Are you scientifically literate?

[orogenicman]

"I would just like to see some hard evidence before the whole world jumps on a multi trillion dollar bandwagon in an attempt to revamp the way business is done in the world today."

Palerider sees no problem with the way "business" is done today:

 

[orogenicman]

But has a huge problem with our potential future:

 

[palerider]

"I would just like to see some hard evidence before the whole world jumps on a multi trillion dollar bandwagon in an attempt to revamp the way business is done in the world today."

Palerider sees no problem with the way "business" is done today:

Glad to see that you took my advice and are trying out some new logical fallacies. The various ad hominems and confusing cause and effect were growing tiresome. The above is a fine example of a nice little fallacy known as a hasty generalization. Do you need a defintion, or can you look it up on your own?

 

[orogenicman]

Glad to see that you took my advice and are trying out some new logical fallacies. The various ad hominems and confusing cause and effect were growing tiresome. The above is a fine example of a nice little fallacy known as a hasty generalization. Do you need a defintion, or can you look it up on your own?

PR, even if global warming were not a reality, which vision, above, would you prefer for your children, and their children?

 

[palerider]

PR, even if global warming were not a reality, which vision, above, would you prefer for your children, and their children?

Business as usual (which by the way is nothing like your pictures) or tossing their hard earned income away on pie in the sky innefficent, ecological disasters like windmills and electric cars? Business as usual of course. I spent a great deal of money putting my kids through college so that they could enjoy life. The last thing I want to see is them reduced to hunter gatherers because a bunch of hand wringing emotionalist wrecked the world economy based on a hoax.

I guess you want to see your kids fighting with skid row bums in bread lines a la the old soviet union.

 

[orogenicman]

Business as usual (which by the way is nothing like your pictures) or tossing their hard earned income away on pie in the sky innefficent, ecological disasters like windmills and electric cars? Business as usual of course. I spent a great deal of money putting my kids through college so that they could enjoy life. The last thing I want to see is them reduced to hunter gatherers because a bunch of hand wringing emotionalist wrecked the world economy based on a hoax.

I guess you want to see your kids fighting with skid row bums in bread lines a la the old soviet union.

So you are saying that there are no smoke stacks belching out filth, no mountain top mining wrecking the landscape and polluting our streams, no leaking underground storage tanks, or conversely, no wind farms, no solar power plants, no electric or hybrid automobiles? Well, if that's the case, the only question left to ask if what planet are you living on?

 

[PLC1]

Wouldn't it be terrible if we were to become energy independent while reducing pollution associated with energy production, and then discover that it was all in vain since global warming was really all a natural phenomenon anyway?

 

[BigRob]

Wouldn't it be terrible if we were to become energy independent while reducing pollution associated with energy production, and then discover that it was all in vain since global warming was really all a natural phenomenon anyway?

If it comes at the expense of our economic prosperity... yes.

When the free market can make alternative energy competitive, I am all for it.

 

[orogenicman]

If it comes at the expense of our economic prosperity... yes.

When the free market can make alternative energy competitive, I am all for it.

The notion that it has to come at the expense of the economy really is the red herring of all red herrings. The technology is coming. Much of is it already here. The only question is are you going to belp make it happen or are you going to let someone else like China design, build, and install it? Because if we don't do it, someone else will. We can either be leaders or losers. Your choice.

 

[BigRob]

The notion that it has to come at the expense of the economy really is the red herring of all red herrings. The technology is coming. Much of is it already here. The only question is are you going to belp make it happen or are you going to let someone else like China design, build, and install it? Because if we don't do it, someone else will. We can either be leaders or losers. Your choice.

"If" it comes at the expense of our economic prosperity... I don't see that as being a "red herring."

Yes, some of the technology is here, and more of it is coming, but show me any form of alternative energy that can meet our demands currently... there is not one.

If I produced a jet engine that could run without fuel (obviously a poor example), that would be fantastic... If I charged one billion dollars per engine, no one would want it.

It does not matter if the technology exists, it matters if it can compete on the open market... if it cannot, then it cannot, and that is the end of it.

 

[orogenicman]

"If" it comes at the expense of our economic prosperity... I don't see that as being a "red herring."

Yes, some of the technology is here, and more of it is coming, but show me any form of alternative energy that can meet our demands currently... there is not one.

If I produced a jet engine that could run without fuel (obviously a poor example), that would be fantastic... If I charged one billion dollars per engine, no one would want it.

It does not matter if the technology exists, it matters if it can compete on the open market... if it cannot, then it cannot, and that is the end of it.

Well, it certainly can't compete if roadblocks are thrown up to prevent it from ever happening, can it? No one is saying that it can or should happen over night. Likely, it will take at least 30 years to make the transition. And while the end result might look revolutionary, certainly the timeline is nothing even close to being disruptive. But what is the alternative. Dirty oil? Dirty coal? Dirty Nukes? When you consider the environmental damage and the potenital environmental damage those technologies have caused and likely will continue to cause, compared to the real clean technologies of wind and solar, to me, there is no comparison.

In the past 22 years, the U.S. spent 100s of billions of dollars cleaning up after the messes the oil companies made with their leaking underground storage tanks. Kentucky alone had 80,000 of them. Did the oil companies foot the bill for this? Well, that depends on who you ask. They will say that they did. But the fact is that you did, at the pump. And the fact is that you will continue to pay at the pump, and with contaminated soil and groundwater because you will continue to have to use underground storage tanks until they are replaced altogether by the next technology that comes along. And that technology won't go online until we insist that they do.

So you have to ask yourself, is continuing to use dirty energy worth the cost to human health and human lives? The cost of using petroleum and coal as energy sources goes far beyond the price we pay at the pump and when we receive our electricity and heating bills. These are the issues that are before us all, and must be addressed sooner rather than later.

 

[palerider]

So you are saying that there are no smoke stacks belching out filth, no mountain top mining wrecking the landscape and polluting our streams, no leaking underground storage tanks, or conversely, no wind farms, no solar power plants, no electric or hybrid automobiles? Well, if that's the case, the only question left to ask if what planet are you living on?

So you do want to be a hunter gatherer? Have you ever actually tried it? I taught wilderness survival for some years, and believe me, you wouldn't like it. You are more useful to nature dead than you are alive. Are you aware that electric cars are an ecologocal disaster in the making? Between the manufacturing of those batteries and disposal of them, they are a nightmare but you gobble up the claim that they are good for the environment. And how many dead raptors do you need to see before you grasp that windmills are a bad plan? Or are you really not concerned about wildlife unless it suits your agenda a la AGW?

Your complaints are hypocritical at the very least. By your presence here, it is clear that you are making full use of modern technology. I dare say that I am greener than you. I live on a small working farm of about 50 acres. I heat my barns with passive solar via stacks of 50 gallon drums filled with water in bermed earth facing south. I use wind to pump water for all of my use except drinking. I grow or hunt roughly 80% of all of the vegetable and animal products that I consume as food, and I have solar panels on my roof that generate enough electricity that there are periods where the power company is paying me. Additionally, I have protected the 30 acres of hardwood forest on my land in my will.

One must wonder what you have done to improve your own little corner of the world. You guys are big on talk but very rarely walk the walk. Your pope algore is a prime example.

 

[palerider]

Wouldn't it be terrible if we were to become energy independent while reducing pollution associated with energy production, and then discover that it was all in vain since global warming was really all a natural phenomenon anyway?

More fantasy. You are living in a dream world. If you are going to have a fantasy, make it a big one. Perpetual motion. Surplus energy. According to the hypothesis of AGW, it is possible. All you need to do is figure out how to capture that excess energy before it is re radiated from the earth.

 

[palerider]

The notion that it has to come at the expense of the economy really is the red herring of all red herrings. The technology is coming. Much of is it already here. The only question is are you going to belp make it happen or are you going to let someone else like China design, build, and install it? Because if we don't do it, someone else will. We can either be leaders or losers. Your choice.

Not it isn't. All we have is expensive, inefficient science experiments funded by government grants. Nothing that could even begin to replace our energy demands.

 

[palerider]

Well, it certainly can't compete if roadblocks are thrown up to prevent it from ever happening, can it?

Roadblocks like the fact that they are too expensive and produce far to little energy to be practical?