bobbob1313 Posted October 14, 2007 Share Posted October 14, 2007 We can move an iceberg to the lake. Then when it melts, it'll go to a place that needs it! You are welcome, Al Gore. Link to post Share on other sites
Good Old Neon Posted October 14, 2007 Share Posted October 14, 2007 The vast majority of the skeptics, not coincidentally, are, in some way, employed by or lobby for the oil industry or industry in general. Don Link to post Share on other sites
isadorah Posted October 15, 2007 Author Share Posted October 15, 2007 I also believe that (given it were caused by humans), any proposed solution shouldn't be worse than the warming. I've been away, and interesting to see how this thread has developed. I have a question, how are the solutions being proposed right now worse than the affects of climate change (I use that phrase because global warming is not just about the planet getting hotter)? How would higher standards for fuel efficiency be detrimental? How is using vegetable based cleaning products, that work just as effectively and are far less toxic, worse than using caustic petroleum based products? How is having a lightbulb that uses 70% less energy and a longer shelf-life while providing the same quality of light as an incandecent bulb worse? There is a finite amount of oil in the world today. The majority of that oil is in war-torn countries. If we as a planet reduce or elliminate our need for this non-sustainable resource, would that not relieve some of the cause to the violence and problems between some countries/within some countries? Oil use aside, human-based climage change aside, let's say all of the science is wrong, or it's not as crucial as we think to change now, please explain to me how making small changes such as the things I noted above hurts our planet, hurts people? If we continue to inovate and look for new, improved, and better ways to live that allow us to have fewer landfills, breathe cleaner air, and live safer lives, shouldn't we do it. Where is the harm in doing something that is safer for the environment which equals safer for the human beings living in that environment? What is it hurting, who is it hurting? Why not do these things? And I still don't understand this whole Al is political thing. The man is a private citizen. He is not an elected official employed by a government. Yes, he had a career in politics, but he is currently not an employed politician. Why is it that he is still being called political? Are other former politicians held to the same standard? Jimmy Carter was recently in Darfur working to help stop the autrocities, is that political? If you have a job in one field and then switch to something else completely, are you still identified with that previous job. Why is there a double-standard when it comes to Al? Then again, I still don't understand how bettering people's lives and making the world a better place without hurting anyone in the process is 1) political and 2) a bad thing. Link to post Share on other sites
Beltmann Posted October 15, 2007 Share Posted October 15, 2007 What is it hurting, who is it hurting? Why not do these things?Those activities will disrupt the industries that currently stabilize our economy--and honestly, I don't care if we annihilate the planet, as long as I can wear cheap Nikes while it happens. Link to post Share on other sites
embiggen Posted October 15, 2007 Share Posted October 15, 2007 We can move an iceberg to the lake. Then when it melts, it'll go to a place that needs it! You are welcome, Al Gore. Link to post Share on other sites
boywiththorninside Posted October 15, 2007 Share Posted October 15, 2007 How is global warning political? Well, to effect real change will likely require government regulation of both industry and individual lives. Additionally, there are (believe it or not) conflicting views on the issue, and, as usually happens these days, these opposing sides often treat each other with derision. E.G. - My scientists are more credible, you don't believe in global warming but you believe in God, hah!, Al Gore flies in private jets!, Lear jet liberals!, etc., etc. This might not be a text book definition, but the way I see it: potential government involvement + contempt for opposing views/name calling = a political issue There was a recent court case in England about "An Inconvenient Truth" which was based almost solely on the fact that global warming is seen as a political issue. The individual who brought the suit did not want his children to be - his words - "indoctrinated by (Gore's) political spin." BBC: Gore film in schools Sadly, I do think the issue is political. I wish it wasn't. How is private citizen Al political? I think the fact that Al's clout as spokesman for global warming is derived from his being a former Senator, VP, and winner of the popular Presidential election makes him, and everything he now does, political. We don't listen to Al because he's regular old Al from Tennessee, we listen to Al because of the political resume' I laid out. Right or wrong, once a politician, always a politician. Link to post Share on other sites
bjorn_skurj Posted October 15, 2007 Share Posted October 15, 2007 I find it interesting that certain folks put their faith and belief in a sky god, a sky god for which there is zero evidence, yet, show them actual scientific proof of something, be it evolution, climate change, etc, and suddenly, they Link to post Share on other sites
Good Old Neon Posted October 15, 2007 Share Posted October 15, 2007 My point was that you have 2 standards. When it comes to global warming skeptics, you dismiss them as being backed by oil companies, but if anyone attacks Al Gore, they're shooting the messenger. And I know you like to take shots at religion every chance you get, but that really has nothing to do with the discussion. I know that you have it all figured out. There's no higher being than an acorn. You'll just have to put up with the rest of us morons worshipping our "sky gods." Many of the proposed solutions are good things. Many (such as ethanol) are not. The main problem is the false sense of urgency. We should try to get off oil, and use renewable energy sources and even *gasp* nucular. But trying to do all that by next Wednesday because New York's going to be under water by Thursday is a lot more expensive than gradually switching over. These changes come at a great economic cost, and it's only worth it if they have a big enough effect on the climate to balance out that cost. Because there are two standards Link to post Share on other sites
Good Old Neon Posted October 15, 2007 Share Posted October 15, 2007 There's no higher being than an acorn. Hey, at least acorns are real and provide a demonstrable benefit, unlike sky god. Link to post Share on other sites
Spawn's dad Posted October 15, 2007 Share Posted October 15, 2007 There are not two standards. There are not two groups. Not everything and everyone fits so neatly in the the boxes that sustain your need for debate. Do you really believe that there isn't a demonstrable beneft to people's personal belief in god? what about meditation? any form of spirituality at all? In the interest of honesty I should say that while I generaly like acorns I have met some I have not liked (that one that ended up in my croc comes to mind). I think the same can be said of my impression of those with faith. Although I tend to blame any of their short comings on their personal psychology and their inability to work it out in therapy. I tend to think the big guy doesn't have much to do with those who shout from roof tops, whether about his greatness or the wonder of acorns. Link to post Share on other sites
Good Old Neon Posted October 15, 2007 Share Posted October 15, 2007 There are not two standards. There are not two groups. Not everything and everyone fits so neatly in the the boxes that sustain your need for debate. Do you really believe that there isn't a demonstrable beneft to people's personal belief in god? what about meditation? any form of spirituality at all? In the interest of honesty I should say that while I generaly like acorns I have met some I have not liked (that one that ended up in my croc comes to mind). I think the same can be said of my impression of those with faith. Although I tend to blame any of their short comings on their personal psychology and their inability to work it out in therapy. I tend to think the big guy doesn't have much to do with those who shout from roof tops, whether about his greatness or the wonder of acorns. For individuals, yes, I do think it provides a benefit. However, when the final chapter of the book of man is written, and all is said and done, I fear our end will come by the hand of religion, a fight to the death over whose sky god is the real sky god. And so, in the end, the damage caused by it, religion, will far outweigh any benefits. Our salvation, if it is to come, can only come by the hand of man, and not some ephemeral other. Link to post Share on other sites
Spawn's dad Posted October 15, 2007 Share Posted October 15, 2007 The downfall of mankind will be hubris. The form that takes is irrelevant.Without eradicating me and mine mankind will fall in one way or another. Link to post Share on other sites
OOO Posted October 15, 2007 Share Posted October 15, 2007 We have to eradicate Let it Be just because it has "I Me Mine" on it? Link to post Share on other sites
Good Old Neon Posted October 15, 2007 Share Posted October 15, 2007 The downfall of mankind will be hubris. The form that takes is irrelevant.Without eradicating me and mine mankind will fall in one way or another. It certainly is relevant when it is avoidable. Religion has taken us as far as it can Link to post Share on other sites
j4lackey Posted October 15, 2007 Share Posted October 15, 2007 Well, anyway, congratulations to Al Gore. Link to post Share on other sites
EL the Famous Posted October 15, 2007 Share Posted October 15, 2007 where is cryptique and EL to the rescue? what the hell am I supposed to do? i believe in skygod. science bad. uggah buggah. all i can offer up is this SAB: ... and Link to post Share on other sites
Atticus Posted October 15, 2007 Share Posted October 15, 2007 what's with the "sky god" label? Are you ok with "earth god" worship ("rain god"? "fire god"?)? Link to post Share on other sites
OOO Posted October 15, 2007 Share Posted October 15, 2007 I wouldn't call the universe revolving around the earth a core principle... And what religion thinks humans are divine? Link to post Share on other sites
EL the Famous Posted October 15, 2007 Share Posted October 15, 2007 I wouldn't call the universe revolving around the earth a core principle... And what religion thinks humans are divine? SKYGODISM Link to post Share on other sites
Spawn's dad Posted October 15, 2007 Share Posted October 15, 2007 I must have missed that course on how the 'core principles' of all religions are the same and are designed to go against science. Imagine my shock thinking they were primarily ethical systems and programs for personal development. If you think religion has taken people as far as it can you should perhaps try actually practicing the core tenets of some religious or spiritual system and get back to us in a decade or two. Link to post Share on other sites
EL the Famous Posted October 15, 2007 Share Posted October 15, 2007 WHY DO YOU HATE SCIENCE? Link to post Share on other sites
Good Old Neon Posted October 15, 2007 Share Posted October 15, 2007 I wouldn't call the universe revolving around the earth a core principle... And what religion thinks humans are divine? It was, at one time, a core belief Link to post Share on other sites
JUDE Posted October 15, 2007 Share Posted October 15, 2007 I don't know what makes me more uncomfortable, religious zealots preaching to convert me or anti-religion zealots preaching to convert me. Link to post Share on other sites
embiggen Posted October 15, 2007 Share Posted October 15, 2007 I think it may be conceivable that man may ultimately fight over water. we all need water to sustain life. if the world's fresh water supply dwindles, as we can see with the drying up of Lake Lanier, that would be catastrophic. just throwing that out there... Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts