peer reviwed refutation of CO2 theory

The reality is, regardless of anthropogenic global warming or not, putting chemicals into the air, even "natural" ones at a level that is far higher than in nature is detrimental to the environment.

Shoot, even in humans if you drink too much water at a shot you will die. And "dihydrogen oxide" is definitely a natural compound. Just because humans aren't creating global warming, if such is the case, doesn't mean it isn't the responsible thing to do to get green.

What most people object to is the same thing people object to with Bush, the fear mongering.
 
tinfoil said:
Dano's thread was posting information. He posted about the condition of the ice mass. CO2 theorists are still crying chicken little EVERY DAY. Dan o and I don't want to see a bevy of taxes enacted in the name of this craptastic theory. You may be unconcerned about you economic power in the future, but i'm fucking poor, so excuse me if I have to worry about my future.
Click to expand...

Dano has made the argument that going green will kill our economy, and has even refuted that spending $700 billion in the Middle East has nothing to do with our national security.

I think you're wrong on the economic argument. I think that green will be the new internet in terms of creating a boom, and I can only see positives economically in keeping more of that $700 billion on domestic sources of energy & new technology. I have never been one to support more taxation on energy costs, and have always advocated for tax credits for R&D and similar measures. You can argue that the gov't will make up for that revenue by taxing the rest of us, but if you can't see the economic benefit of transitioning to green domestic sources, or the national security benefit, I can't do much for you.
 
Onceler said:
Dano has made the argument that going green will kill our economy, and has even refuted that spending $700 billion in the Middle East has nothing to do with our national security.

I think you're wrong on the economic argument. I think that green will be the new internet in terms of creating a boom, and I can only see positives economically in keeping more of that $700 billion on domestic sources of energy & new technology. I have never been one to support more taxation on energy costs, and have always advocated for tax credits for R&D and similar measures. You can argue that the gov't will make up for that revenue by taxing the rest of us, but if you can't see the economic benefit of transitioning to green domestic sources, or the national security benefit, I can't do much for you.
Click to expand...

It will be a boom in regulatory jobs and greenshirt nazis with government jobs. It's not market growth, it's fascist growth.
 
Onceler said:
Dano has made the argument that going green will kill our economy, and has even refuted that spending $700 billion in the Middle East has nothing to do with our national security.

I think you're wrong on the economic argument. I think that green will be the new internet in terms of creating a boom, and I can only see positives economically in keeping more of that $700 billion on domestic sources of energy & new technology. I have never been one to support more taxation on energy costs, and have always advocated for tax credits for R&D and similar measures. You can argue that the gov't will make up for that revenue by taxing the rest of us, but if you can't see the economic benefit of transitioning to green domestic sources, or the national security benefit, I can't do much for you.
Click to expand...

No doubt green will be an industry of huge proportions, but the funding is coming right from the pockets of the poor.

and if you use the old trick of comparing the ratio of income to carbon tax, the future looks bleak for the poor. Every ladder they encounter will have an additional component keeping them from it.

Need a car to get that job? Nope, not you! You're too poor to afford the carbon. You better get a bus pass!


This is what I find disturbing about the warmers. You, no doubt, think this is funny and unrealistic. You have no problem believing people will happily be able to go green.
 
tinfoil said:
and it's all based on poor science and ignorant zealots
Click to expand...

No it isn't. A lot of the "base" of the green movement is based on AGW, but there are people from all spectrums supporting it now - from the military, conservative outfits like the Heritage Foundation, etc.

It's a smart move for our national security, and for our economy. I don't argue AGW anymore; there are more compelling, tangible reasons for accelerating the transition.
 
Green will be awesome for growth, if people let them make it not suck. Like the Tesla, the first really green car that doesn't suck.

The light bulbs suck, the cars overwhelmingly look like matchbox cars designed by the blind and fit like them too.

If the government mandates it, we'll wind up with all the crap and none of the cool. I prefer to have the cool and to do it because I like it rather than have the suck and be forced to do it because people are in a panic.

I'm putting solar on my house, not because I want to save the world, but because I want to be independent of the power grid. I'd like a car that uses electricity because I'll be able to generate my own power and use my car even if gas is unavailable.

I'm not out to save the world, and I don't need to be frightened into buying stuff that will go towards my goals.

I'm for it because it really is a national security issue, and if America becomes the producer of the new technology we'll rock for another century or two pWning the economies of the rest of this rock for a long time to come.
 
Damocles said:
Green will be awesome for growth, if people let them make it not suck. Like the Tesla, the first really green car that doesn't suck.

The light bulbs suck, the cars overwhelmingly look like matchbox cars designed by the blind and fit like them too.

If the government mandates it, we'll wind up with all the crap and none of the cool. I prefer to have the cool and to do it because I like it rather than have the suck and be forced to do it because people are in a panic.

I'm putting solar on my house, not because I want to save the world, but because I want to be independent of the power grid. I'd like a car that uses electricity because I'll be able to generate my own power and use my car even if gas is unavailable.

I'm not out to save the world, and I don't need to be frightened into buying stuff that will go towards my goals.

I'm for it because it really is a national security issue, and if America becomes the producer of the new technology we'll rock for another century or two pWning the economies of the rest of this rock for a long time to come.
Click to expand...

I'm just plain old cheap. I don't want to pay for worthless crap, which is how I see carbon taxes in any shape. Call it an environmental tax and I'll resist less.

I equate carbon fear mongering with chick tract style propaganda.

using some unprovable/untestable consequences to frighten people is BS
 
Damocles said:
Green will be awesome for growth, if people let them make it not suck. Like the Tesla, the first really green car that doesn't suck.

The light bulbs suck, the cars overwhelmingly look like matchbox cars designed by the blind and fit like them too.

If the government mandates it, we'll wind up with all the crap and none of the cool. I prefer to have the cool and to do it because I like it rather than have the suck and be forced to do it because people are in a panic.

I'm putting solar on my house, not because I want to save the world, but because I want to be independent of the power grid. I'd like a car that uses electricity because I'll be able to generate my own power and use my car even if gas is unavailable.

I'm not out to save the world, and I don't need to be frightened into buying stuff that will go towards my goals.

I'm for it because it really is a national security issue, and if America becomes the producer of the new technology we'll rock for another century or two pWning the economies of the rest of this rock for a long time to come.
Click to expand...

How will green be awesome for growth? Government mandated purchases?
 
AssHatZombie said:
How will green be awesome for growth? Government mandated purchases?
Click to expand...
Did you even read the post, are you capable? It was against government mandated green, just an FYI for those with ADD.

As for how it will be huge growth... Because it is an emerging market. If you can create the wave that everybody else will ride you will make the largest profit.
 
Damocles said:
Did you even read the post, are you capable? It was against government mandated green, just an FYI for those with ADD.

As for how it will be huge growth... Because it is an emerging market. If you can create the wave that everybody else will ride you will make the largest profit.
Click to expand...

Most people are figuring out how to surive damo. I'm glad you can afford the gadgetry. Most can't.

And pleas check you condescension, assplug.
 
AssHatZombie said:
How will green be awesome for growth? Government mandated purchases?
Click to expand...

I can see how the circulating money would be considered activity, but it's not being created, just shifted.

Taking a quater from your right pocket and putting two dimes and a nickel in your left pocket does you how much good?
 
AssHatZombie said:
Most people are figuring out how to surive damo. I'm glad you can afford the gadgetry. Most can't.

And pleas check you condescension, assplug.
Click to expand...
It was matching condescension to yours. If you don't want it, don't supply it. At least read what I write before trying to refute it, it will net you a better response.

I'm adding it a bit at a time because that is what I can afford. Most people don't take the long view, nor have an urge to become independent of the grid.
 
Damocles said:
It was matching condescension to yours. If you don't want it, don't supply it. At least read what I write before trying to refute it, it will net you a better response.

I'm adding it a bit at a time because that is what I can afford. Most people don't take the long view, nor have an urge to become independent of the grid.
Click to expand...
I just believe it's foolishness to believe green technology is going to be a big growth industry without a government order making it so.
 
AssHatZombie said:
I just believe it's foolishness to believe green technology is going to be a big growth industry without a government order making it so.
Click to expand...
Again a sign you didn't read the post, which is a sign of condescension. Especially if you wish to attempt to "refute" what I said. It was in the post.

I'll bullet point it for you.

- If you make it not suck, people will like to buy it.
- If you mandate it, it will guarantee it sucks, so don't.
- There are reasons to buy green other than fear and government force.


That was pretty much my post in a nutshell. If you want to flesh in the ideas, read the post.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top