sundevil777 102
Recommended Posts
kallend 2,230
Out of date, and only partially true when it was written.
www.snopes.com/politics/business/gorehome.asp
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
Quote
and only partially true when it was written.
Well, since he is only partially guilty, then it's OK.
sundevil777 102
Quote
Out of date, and only partially true when it was written.
www.snopes.com/politics/business/gorehome.asp
Oh yes, only 12 times the average of the local area, instead of 20, and the snopes article still confirms that it took him until the end of the year (criticized at the beginning of the year) to install the eco-friendly features.
I thought you were trying to rebut the criticism.
People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am
jakee 1,648
QuoteI never said they are not down.... you skirted the point. THey are down bc of technology not buying offsets!
The purpose of me quoting that source was to show you there are two sides to the coin. How did you not get that as smart as you are?
I'm sorry I can't help your erroeous belief's that my source is not correct.
Why do you think low sulfur technology suddenly started being developed without reference to punitive financial controls?
Do you want to have an ideagasm?
sundevil777 102
QuoteQuoteI never said they are not down.... you skirted the point. THey are down bc of technology not buying offsets!
The purpose of me quoting that source was to show you there are two sides to the coin. How did you not get that as smart as you are?
I'm sorry I can't help your erroeous belief's that my source is not correct.
Why do you think low sulfur technology suddenly started being developed without reference to punitive financial controls?
I must agree, the change wouldn't have happened without the financial/economic pressure/incentive.
That is much of the reason why many environmentalists want the price of energy to rise sharply - it will enable alternative sources to compete. Charles Krauthammer, a noted conservative columnist, even agreed with the logic. He advocates that high energy taxes be coordinated with lowering other taxes (such as the payroll tax), so that the individual would on average not be affected overall. The average person would still have a high incentive to conserve energy, and thus we would move toward alternatives faster and conserve more than we would otherwise. This makes a lot of sense to me, a good trade off, although some will suffer and benefit more than others.
I just want us to stop buying any oil from unfriendly countries, especially from the Middle East. Whatever it takes to make that happen would be worth it.
People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am
[Reply]If Al Gore puts solar panels in his home how does that make you use more oil?
Notice you don't say "When Al Gore puts solar panels." Because everybody knows that he can use non-renewable energy sources and pay himself carbon credits.
He is not in the solar panel business. He's in the carbon credit business. His business model is to suck up power and pay others not to.
[Reply] If he puts in a geothermal heating system how does that make you use more coal?
Notice you didn't say "when he puts in a geothermal system."
It doesn't mean he makes others use more coal. He is not in the geothermal business. He's in the carbon credit business. His business model is to suck up power and pay others not to.
If he super-insulates his house, how does that make you use more natural gas?
Notice you didn't say "when." And he won't do this - mainly because the house is gorgeous and he won't be tearing out the walls and ceiling to do that.
Also - it's fucking Montecito. It doesn't get hot. It doesn't get cold. It has a sea breeze and it isn't humid. So he chose a good location to limit the need for power usage in environmental systems.
[Reply] Al Gore is not stealing your share of renewable energy sources.
No. He's stealing the non-renewable resources and paying people to not participate in using non-renewable resources, thereby putting them in increased competition for limited renewable/carbon lowering energy resources, which drives up the price of it, thereby making him rich enough to use more energy that you and me and ten other put together.
[Reply]He is not taking your share of the wind.
You're correct. He doesn't use wind power. He'll be using, at most, 1% wind to power his second place.
[Reply]He is not taking your share of the Sun.
Right. He isn't using the sun at all, in fact. He's got CH4 to use.
[Reply] He is not taking your share of waves and tides.
Actually, he's trying to make sure the ocean doesn't get any bigger. By buying an ocean view so he can track sea level rise.
[Reply]He is not taking your share of geothermal.
Right. He doesn't use it.
[Reply] He is not stealing your share of methane from rotting garbage,
Right. He uses natural gas shipped in to power plants in Cali.
[Reply] He is not stealing your share of the world's algae.
Right. He uses good old natural gas.
[Reply] He is not stealing your share of the world's switchcgrass.
Right. He uses dirty power - not the green renewable stuff.
[Reply] He is not stealing your share of the world's cornstalks.
He isn't. He doesn't use them. I'm not stealing anyone's share of follicle stimulating hormone, either.
[Reply]Get over it. (You are coming over like a Communist in this thread).
So you agree that government policies designed to limit access to certain products are communist in nature.
[Beer]
I believe we've had a breakthrough. 
My wife is hotter than your wife.
For someone who has said in the past "Al Gore was not their hero", you sure are spending many hours of your day defending him here. Usually when people do NOT think of someone else as their hero, they brush off the criticism towards this figure and they put their time in their day to better use. 
Try not to worry about the things you have no control over
[Reply]
Why do you think low sulfur technology suddenly started being developed without reference to punitive financial controls?
Why do you think low sulfur technology suddenly started being developed without reference to punitive financial controls?
I've got a sneaky suspicion that sulfur emissions may have been a big key to keeping temperature change in check.
If global warming is THE biggest threat, emission of sulfur is a damned easy way of stopping it.
My wife is hotter than your wife.
Quote
Do you SERIOUSLY believe that SO2 emission would have dropped dramatically after rising for decades, in the absence of controls? Really?
I seriously believe that technology is what has reduced the emissions. As for how we got there.... who knows.... without the strong arming the companies may have developed these even faster or may have better tech. now bc they did not have to go through the govt. red tape.
Either way you cannot say just bc C comes after B that B caused C. Post Hoc fallacy.
http://www.skepdic.com/posthoc.html
Life is all about ass....either you're kicking it, kissing it, working it off, or trying to get a piece of it.
Muff Brother #4382 Dudeist Skydiver #000
www.fundraiseadventure.com
Muff Brother #4382 Dudeist Skydiver #000
www.fundraiseadventure.com
jakee 1,648
QuoteI seriously believe that technology is what has reduced the emissions. As for how we got there.... who knows.... without the strong arming the companies may have developed these even faster or may have better tech. now bc they did not have to go through the govt. red tape.
Indeed. I'm sure those companies were all chomping at the bit to spend many millions of dollars on clean technology for the simple pleasure of doing good for mankind .
QuoteEither way you cannot say just bc C comes after B that B caused C. Post Hoc fallacy.
Well, yeah...
Do you want to have an ideagasm?
Quote[Reply]
Why do you think low sulfur technology suddenly started being developed without reference to punitive financial controls?
I've got a sneaky suspicion that sulfur emissions may have been a big key to keeping temperature change in check.
If global warming is THE biggest threat, emission of sulfur is a damned easy way of stopping it.
I've been reading a lot about this recently. Pretty interesting.
Life is all about ass....either you're kicking it, kissing it, working it off, or trying to get a piece of it.
Muff Brother #4382 Dudeist Skydiver #000
www.fundraiseadventure.com
Muff Brother #4382 Dudeist Skydiver #000
www.fundraiseadventure.com
What a hypo.
I've already gone through that, and the important point was different than you describe. Please pay attention.
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites