Tide is Turning on Manmade Climate Change

Desh said:
There are enough reasons to limit or end our use of fossil fuels even without global warming.

If it does in the end turn out that science reverses itself on the C02 effects on climate then no harm done huh?

I just dont get the insane level of refusal to accept the prevailing idea on this subject?
Click to expand...

Because the 'prevaling idea' is not necessarily correct.

Nor is it necessarily incorrect, but that's not the point.

But you are right on one thing: there are reasons to limit and end our use of fossil fuels even regardless of global warming. While we still haven't created the a better alternative to plastics yet (that I know, anyway) I would stay that the production of hybrid cars is a step in the right direction.

I do not necessarily disbelieve that this so called climate change is manmade, but I've definitely not seen enough to make me believe it, either. And before I accept the government shooting in the dark with nonsensical programs with my money, I want proof first.

But yes, some people on this board, and this topic, have proven that environmentalism as a religion is very much true. Now, unlike those environmentalist fundies, I will not whitewash all environmentalists this way because I'm better than that. Those who have bothered to actually debate the subject know who they are. Those who cannot be bothered to say anything more than 'lol backwards unthinking nubs' hopefully know who they are.

Onceler said:
There is no logical economic argument for shipping $700 billion overseas...
Click to expand...

I tend to agree that buying all of our oil oversees is not necessarily in our best long term interests. Since you seem to actually care about discussion, I have a question: How do you suppose we avoid this?

You've already mentioned drilling at home, and I agree with that as well.
 
Dung. Cost is not the only consideration. Consider the stupiditty from a security angle of being dependant on hostile countries.
 
Dungheap said:
"But surely we cannot recover the oil as cheaply as other countries. While oil is fungible and the price of the oil remains the same, the cost of extracting the oil and natural gas is not the same. It is oftentimes much cheaper to buy it elsewhere. "

Actually, it is about the same when you factor in having to ship it into the US vs. the oil already being here. Not to mention the strategic advantage to doing so. Add in the fact that it is going to cost the end user the same regardless and this is a no brainer.



"Yeah, but at what cost. Is the money better spent on other job producing industries where we have an actual competitive advantage?"

What competitive advantage? If it costs us $50 a barrell it doesn't matter who we get it from or where it was produced. All it means is that the profit margin of oil companies might be a little lower. The price per barrell remains the same. Actually, when you stop to think about it.... bringing on the new supply should actually reduce the price per barrell. (assuming demand stays the same)



I am somewhat sympathetic to this view. The problem is that the oil producers have economic needs as well and oftentimes need to sell the oil. They can't just sit on it.




You seriously overestimate our capacity to become energy independent.
Click to expand...

No I do not over estimate our capacity to become energy independent. I do not think it is anything that can happen overnight. But we have an estimated 100 year supply of nat gas available. Not to mention all the untapped oil. Add in the advancements in solar, wind, cellulosic biofuel etc.. and we are certainly capable of becoming energy independent.

But to be clear, it will not be easy or quick, but we certainly have the capacity to do so.
 
Dung... side note on your competitive advantage... by your standards we should then leave auto production up to foreign producers, because they have a distinct advantage over US producers.
 
Democrats are dead wrong on the issue.
That's why Obama jogged hugley to the middle in the "idependence from foreign oil" from fossil fuels all together which ain't happnen in our lifetime.
 
Superfreak said:
um... yes they do, they are not cost competitive and they have shitty management. Dump them and let those who do it better and more cost efficient produce the worlds autos
Click to expand...


Again, I'm somewhat sympathetic to this view but not during the worst recession since the Great Depression.
 
Superfreak said:
I don't think it should happen now either, I was just showing you the error in your logic with regards to the oil companies producing here.
Click to expand...


I don't think there is necessarily an error in my logic. If it costs more to extract the oil than the oil is worth it doesn't make any sense to extract the oil. That's all. To do so would require subsidies. Now, there is an argument that the subsidies are worth it from a national security/economic development argument, but I don't think that is the case. I think there is a much stronger national security/economic development argument for the auto bailout at this particular time.
 
Desh said:
If it does in the end turn out that science reverses itself on the C02 effects on climate then no harm done huh?
Click to expand...

No harm done? How about third world citizens dying from diseases that could have been prevented if they had the same technolgies we enjoy in the west. Clean fuel for cooking and heating and electricity. Why do you hate third world people?
 
We all know all this alternative bullshit is mostly bullshit at this point. Foregoing development of our internal resources and hoping the wind will save us is pretty fucking stupid.
 
tinfoil said:
LOL
Look at the thread I started yesterday which has links to the predictions from the same people for both 2007 and 2008, which they predicted to be record setting as well.

What a joke. I'll ask the same question to you that I posed in the other thread.

How many times do they get to make failed predictions before you stop listening to them? Hilarious!!
Click to expand...

LOL
 
tinfoil said:
LOL
Look at the thread I started yesterday which has links to the predictions from the same people for both 2007 and 2008, which they predicted to be record setting as well.

What a joke. I'll ask the same question to you that I posed in the other thread.

How many times do they get to make failed predictions before you stop listening to them? Hilarious!!
Click to expand...

perhaps, i would not quite so quick to laugh - what if reduction of green house gases turns out to be crucial to the survival of human civilization and we had the capability to turn the page...and did not

one thing we can be sure of, if the atlantic escalator breaks, northeastern america and northwestern europe will be disaster areas

dump enough cold or warm water into the atlantic and just that thing will happen - this is not based on global warming or cooling predictions but solid science - it has happened before and will happen again

otoh, perhaps this will be another solution to over population

another possibility is a major volcanic eruption causing another summer or two failing to occur

oh well
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top