for the downsides. Again rubbish. But they know that all that would be accomplished by returning to the Stone Age would allow people who think like you to use fossil fuels even faster. Only concerted action can avert the crisis. SO, if everyone in the world owned and drove a car just like yours and drove it as much, would that be an example of the "concerted action" to "avert the crisis" to which you allude? |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Climate change will change thing, not for the better | Uncarollo2 | Amateur Astronomy | 89 | May 8th 14 03:04 PM |
Koch funded climate scientist reverses thinking - climate change IS REAL! | Uncarollo2 | Amateur Astronomy | 21 | August 8th 12 10:43 PM |
Conservative Change | Foul Weather Patriot | Astronomy Misc | 1 | September 9th 08 03:59 PM |
- IDA policy Change | RMOLLISE | Amateur Astronomy | 0 | April 1st 06 05:40 PM |
- IDA policy Change | Matthew Ota | Amateur Astronomy | 0 | April 1st 06 05:39 PM |