Binge Flying

[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.