rehmwa 2 #26 August 16, 2005 Quote>Now, there are a lot of other 'environmental' organizations out there that, I think, just exist to cause trouble and make noise. I put them in quotes because they are no more pro-environment than the "Democratic People's Republic of Korea" is a democracy. Earth First, for example, is a bunch of thugs, and the few people I've met from that organization put activisim first and planning for the future second. So then can you acknowledge that these are the ones Lawrocket and I are focusing on? And even the possibility that if one of your 'locals' gets their orgs to a point where actually have the power to make a difference then your buds will either become corrupt or someone corrupt will take over their cause for selfish reasons? Power corrupts, etc is a major theme in many of your arguments against "right wingers", can you admit that people are people or just stick with only right wingers are corruptable and left wingers are pristine and pure? If not, this is just argument for argument's sake. If so, cool... (no it's not, yes it is, no it's not, yes it is) ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #27 August 16, 2005 I am familiar with Surfriders, who were fairly well known in Santa Barbara when I went to school there. But, Surfriders can't disband. Once its goal is met, it needs to stay together to ensure that the goal is maintained. QuoteBeing a soldier of fortune is like being a ...lawyer Touche... My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #28 August 16, 2005 QuoteCertainly, on a world scale, those who pollute the most will get the short stick of the deal. Ethiopia will not even notice a Kyoto agreement, but the thing is that on a local scale those who stop polluting will benefit themselves as well, and not just the whole world. In any case, any measure toward less pollution, will affect all bussiness of a kind the same so no one will go bankrupt, it will be a challenge alike for all of them. Regarding foreign services, the government can raise taxes for those imprted goods that have an advantage due to diferences in pollution laws, so can compete with national good in equal conditions. I am sure that if there is a will, there is a way. I quite reading after the first sentence. The US would have born the biggest cost while the largest producer of green house gases basicaly got a pass. But you are right about one thing. GW is more about money that science"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,118 #29 August 16, 2005 >The US would have born the biggest cost while the largest >producer of green house gases basicaly got a pass. Dude, we ARE the largest producer of greenhouse gases. See the link for a graph from a recent study. http://cdiac.esd.ornl.gov/trends/emis/graphics/top20_2000.gif Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gawain 0 #30 August 16, 2005 QuoteCertainly, on a world scale, those who pollute the most will get the short stick of the deal. Ethiopia will not even notice a Kyoto agreement, Neither would China or India, the two largest polluters of fossil fuel consumption on the planet. QuoteIn any case, any measure toward less pollution, will affect all bussiness of a kind the same so no one will go bankrupt, it will be a challenge alike for all of them. Um, yes, many (especially small businesses) would be the first to go bankrupt. Larger companies would lay off headcount to absorb the costs of meeting new standards in an unreasonable time-line. RESULT: Higher unemployment, larger strain on government unemployment programs and benefits. Something which raising taxes alone cannot fix. QuoteRegarding foreign services, the government can raise taxes for those imprted goods that have an advantage due to diferences in pollution laws, so can compete with national good in equal conditions. Taxes do not solve problems. They create them. Tariffs do not solve problems, they create them, and hinder friendly relations between nations. QuoteI am sure that if there is a will, there is a way. Not all wills are the best way though. Kyoto was a joke, severely punishing the modern west, and far east and leaving the middle alone with nothing to do to help the planet, even though they have more than a fair share in pollution.So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,118 #31 August 16, 2005 >Neither would China or India, the two largest polluters of fossil fuel >consumption on the planet. Actually, we are the largest petroleum user and the largest emitter of greenhouse gas on the planet. Can't blame this one on someone else. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhys 0 #32 August 16, 2005 if you look at statistics only you will never get the actual truth. just visit a glacier or live next to one, see it/them receeding. go to holland and ask the technitions on the dykes. ask them if the oceans are rising they'll tell you. they definately are. statistics will fuck you up every time. that is why polititions don't see what is happening in the real world. of course the bloody place is warming up. it's so obvious"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #33 August 17, 2005 Quotejust visit a glacier or live next to one, see it/them receeding. I tried to visit one a couple of years ago in Yosemite and it was gone. Melted away. The only thing left behind was a valley and lots of guys wanting to huck themselves off of the carcass of a landscape left in the wake of the death of that glacier. They even have a hotel and gift shops dedicated to the death of the glacier. I mean, had is not been for global warming, Yosemite Valley would be under a mile of ice, dammit. And people say there's no global warming. I won't be happy until Yosemite Valley is hidden once again. Quotego to holland and ask the technitions on the dykes. ask them if the oceans are rising they'll tell you. they definately are. And go to any baseball player and ask them if they've seen a rising fastball. They'll tell you they definitely have. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,118 #34 August 17, 2005 >I tried to visit one a couple of years ago in Yosemite and it was >gone. Melted away. Yep. Fortunate that that change took place over tens of thousands of years; the life there adapted. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #35 August 17, 2005 Quote>I tried to visit one a couple of years ago in Yosemite and it was >gone. Melted away. Yep. Fortunate that that change took place over tens of thousands of years; the life there adapted. True. Just as well, if not better than the life adapted to the cataclysmic change at Mt. St. Helens... My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,118 #36 August 18, 2005 >True. Just as well, if not better than the life adapted to the >cataclysmic change at Mt. St. Helens... Whatever we do to this planet, life will adapt. If we unleashed every nuclear bomb we had, life would adapt. It would, of course, start to favor rats and cockroaches over people, but that's fine - evolution pays no heed to your intelligence, just your ability to survive in a given environment. It's like saying your property will still be there after your house burns down. That's true - but will you still want to live there? If not, perhaps it might be worthwhile to spend just a little bit of time preventing that fire from happening. Even if you're not 100% sure it's going to happen. And even if you know your house won't last 10,000 years. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites