Binge Flying

[waveflyer]

AA717-- I can't control what china will do- I'm an american-- if Holland can adopt the Kyoto accord and invest in cleaner energy-- i'm pretty sure that if we did it- it would have a much larger impact. You sound like you get all of your excuses from FoxNews. ??

None of you have answered the question of why you're so defensive about wanting to pollute. I don't get it-- do you argue with your wives about cleaning your room too?

 

[DOVPILOT]

8) The whole y2k computer crisis.

People prepaired for that thing for years and built bomb shelters and stuff. I laughed my arse off when nothing happened.

Don't forget the spontaneous combustible shopping bags

 

[UALjan15]

2. I'm saying slow down. Look at all of the evidence. When is the last time you heard a report on national t.v. with a scientist who refuted global warming. You won't because the media loves doom and gloom. This stuff is shoved down our throats 24-7 with no discussion at all. (Until recently)

Sure, the media loves doom and gloom....but the one thing they love even more is disagreement! Tune in at virtually any time of day, and the news shows always seem to be able to parade out 2 "experts," each arguing opposite sides of the issue. It doesn't matter if the topic is politics, the economy, gun control, Anna Nicole, whatever! As long as there is disagreement to watch, people will stay tuned.

On the topic of global warming, I have noticed that I'm not seeing this classic tactic pursued much anymore. Have I just missed it, or have the all of the experts given up on fighting the green wave?

 

[UALjan15]

One more thing-- Let's talk ethanol for a minute. Brazil has transferred over to sugar ethanol-- a very clean alternative. (again-- the technology is there) We are considering ethanol-- but it seems the corn lobbyists have a bit more money-- trouble is-- corn ethanol burns only slightly cleaner than gas. I don't know enough about this-- but it appears right now that we are going to finance a switch that really won't help that much.

There are a few reasons why ethanol is getting so much good press lately (well, mostly good). First, it is not such a leap in technology--grow lots of corn, process it, get cars to burn it, and open an ethanol pump at the gas station. Pretty reasonable stuff. Therefore, our politicians can jump on the bandwagon and make some near term progress instead of pouring billions of dollars into something that won't pay dividends until after the next election cycle. Next, you will notice that all of the presidential candidates have jumped onboard, and they're riding this wagon all the way to Iowa--you guessed it, a state that lives and breathes corn. Never mind that by the time you grow, fertilize, harvest, distill, and distribute the ethanol, you've burned all of the oil that you were trying to save.

We need to concentrate on sources of energy with real net energy gains, like solar, wind, hydro, etc. It's too bad the solutions are far away and expensive, but on the other hand, so was the moon back in 1960.

 

[AA717driver]

waveflyer--I don't get all my news from Fox. I get it from a variety of sources. Sounds like you get all your news from NPR. So there...

This is obviously a contentious issue. What many of us who aren't jumping on the GW/CC bandwagon are skeptical of is that this isn't a result that has been arrived at over a period of time. Many of us lived through the "ice age" hysteria of the '70's and found that, despite the "consensus" of MANY scientists, it was simply not the case and the data supporting it was flawed.

Supporters of the "coming ice age" presented data to support their position and poo-poohed those who questioned their findings. We're seeing the same thing happening again. Washed up politicians, movie stars and the socialists are all fighting for this cause. The UN (find me a more corrupt and intellectually vacuous body outside of the African continent and you drink free for the rest of your life...) supporting this cause should be enough to give you pause.

You are making knee-jerk assumptions about those of us who are not willing to take this at face value. You assume we're just drooling "W supporters" who sit around watching Fox News all day--and you're not afraid to deride us as such. Well, you're wrong--and condescending.

As for not being interested in alternative fuels, exactly how do you arrive at that conclusion? I'm incensed at BOTH political parties for being owned by big business and not pursuing domestic sources of oil (which environmental groups are doing the work of the big oil companies) and new, non-fossil-fuel sources of energy (again, the environmental movement killed nuclear power, helping big oil...). Again, you're making an assumption based on a political stereotype.

As for China and India not polluting as much as we do, well, maybe by CO2 standards (apparently the only standard that means anything to the GW/CC crowd) but even in LA your throat and eyes don't burn like they do in Beijing. I've not seen the sun in Shanghai other than through a polluted haze. The Guangzhou Valley WILL SOON BE UNINHABITABLE due to pollution. I'm not aware of any areas in the U.S. that fit that description.

There is no EPA in India. PM Singh admits they have a serious problem with pollution and it needs to be addressed. When is the last time a U.S. President has made the same statement about our environment?

Russia is an environmental disaster. Between no pollution standards (not that any company would adhere to them), wasted dumped in open fields, spent nuclear fuel being stored above ground in poorly secured facilities and the Russian nuclear naval vessels rusting in Murmansk and Vladivostok without having their reactors secured.

We can't control what other countries do? I disagree but we shouldn't hamstring our economy and give up civil rights to embark on a unilateral course of action that will achieve nothing without the cooperation--AND adherence to the rules by the rest of the industrialized countries.

The bottom line is that the rest of the world has got a long way to go in cleaning up their act before I'm willing to gut our economy to satisfy the bleatings of a bunch of Socialists who don't exactly have my best interests at heart.

Back to GW/CC--I have no intention of heading down a road with no road map and nowhere to turn around. That's where the knee-jerkers are taking us. TC

 

[SDF2BUF2MCO]

So who is it behind all this GW stuff? Is it the oil companies? Car companies? The consumer?
While I can agree burning fuel can't be good for the environment, I would think we would "demonize" it the way the US has done with smoking/tobacco if it were that bad (I question the smoking thing since allegedly the Japanese smoke like crazy but seem to still have a healthier lifestyle than the US and Europe - probably due to the lack of twinkies and Coke). I don't see (nor do I expect them to) BP or Ford saying we got to do something about GW. Does green (money that is) trump the well being of the environment? Probably so.

 

[waveflyer]

(shakes head)

We can agree then, there is considerable contention in this issue. Can we just agree that since doubt is in your mind, cleaner is still better? That's the common sense argument i'm posting.

I believe in doing what we can to compel china and India to clean up-- Since we buy so many of their products- you'd think we could have influence. I reference FoxNews- b/c the conventional wisdom coming from them is exactly what you're spouting. I'm sorry you find that condescending. I wholeheartedly disagree that becoming cleaner has to be detrimental to our economy. We just need to stand up to the powers that gain from oil. Our economy would flourish with new ideas and inventions-- yet we're still dealing with 100+year old reciprocating/oil burning technology-- It defies my common sense that we can't use our collective talents and find a better way...

I don't know why that makes me an alarmist, or how that would hurt the economy.

If i made assumptions of you, i apologize. I'd like to conduct myself as if you knew who i was. But please, give me an argument to refute my common sense.

 

[waveflyer]

So who is it behind all this GW stuff? Is it the oil companies? Car companies? The consumer?
quote]

How about reputable scientists?

When we ignore reason and proof- what does that make us?

Two people appear on a show, to talk about the blue sky. One is there to argue that the sky is green. The other that it is blue. Equal time. Never mind the fact that it is blue. And never mind the proof each offers, where it comes from and the intention of each.

My common sense is the only thing i have left. When in doubt the more conservative way wins.

 

[SDF2BUF2MCO]

Wave, for clarification, when I asked who is behind GW I meant who/what is the cause/driving force behind the issue.

 

[waveflyer]

Wave, for clarification, when I asked who is behind GW I meant who/what is the cause/driving force behind the issue.

I took it that way. I think it's the scientists who are the driving force. They're getting louder the longer they aren't being listened to. As the evidence mounts, you are seeing anti-GW sentiments having to concede over time.