On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 7:50 PM, Sam wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 7:07 PM, denstar wrote: >> >>>> The question is, could "we" be changing our environment? >>> >>> No it wasn't >> >> It is the question at the heart of the debate, esse. > > The heart of the debate is fudging science to earn billions in grants > and change world economies by trillions. > But we can focus on your all absorbing tangent if you'd like.
Aren't we talking about the data here? You think it's all just BS now (and has been)? Do these emails prove we have no impact? That there's nothing to worry about? >> So, are we? You gonna say we don't have a measurable impact, like Rob >> apparently is? > > Yeah, Pollution sucks and I hate breathing it, but I don't think > cap-n-trade will change that, I'm pretty sure it'll make it worse. Maybe. >> "Plus cheap labor" --- yeah. That's a tough one. :) > > Minimum wage laws in China? Good luck with that. China is producing cheap solar panels. They're going electric. >> I think they call it "leading by example", tho I don't practice that. >> Do what I say! > > So you ride a bicycle to work? Not often. I mostly try not to waste water, or paper, and I stopped throwing trash out my car window as I burn oil, so to speak. And I moved a few blocks away from work, which is where I mostly travel. Lugging computers and whatnot around on a bike is pretty tough. I should ride more tho. You got me! >> You can create stuff without wrecking the environment at the same >> time, they're not mutually exclusive. > > Why do you think people on the right are against that? > That's the crux of the issue, who programmed you? That's what I've > been saying all along, let us build cleaner factories rather than > close them down and sent the work to China. Did you hear me? I thought you were exaggerating. Does "the left" want to close down all factories vs. making them "green"er? I hadn't heard that. Aren't you one of the ones who was arguing that we shouldn't make old factories install "scrubbers", because scrubbers cost money, and the Chinese don't care, so why should we? >> So, what about that tree food with a lack of trees to eat it? > > Isn't 90% of the US still wilderness? It's all relative, neh? Bush43 was gung-ho about protecting old-growth forests, right? How much of the Amazon are "we" chopping down each year? This is a global problem, which makes it way more complicated. >>> Hold on there partner. You think lefties are responsible for energy >>> efficiency? I guess that means righties have been fighting tech all >>> along? I think if the lefties had there way all factories would be >>> closed, thanks to the rest, we have cleaner and more efficient tech. >> >> Oh, yeah, I remember now! -- during the "height" of the Right >> (Bush43), the environment was *so* politically correct. Just *tons* >> of energy credits and whatnot, right? > > Energy credits are a scam. I'm not talking about the credits you can trade, I'm talking about tax-cuts for people who buy solar panels and whatnot. I think it's been proven to work in other countries, but maybe the data was fudged. >> The government was bending over backwards to get us off oil during >> those bright days, right? > > You still on the oil-is-bad school of thought? Burning oil in our cars is *incredibly* bad. Do you have any fscking clue what all we use oil /for/? Medicine, plastics, blah blah blah? You don't think it's git-dam retarded to burn it up (lots of it) just to get from point A to point B? The trouble is there's easy money in it. And we prefer to go for the easy money first. Why is China trying so hard to stop burning oil in their cars and whatnot? >> Right? >> >> Mari? Line monster, and I can't guess the rest. > > Maria. MG got it. Thanks, I mostly just remember the dancing, and the Romeo and Juliet feel. It will go on The List. >> I can tell you this: I think that the energy credits are swell. I >> think gay marriage is dandy. I think our kids should have a chance to >> live in a world as beautiful as mine was (at least). I don't like an >> invasive government. I don't like a non-transparent government. >> Yadda yadda and blah blah blah. > > I didn't vote for the One so don't blame me for all this invasiveness. You probably voted for the One before the One, so you made it really easy for this One. Thanks, bro! But don't worry, they'll use the power for /good/! >> Hell, we're all like 99% the same when we get down to brass tacks, neh? >> >> It *is* fun to pretend differently tho, I guess. >> >> I've labeled you "Sam", BTW. It helps to keep me from mixing you up >> with Someone Else. > > I like the drill down, make me feel you reached. It's hard to get out of my comfort zone, thanks. >> Heh. Randomness: The "Someone Else's Problem" cloaking device. (the >> dude's a prophet!) > > Right on brot Douglas Adams was too awesome for this world. :) -- There are three methods to gaining wisdom. The first is reflection, which is the highest. The second is limitation, which is the easiest. The third is experience, which is the bitteres ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:309092 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
