Global Warming

[saggyjones]

Of course. I'm just sharing some facts. The U.S. isn't an evil empire simply pumping out pollution on a whim as many would like to think.

Well the US pollutes the most, followed by China. But I think we are doing good by moving toward less polluting measures.

 

[HighVoltage123]

I don't know... Al Gore took home academy award for An Inconvenient Truth (2006)

 

[palerider]

OK, so why wouldn't tax credits for research work?

Because the tax credits wouldn't cover the cost of research. Do you know how much research costs? Facilities, equipment, people? Unless you are suggesting that government pay for all the research, and that is an even worse idea than tax credits. It does nothing to address what we pay for goods and increases our tax burden as well.

We would pay the same amount as before for taxes. The only thing cost that would be added to our taxes would be the subsidies.

I am not willing to have anything added to my taxes. I already pay far to much.

People who can afford them will take the tax break and buy a hybrid instead of a purely gas-run car.

Look around the road. The expense is not paying off. A few rich uber liberals are riding around in them feeling like they are saving the earth. No actual good is being done. It is a feel good program.

You seem very against progress in this area. Why is it that you oppose alternative energy? Do you not believe we are polluting?

Alternative energy will emerge when it becomes profitable. Until that time, we are wasting our money for no good reason.

 

[palerider]

And if companies are given subsidies to conduct research, they can still sell their current products but move toward better ones.

Tax breaks are given to consumers who buy hybrid cars, and in the future they'll get tax breaks for buying hydrogen cars or whatever the new technology is.

In light of information released today by Conecticut State University I am going to have to answer this again. As I said on 03/18, hybrids are not doing the environment any favors. Read and see the unintended consequences of trying to force technology before it's time. If the profit motive had been behind building these cars instead of tax credits and feel goodism, these problems would have, in all likelyhood, been anticipated as they would most assuredly cut into profits.


http://clubs.ccsu.edu/recorder/editorial/editorial_item.asp?NewsID=188

 

[palerider]

I don't know... Al Gore took home academy award for An Inconvenient Truth (2006)

And a hollywood award means exactly what?

 

[palerider]

Well the US pollutes the most, followed by China. But I think we are doing good by moving toward less polluting measures.

Actually, china is a larger polluter than we are but you have to take that in the context of us producing over 50% of the world's wealth. It isn't as if we just pollute and don't produce.

 

[saggyjones]

Because the tax credits wouldn't cover the cost of research. Do you know how much research costs? Facilities, equipment, people? Unless you are suggesting that government pay for all the research, and that is an even worse idea than tax credits. It does nothing to address what we pay for goods and increases our tax burden as well.

Major companies already want, and have the capability to, research to get ahead of their competitors. Tax credits would just add to the incentive.

I am not willing to have anything added to my taxes. I already pay far to much.

Fair enough.

Look around the road. The expense is not paying off. A few rich uber liberals are riding around in them feeling like they are saving the earth. No actual good is being done. It is a feel good program.

Addressed in other post.

Alternative energy will emerge when it becomes profitable. Until that time, we are wasting our money for no good reason.

It's already emerging. I just want to see the process sped up.

 

[saggyjones]

In light of information released today by Conecticut State University I am going to have to answer this again. As I said on 03/18, hybrids are not doing the environment any favors. Read and see the unintended consequences of trying to force technology before it's time. If the profit motive had been behind building these cars instead of tax credits and feel goodism, these problems would have, in all likelyhood, been anticipated as they would most assuredly cut into profits.


http://clubs.ccsu.edu/recorder/editorial/editorial_item.asp?NewsID=188

Wow, that's a great article. I'm never buying a hybrid now lol

Well once the technology for hydrogen fuel is further developed I think we'll have a solution there.

 

[saggyjones]

Actually, china is a larger polluter than we are but you have to take that in the context of us producing over 50% of the world's wealth. It isn't as if we just pollute and don't produce.

I know we produce a bunch, but we still put out the most pollution in the world.

Among countries who sent ministers to Monterrey were China and India, whose ballooning demand for energy has made them some of the worst polluters after the United States, which pumps out a quarter of the world's greenhouse gases.

http://www.enn.com/today.html?id=11388

But we do have cleaner production than most countries, it's just the massive amount of stuff we do produce that makes us pollute a lot.

 

[palerider]

Wow, that's a great article. I'm never buying a hybrid now lol

Well once the technology for hydrogen fuel is further developed I think we'll have a solution there.

Hydrogen is a pipe dream. It takes more energy to strip hydrogen from water than the hydrogen could ever produce. No real scientist (physicist & chemist) sees any future for hydrogen powered cars.

 

[TVoffBrainOn]

Science magazine analyzed 928 peer-reviewed scientific papers on global warming published between 1993 and 2003. Not a single one challenged the scientific consensus the earth’s temperature is rising due to human activity.

 

[palerider]

Science magazine analyzed 928 peer-reviewed scientific papers on global warming published between 1993 and 2003. Not a single one challenged the scientific consensus the earth’s temperature is rising due to human activity.

While ignoring studies that show that mars, jupiter, and saturn are experiencing the same sort of warming as earth and other such studies that put serious questions to AGW'ers.

 

[USMC the Almighty]

Science magazine analyzed 928 peer-reviewed scientific papers on global warming published between 1993 and 2003. Not a single one challenged the scientific consensus the earth’s temperature is rising due to human activity.

Someone's watched an "Inconvenient Truth". I'm going to ignore most of what's wrong with this statement. Remember, at one time, the consensus was that the world was flat. Simply because a handful of government-funded scientists believe something that a handful of their other government scientist friends wrote doesn't make it fact.

 

[palerider]

Someone's watched an "Inconvenient Truth". I'm going to ignore most of what's wrong with this statement. Remember, at one time, the consensus was that the world was flat. Simply because a handful of government-funded scientists believe something that a handful of their other government scientist friends wrote doesn't make it fact.

We also shouldn't forget the total scientific consensus on the science of eugenics. Until the end of WWII that is, at which time it suddenly became impossible to find anyone who ever thought that eugenics was a credible science.

Consensus isn't science. Consensus is politics.

 

[TVoffBrainOn]

Someone's watched an "Inconvenient Truth". I'm going to ignore most of what's wrong with this statement. Remember, at one time, the consensus was that the world was flat. Simply because a handful of government-funded scientists believe something that a handful of their other government scientist friends wrote doesn't make it fact.

Wow! great comparison.... i seem to remember a comment you've made previously, it went something like. "you can't compare 18th century standards to modern times." this was in reference to slavery, but i hope you get my point when comparing what "scientists" thought 500 years ago.

i hope you keep an open opinion to global warming. it would be a shame if your mind was already made up.

who hasn't seen an inconvenient truth? did you see it? everyone has seen it.