Debate Tonight!!!!!!!

245678

Comments

  • polaris_x
    polaris_x Posts: 13,559
    ComeToTX wrote:
    I don't know why it's hard to believe that releasing all sorts of shit into the air for 100+ years would have a negative result.

    Close the garage door and sit in your car while it's running for an hour and it'll kill you! That's the shit we're pumping in the air. Why is it hard to believe that if it kills us it will kill the planet?

    it's hard to believe because a) you don't want to believe it and b) you lack the ability to think critically
  • VINNY GOOMBA
    VINNY GOOMBA Posts: 1,826
    polaris_x wrote:
    ComeToTX wrote:
    I don't know why it's hard to believe that releasing all sorts of shit into the air for 100+ years would have a negative result.

    Close the garage door and sit in your car while it's running for an hour and it'll kill you! That's the shit we're pumping in the air. Why is it hard to believe that if it kills us it will kill the planet?

    it's hard to believe because a) you don't want to believe it and b) you lack the ability to think critically

    I think you may have read this guy wrong. I think he DOES believe that climage change is because of human interaction. That's how I read it anyway. His previous post backs it up.
  • polaris_x
    polaris_x Posts: 13,559
    VINNY GOOMBA wrote:
    polaris_x wrote:
    ComeToTX wrote:
    I don't know why it's hard to believe that releasing all sorts of shit into the air for 100+ years would have a negative result.

    Close the garage door and sit in your car while it's running for an hour and it'll kill you! That's the shit we're pumping in the air. Why is it hard to believe that if it kills us it will kill the planet?

    it's hard to believe because a) you don't want to believe it and b) you lack the ability to think critically

    I think you may have read this guy wrong. I think he DOES believe that climage change is because of human interaction. That's how I read it anyway. His previous post backs it up.

    no ... i got it ... i was just answering his question why people would not believe it ... i should change you to something else ...
  • cincybearcat
    cincybearcat Posts: 16,880
    polaris_x wrote:
    polaris_x wrote:
    ComeToTX wrote:
    I don't know why it's hard to believe that releasing all sorts of shit into the air for 100+ years would have a negative result.

    Close the garage door and sit in your car while it's running for an hour and it'll kill you! That's the shit we're pumping in the air. Why is it hard to believe that if it kills us it will kill the planet?

    it's hard to believe because a) you don't want to believe it and b) you lack the ability to think critically


    no ... i got it ... i was just answering his question why people would not believe it ... i should change you to something else ...

    It's easy to see there could be impact. It's more difficult to decide what you have to do, versus what would be nice to do, versus what is just overkill and doesn't meet a cost-benefit equation.
    hippiemom = goodness
  • polaris_x
    polaris_x Posts: 13,559
    cincybearcat wrote:
    It's easy to see there could be impact. It's more difficult to decide what you have to do, versus what would be nice to do, versus what is just overkill and doesn't meet a cost-benefit equation.

    sorry ...

    but we already see there is an impact not could be
    we already know what we have to do and the only real losers are big corporations
    until you can give me a metric of what a life is worth - overkill shouldn't even be in the discussion
  • mikepegg44
    mikepegg44 Posts: 3,353
    polaris_x wrote:
    VINNY GOOMBA wrote:
    polaris_x wrote:
    it's hard to believe because a) you don't want to believe it and b) you lack the ability to think critically

    I think you may have read this guy wrong. I think he DOES believe that climage change is because of human interaction. That's how I read it anyway. His previous post backs it up.

    no ... i got it ... i was just answering his question why people would not believe it ... i should change you to something else ...

    "the royal we"? :lol:


    anyway, the best we can do is treat the earth like we treat our houses...your mother at home would only clean up after you for so long before she exploded, mother nature isn't any different. Even a half hearted effort will have lasting changes...but I digress from my main point, Copernicus be damned, science is heresy.
    I will say this, as soon as it becomes profitable, private industry will make the switch to clean energy, just hope we can hold on that long. The more the government looks like it is forcing people to change rather than trying to massage the market forces into speeding up the green energy progress, they will meet resistance.
    that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
    It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
    - Joe Rogan
  • VINNY GOOMBA
    VINNY GOOMBA Posts: 1,826
    polaris_x wrote:
    no ... i got it ... i was just answering his question why people would not believe it ... i should change you to something else ...

    My bad. I definitely didn't get YOU there for a second. :)
  • cincybearcat
    cincybearcat Posts: 16,880
    polaris_x wrote:
    cincybearcat wrote:
    It's easy to see there could be impact. It's more difficult to decide what you have to do, versus what would be nice to do, versus what is just overkill and doesn't meet a cost-benefit equation.

    sorry ...

    but we already see there is an impact not could be
    we already know what we have to do and the only real losers are big corporations
    until you can give me a metric of what a life is worth - overkill shouldn't even be in the discussion


    Man you are a killer for semantics. All I meant was the science of it shows that is could be an impact (CO2 emissions can create a warming effect). The further studies that it is effecting our environment, seems like a lot of them out there. So, even if you don't think it is causing any climate change, a lot of scientists do, the basic science shows it could, so why not do something about it?

    I don't think overkill should ever be out of the discussion. Cars kill people, so should we limit all driving to speeds that will not cause fatal injuries? What speed would that be exactly?
    hippiemom = goodness
  • brianlux
    brianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 43,671
    Thank you ComeToTx and cincybearcat for filling me in on that part of the debate.

    I try to understand that there are people who aren't convinced that humans have played a major role in climate change- there is a lot of misleading info out there that says otherwise. Two of my best friends doubt human influenced climate change. Now I don't mean at all to sound pretentious or give the impression that I have all the answers but I have read literally thousands of pages on the subject, have corresponded with a number of climate science writers and a few scientists with whom I am friends or am related to, and have read both sides of the argument. I cannot fathom the possibility that climate change is NOT real and I cannot fathom that climate change is NOT hugely human caused. I wish I could believe otherwise because without immediate action, the outlook is not good. And, as Bill McKibben say in his book EAARTH, my biggest fear is that this knowledge will cause some people to throw their hands up in the air and say, " why bother". We still can and should make a positive difference! I hope some of our presidential hopefuls feel the same way.
    "It's a sad and beautiful world"
    -Roberto Benigni

  • Jason P
    Jason P Posts: 19,327
    brianlux wrote:
    T And, as Bill McKibben say in his book EAARTH, my biggest fear is that this knowledge will cause some people to throw their hands up in the air and say, " why bother". We still can and should make a positive difference! I hope some of our presidential hopefuls feel the same way.
    I throw my hands up in the air and say, "Until China gets their environmental standards to the current U.S. standards, why bother". Why choke ourselves out by increasing our already stringent EPA regulations so the rest of the world can increase their production (AND unregulated pollution) to fill in for supply that the world demands.

    The world wants and demands stuff. If environmental standards are raised to the point that a U.S. business closes, that doesn't change the fact that the world wants stuff. A company will rise to fill in the gap (most likely in Asia somewhere) and they sure as hell won't be filling out environmental permits.

    Instead of increasing regulations and penalties, why don't we focus on setting standards and incentives? Why not make it profitable for a company to be green?

    (actually, I know that answer .... government spending is out of control and congress needs every dime they can wring out of us)
    Be Excellent To Each Other
    Party On, Dudes!
  • brianlux
    brianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 43,671
    Jason P wrote:
    Why not make it profitable for a company to be green?

    That would be an excellent start and green markets are starting up- the question is- how fast? And yes, people want stuff but when what they really need is food, most "stuff" will seem just what it is, stuff. Peak oil will cure us of our addiction to so many non-essentials. Asia will not continue endlessly producing these things either- they too will run short of cheap energy (oil) and, sadly, many Asian countries have already trashed their environment. Hopefully they too will get on board with greening before it's too late. Again, why EVERYBODY isn't is beyond me. :(
    "It's a sad and beautiful world"
    -Roberto Benigni

  • Idris
    Idris Posts: 2,317
    Next debate this tuesday, 18th Oct. CNN.
  • CH156378
    CH156378 Posts: 1,539
    Idris wrote:
    Next debate this tuesday, 18th Oct. CNN.

    i love a good spectacle!
  • Idris
    Idris Posts: 2,317
    BuMpItY BuMp...
  • CH156378
    CH156378 Posts: 1,539
    who are these fucking people? crowd included.
  • CH156378
    CH156378 Posts: 1,539
    thats what we need! a state bidding war on nuclear waste! let the markets work!
  • gimmesometruth27
    gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 24,405
    CH156378 wrote:
    who are these fucking people? crowd included.
    they cheered when cain repeated "if you don't have a job and you aren't rich it is your fault" postion...

    the crowd was predominantly white middle aged folks.

    perry and romney had a few testy exchanges....romney dissed perry saying "rick is coming off a couple of bad debates" and my reply while watching it on tv was "WOOT!!" :lol:
    "You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry."  - Lincoln

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • gimmesometruth27
    gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 24,405
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/1 ... 18798.html

    :roll:
    "You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry."  - Lincoln

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • cincybearcat
    cincybearcat Posts: 16,880
    gimmesometruth27 wrote:
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/18/herman-cain-unemployed_n_1018798.html

    :roll:


    He's not all wrong, and certainly not all right.

    But reality aside, what makes him and his people think this is a good message to win an election?
    hippiemom = goodness
  • VINNY GOOMBA
    VINNY GOOMBA Posts: 1,826
    cincybearcat wrote:
    gimmesometruth27 wrote:
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/18/herman-cain-unemployed_n_1018798.html

    :roll:


    He's not all wrong, and certainly not all right.

    But reality aside, what makes him and his people think this is a good message to win an election?

    He's playing to the base right now to get the nomination. He will change his tune if he gets the nom and ends up going toe to toe with Obama-- he even mostly agreed with Ron Paul's response to that question, so he's already given himself an out. Politics is all about the art of doublespeak. I don't see Herman staying the frontrunner for much longer. I'm hoping for a scenario where all of the neo-cons up there just beat themselves up to the point of implosion and my man Ron sneaks in and steals it-- or, he makes The GOP the ultimatum: nominate me, or I run third party. He knows for damn sure that the country will likely be no better off with any of those other clowns in office, nor Obama, so if he doesn't get the nomination it's likely to be status quo for another 4 years no matter what. He's retiring from politics if he doesn't get the nomination, so he doesn't owe The Republican Party or anyone else anything come November of next year-- unless he gets elected :)

Categories